Roe VS Wade officially goes back before the Supreme Court - Page 8 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15201084
Every miscarriage is a gift from G-d, the omnipotent abortionist. He knows which babies deserve to die, and we can't presuppose that we are as smart as him.

Also I'm loving the double standard from Unthinking_Majority who loves ~the precious little babies~ but then shits on women for having unprotected sex, the process which makes those ~little angels who can't defend themselves~. Real whore/Madonna complex going on there.
Last edited by SpecialOlympian on 06 Dec 2021 08:23, edited 1 time in total.
#15201087
It owns when people say they are there to defend the fetus because fetuses by definition have zero life experience. They have formed no opinions. They have made zero decisions based on any sort of morality they have learned through lived experience. So they are blank canvases upon which someone can project their bullshit beliefs.

Fetus fuckers conveniently stake their claim to morality in a space completely free from any societal context because, to them, it's much easier to care for and defend a proto-person than it is to take a stance on anything meaningful. I forget where I heard the quote, but it was something along the lines of how minds as brilliant as Einstien's have died on plantations or in other forms of slavery or poverty that deprived them of ever achieving any sort of potential. Now erase even that context, which can be explained away because that's the status quo, and you get the kind of person who is really concerned about fetii. The perfect little angels gestating so beautifully in their whore mother's belly.
#15201090
ckaihatsu wrote:What's with the repeated 'whore mother' thing, SO -- ? Ever consider *not* stereotyping -- ?


It's not about misogyny. It's about:

Unthinking Majority wrote:Why did they choose the term "pro-choice" instead of "pro sucking fetus out of womb & killing it because I was too much of a pussy to insist my bf wear a condom plus I think spewing cum on the back of my cervix is hot".


Again, it's not about misogyny. It's about genuine care and love for people who don't exist and also correctly placing the blame entirely on women.
#15201094
Unthinking Majority wrote:WTF are you talking about? You're also a collection of tissue. But please, keep trying to dehumanize the fetus so you can sleep at night when you kill them. It looks like a baby to me:

Image


So is being sucked out the womb.

It is the truth. A 12-week fetus outside of the incubator has as much of a chance to grow to be a human as a kidney does. It cannot feel pain (just like a kidney), it cannot "survive" just like a kidney.
You stop making this be a sentimental guilt trip. About half of pregnancies end up in miscarriages NATURALLY. How many of those miscarriages have you mourned? Chances are that your mother had one or many, how many of those miscarriages have a cemetery tomb for you to go and put flowers or weep? Your wife? Daughter? I am not saying that a miscarriage is "never traumatic" sometimes it is, sometimes there is a highly wanted pregnancy, a pregnancy to a couple that is having fertility issues and/or a miscarriage at a later time in the pregnancy. It happens. The point is, the vast majority of times we either never find out and/or is not a huge deal.
Stop trying to save the life of an embryo and or fetus at the expense of treating a human as an incubator and taking away her autonomy. You want to save lives? Go to Africa and start giving Malaria, TB, HIV medications.... You want to save lives? Go to Asia and vaccinate people against hepatitis. You want to save lives? Go to the middle east were they treat women like slaves, stone them to death, etc. A guy with a dick, dictating that a woman, with what is essentially a parasite, must live with this for 9month and deliver it, regardless of the physical and/or psychological implications out of some misguided sense of personhood is ridiculous.

Crazy idea: if you don't want anyone pregnant, don't cum inside a vagina.

Quick fix!

Interesting idea. So... how about we go and castrate men to ensure this? :lol:

I wonder if you would be so willing to hit on men's "freedoms" to save "babies". Perhaps if you kept the DNA database of every men, and then when a baby is born, test every baby against the database, and if a baby is the result of a rape, instantly put the man that matches the DNA in jail forever and have the state pay for child support? Or if a baby is born to an "unexpected father" have the IRS automatically deduct child support and give to the mother, no question asked? Perhaps this way we will ensure no unwanted pregnancies or abortions....
But instead, it is easier to take the bulk of the rage, accusations and judgments to the mother.
Again, society has already decided that a pregnant woman has autonomy over her body. You cannot jail a woman that drinks while pregnant, even though we know alcohol is damaging to the unborn. Do you support charging a woman with battery or child abuse if she drinks or smoke while pregnant? If not? Why not? You just told me a fetus is a baby... worthy of living and having rights... so this baby don't have the right to not be poisoned by her mother? I am sure if you find a mother giving whisky to her 5 year old and letting them smoke and/or doing drugs child protective services would have something to say about this....
Yet, a pregnant woman can drink alcohol, a pregnant woman can smoke, a pregnant woman can continue her warfarin which can potentially be teratogenic.
This is an obsession... There are 10x as many children dying in Africa of preventable things than fetus aborted in the US, yet you are playing the "pro-life" card.
Is the unborn really that much important to you... that you would rather forcibly have someone complete a pregnancy? Yet you could instead focus your "dedication" to save those children that are already born, and presumably, loved by their parents? I don't buy it, I don't buy it for a second. This is not some sort of humanity that you have and I lack. This is pure and simple religious/political propaganda that has brainwashed the judgment out of otherwise sane people. SNAP out of it. You want to save lives? Go ahead, there are plenty of lives that need saving, don't do it at the expense of people's freedom/autonomy and certainly not until all other "low hanging fruits" have been exhausted.
#15201095
I believe that if a woman has an abortion then whatever man she's shacking up with should be charged as an accessory to murder. The man is just as much at fault. He is just as culpable for knowingly engaging in mature relations with a woman who wasn't prepared to bring a life into this world.
#15201097
XogGyux wrote:treating a human as an incubator and taking away her autonomy

The percentage of countries with pro-natalist policies grew from 10% in 1976 to 28% in 2015, according to UN data cited by this report. Governments across the world are increasingly resorting to de facto coercion in order to increase their populations, by depriving people of their reproductive rights.

Across these many examples we find that coercive pronatalism is not simply a manifestation of patriarchy or misogyny, but can be a product of political and economic forces entirely indifferent to women, who exist for them simply as productive or non-productive wombs.

In combination with exclusionary, nationalistic, and socially conservative agendas, and fragile or non-existent regard for human rights, a toxic brand of pronatalism emerges that represents an almost inevitable threat to sexual and reproductive health and rights.


— Welcome to Gilead: Pronatalism and the threat to reproductive rights
#15201100
SpecialOlympian wrote:I believe that if a woman has an abortion then whatever man she's shacking up with should be charged as an accessory to murder. The man is just as much at fault. He is just as culpable for knowingly engaging in mature relations with a woman who wasn't prepared to bring a life into this world.


??

I can't tell if this is sarcasm or if you genuinely believe this fact.

Can't you ever switch off the Sarcasm Mode???
#15201102
Unthinking Majority wrote:It looks like a baby to me:
Image

So what? A lot of animals look cute and cuddly, animals that most certainly have a higher level of consciousness than that foetus, but we still allow them to be killed for food.

Now as democracies, or as dictators, we choose to give protections to beings that are not full voting citizens. We give protections to post-natal babies and animals. To deliver those protections requires serious infringement of the freedoms and privacy of full voting adult citizens. Having social workers stick their noses into you family life is not a fun experience. Now there's a lot of pathetic narcissists about who demand that social workers be perfect. But those of who live in the real world rather than a pathetic fantasy world know that's inevitable that will get it wrong sometimes. Your views on trans issues might disagree with the social worker for example. Now these sorts of things tend to be mitigated by the fact that those who have most influence in setting and even implementing the rules don't expect to have their own family investigated by social workers. there used to be a joke in Britain, what's the difference between a Rottweiler and a social worker? With a Rottweiler you sometimes get your kid back.

Guaranteeing the the rights, protections and privileges of one individual or group always means damaging the rights, protections and privileges of other individuals or groups. Giving foetuses rights is a completely different order of magnitude in terms of damaging the rights, protections and privileges of adult citizens. You can weep for the terminated foetuses as much as you want, but as far as some of us are concerned a woman's body is not your to moralise over.
#15201105
Unthinking Majority wrote:It's not about punishing the mom, it's about not punishing the child. Giving medical treatment to a fat person doesn't kill another person so there's no ethical reason to deny treatment.


….except for the fact that you are denying the pregnant person their rights.

All this talk about killing babies is an appeal to emotion to hide the fact that rights are being denied.
#15201107
The Founding Fathers made this a secular country to avoid religious conflict and war. Which was recent history for them.

American law forbids religious law, has to be that way...

Hiding in all this abortion idiocy is another attempt to make religious law. Religious extremists have been trying to do this from the time before we were even a country.

Did you ever see the moment in Star Trek where a Borg soldier was trying to take control of the Enterprise? Q said to Picard, "I wouldn't let them, if I were you."

I wouldn't let them, if I were you.
#15201120
XogGyux wrote:It is the truth. A 12-week fetus outside of the incubator has as much of a chance to grow to be a human as a kidney does. It cannot feel pain (just like a kidney), it cannot "survive" just like a kidney.

An adult in a coma hooked up to machines to survive that has a great chance to come out of that coma is still considered a human. A fetus is not a kidney, it's a stupid argument. At 12 weeks all vital organs are in place and it's had a heartbeat for weeks.

You stop making this be a sentimental guilt trip. About half of pregnancies end up in miscarriages NATURALLY.

An adult dying naturally is different than someone killing that person unnaturally. What's your point? Hey crib death happens sometimes so its ok to kill your 2 month old baby sitting in the crib?

A guy with a dick, dictating that a woman, with what is essentially a parasite, must live with this for 9month and deliver it, regardless of the physical and/or psychological implications out of some misguided sense of personhood is ridiculous.


Again, society has already decided that a pregnant woman has autonomy over her body. You cannot jail a woman that drinks while pregnant, even though we know alcohol is damaging to the unborn. Do you support charging a woman with battery or child abuse if she drinks or smoke while pregnant? If not? Why not? You just told me a fetus is a baby... worthy of living and having rights... so this baby don't have the right to not be poisoned by her mother? I am sure if you find a mother giving whisky to her 5 year old and letting them smoke and/or doing drugs child protective services would have something to say about this....
Yet, a pregnant woman can drink alcohol, a pregnant woman can smoke, a pregnant woman can continue her warfarin which can potentially be teratogenic.

Those things are child abuse and should be illegal.

This is an obsession... There are 10x as many children dying in Africa of preventable things than fetus aborted in the US, yet you are playing the "pro-life" card.

Whattaboutism.
#15201122
Pants-of-dog wrote:….except for the fact that you are denying the pregnant person their rights.

All this talk about killing babies is an appeal to emotion to hide the fact that rights are being denied.

And yet you don't care at all about the rights of the child. This is a conflict of rights.
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 19

@colliric Bad, bad and bad. If God allows any […]

Very insightful, thanks for your sharing.

One would think that Europe would have learned an[…]

Never gonna happen. For once I find Scamp's sug[…]