[Zagadka]

Support or opposition to abortion should not completely eliminate an organization, especially international, from ALL funding sources. You need to deal with the "enemy" sometimes. Having an exclusive policy can be counterproductive at times. Especially dealing in Africa, where social situations can make dealing with governments rather tricky.

Especially when the most common alternative to abortion most pro-life advocates can come up with is "abstinence", which is a really dumb sole policy. We should be air dropping mountains of condoms on Africa.

[Pants-of-dog]

It is relevant to your argument because you give the women the right to kill another person , albeit unborn, who happens still to be in her uterus.

Not quite.

It would be more correct to say that I recognise a woman's right to withhold her body from use by others, regardless of whther or not the other person is going to die if her body is withheld.

This is consistent with the fact that people who are born and who happen to not be in her uterus cannot force a woman to act as their life support system.

To argue that a person who happnes to be in her uterus should be able to exercise this specific and special right that no one else has is contradictory to the idea of equality under the law.

And this is where we disagree.
A pregnancy is not an event that concerns only the female of the species.
There are three parties involved.
I do however not think that feminists would agree with that reality.

Your opinion on pregnancy does not contradict any of the facts I have mentioned.

Maybe you think the father or the fetus should have special rights that somehow trump a woman's right to use her body as she will. If so, you may wish to explain why.

[Donna]

Great news. Our bodies belong to God and we are simply leasing them. Glad Mr. Trump has recognized who the real leaser is.

[Ter]

Maybe you think the father or then fetus should gave special rights that somehow trump a woman's right to use her body as she will. If so, you may wish to explain why.

It is self-explanatory.
The foetus can of course not speak for itself but it is there and therefore, in my opinion, has the right to life.
The father contributed to the pregnancy but biology has reserved the female as the incubator.
Maybe soon we will have technology to let the foetuses develop in an external device, then the women won't have to kill the foetuses any more. I wonder if they (the women) would agree to that ?



.

[Tewodros III]

Great news. Our bodies belong to God and we are simply leasing them. Glad Mr. Trump has recognized who the real leaser is.

Enjoy Blacks and minorities out breeding your kind.

[Pants-of-dog]

It is self-explanatory.
The foetus can of course not speak for itself but it is there and therefore, in my opinion, has the right to life.

I am not disputing that it has the right to life. In fact, I am explicitly pointing out that even if we grant fetuses every right that born people have, it still does not affect my argument.

This is because even born people do not have enrights that you wish to give fetuses.

The father contributed to the pregnancy but biology has reserved the female as the incubator.

Okay. The father and the mother both can have the same rights to bodily autonomy.

Maybe soon we will have technology to let the foetuses develop in an external device, then the women won't have to kill the foetuses any more. I wonder if they (the women) would agree to that ?

Maybe, but who cares?

[Ter]

I am not disputing that it has the right to life. In fact, I am explicitly pointing out that even if we grant fetuses every right that born people have, it still does not affect my argument.

Spoken like a true lawyer.
You say it does have the right to life but it has to die because it is in the wrong place.

Okay. The father and the mother both can have the same rights to bodily autonomy.

That is a ridiculous argument, even for you.
I just said the mother is the incubator, not the father.

Maybe, but who cares?

Well, to start with, the foetus cares. It might save its life.
And the father, he gets to be a daddy independent of the wishes of the mother.

Let us end this fruitless discussion.

[Pants-of-dog]

Spoken like a true lawyer.
You say it does have the right to life but it has to die because it is in the wrong place.

And the people who die because they need kidney and liver transplants also die, but you do not shed a tear for them.

But since we would be taking rights away from men as well as women, we do not pass laws forcing people to donate a kidney or a protion of their liver.

That is a ridiculous argument, even for you.
I just said the mother is the incubator, not the father.

And I just said they have equal rights.

Unless you are arguing that father should have more rights?

Well, to start with, the foetus cares. It might save its life.
And the father, he gets to be a daddy independent of the wishes of the mother.

Great. That has nothing to do with my argument.

Let us end this fruitless discussion.

Feel free.

[Donna]

Enjoy Blacks and minorities out breeding your kind.

This is not going to happen. Please note that you are simply reinforcing white supremacist propaganda about so-called "white genocide".

[Tewodros III]

This is not going to happen. Please note that you are simply reinforcing white supremacist propaganda about so-called "white genocide".

So even you admit isn't real? It can't be consider genocide if we just breed more than Whites.

[Donna]

So even you admit isn't real? It can't be consider genocide if we just breed more than Whites.

It's obviously hyperbole.

[Tewodros III]

It's obviously hyperbole.

[Zag Edit: Rule 2]

But again, Minorities breed more than Whites, even in the south and without healthcare, White babies will die more than Minorities. So you're fucked either way.

[Donna]

[Zag Edit: Rule 2]

But again, Minorities breed more than Whites, even in the south and without healthcare, White babies will die more than Minorities. So you're fucked either way.

Pretty sure that whites have always been a statistical minority on a global scale. So the fact that everyone else is breeding themselves into destitution is not necessarily a problem for white-majority countries, so long as domestic populations are capped through sustainable immigration policy.

I think this is why the global south is reacting so badly against Trump's presidency. It means that everyone has to pull their weight. Everyone has to make their own country great again.

Not everyone wants to do that.

[Zagadka]

Everyone has to make their own country great again.

Not everyone wants to do that.

Which is why Mexico will be paying for the wall?

[Tewodros III]

Pretty sure that whites have always been a statistical minority on a global scale. So the fact that everyone else is breeding themselves into destitution is not necessarily a problem for white-majority countries, so long as domestic populations are capped through sustainable immigration policy.

I think this is why the global south is reacting so badly against Trump's presidency. It means that everyone has to pull their weight. Everyone has to make their own country great again.

Not everyone wants to do that.

We're talking about America and China is doing great for a billion people. Since when have America helped Africa and Latin America? We're not talking about mass immigration here, we mean the legal non-whites.

[Ter]

Which is why Mexico will be paying for the wall?

Why would Mexico have to pay for that wall ?
That is something I have not understood.
He who wants a wall has to pay for it is what I say.

[Zagadka]

Why would Mexico have to pay for that wall ?
That is something I have not understood.

Which is my point. It is pretty goddamn ridiculous. Mexico will pay for that wall (assuming it is actually a thing and not what we'd term as vaporware) the same way Iraq paid for the Iraq War.

For "fiscal conservatives", Republicans are awfully romantic about their notions of funding their actions.

[Donna]

Which is why Mexico will be paying for the wall?

If I recall, Trump promised to "make" Mexico pay for it. I don't doubt for moment that he will pull all kinds of economic strings to get them to pay up.

Consider the point of view from a Mexican nationalist though: a non-pourous border wall with the US would severely undermine the illicit industries that have effectively rendered Northern Mexico a failed state. Let that sink in.

[Zagadka]

Well, as long as he says he will go into incredible detail of to "make" them pay, it all sounds super great.

[colliric]

Sanger was an evil bitch. Why should the organization she founded be given public funds?

Usually organisations with evil racist founders get totally squashed, why not this one too?