US Politics Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
FogBlueInSanFran said:
It’s fine if you think it’s immoral or amoral. I can’t decide TBH. I think abortion probably can be and has been abused by some in a way that would make me uncomfortable morally. But what is at issue here is if the decision is a woman’s or the state’s, right?
Click to expand...
FogBlueInSanFran said:
It’s fine if you think it’s immoral or amoral. I can’t decide TBH. I think abortion probably can be and has been abused by some in a way that would make me uncomfortable morally. But what is at issue here is if the decision is a woman’s or the state’s, right?
Click to expand...
It is absolutely the womans decision.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Fair enough. I’m not trying to question your own morals either. Please accept my apologies if I have made you feel uncomfortable. That really wasn’t my intention.

I think, when I strip it down to basics, that my feeling on abortions are that it is up to the individual in each case. There will be a million different scenarios in play.

What should always be there though, for me, is the right for the woman to choose her own destiny, something which this ruling stops for a lot of American women.
Click to expand...
Absolutely Alan, the right is with the woman. There is no dispute from me in that regard. No need to apologise.
 
Father Paul said:
That is somewhat nonsensical. Of course they are totally opposed to the slaying of children. It is just that they don't virtue signal about gun control being how one stops lunatics .
Trying to maintain abortion is purely a medical/health issue and not a moral dilemma is the real contradiction here.
Click to expand...
Person 1: “We should restrict the sale of assault weapons to reduce the murders of children”

**** 1: “Why are you virtue signalling?”

/end

Now go fuck yourself.
 
55yr old teenager said:
Absolutely Alan, the right is with the woman. There is no dispute from me in that regard. No need to apologise.
Click to expand...
I was just aware that I’d asked why twice without further reference.

If the woman in the predicament has a moral dilemma, then that is hers to solve with her family/doctor/therapist/friends/herself.

This ruling won’t ban abortions, it will create illegal ones that may or may not be medically safe. That’s just not right in this day and age.

In my opinion, of course.
 
domalino said:
It’s entirely possible to be against abortions personally while believing that in a free and democratic society people should be free to think differently and make their own choices.
Click to expand...


domalino said:
It’s called “Pro-choice” not pro-abortion” for a reason.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but that is a false description. What's at issue here is the choice to abort is a right.. No one is against a woman's choice to have or not have sex, to use condoms, to use IUDs, to demand the men they sleep with snip it or get none, or perhaps time their sexual intercourse to the 20 or so days of the month where it's almost impossible for women to get pregnant.

The ONLY choice at issue with, is the choice of whether there is a right to abort a pregnancy.

Thus, a fair reading of what's at issue is whether you are the pro or anti abortion.

Any other reading is simply sophistry.
 
Dax777 said:
Yeah, but that is a false description. What's at issue here is the choice to abort is a right.. No one is against a woman's choice to have or not have sex, to use condoms, to use IUDs, to demand the men they sleep with snip it or get none, or perhaps time their sexual intercourse to the 20 or so days of the month where it's almost impossible for women to get pregnant.

The ONLY choice at issue with, is the choice of whether there is a right to abort a pregnancy.

Thus, a fair reading of what's at issue is whether you are the pro or anti abortion.

Any other reading is simply sophistry.
Click to expand...

Oh really Dax? It’s called pro-choice because it’s about having the right to choose an abortion?!

Oh thank you so fucking much, none of us could Have worked that out without you.
 
55yr old teenager said:
Didn't see that. Abortions should never be used as a form of contraception. That is morally so wrong. I would have to question why somebody with a modicum of Intelligence would even suggest that is acceptable.
Click to expand...
Simple solution is for you to not have an abortion then. Job done.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
I was just aware that I’d asked why twice without further reference.

If the woman in the predicament has a moral dilemma, then that is hers to solve with her family/doctor/therapist/friends/herself.

This ruling won’t ban abortions, it will create illegal ones that may or may not be medically safe. That’s just not right in this day and age.

In my opinion, of course.
Click to expand...
Sorry for not answering your why question. I misunderstood you. I agree with you, it absolutely is and always should be the womans choice. I totally disagree with the overturning of Roe v Wade. Unfortunately as you say it will just increase the number of illegal abortions and also cause injury and death in some cases to the woman having the abortion. It will go back to being done in people's houses in a cloak and dagger fashion by people who charge a lot of money and who are not qualified. Its a sad backward step in women's reproductive health.
 
SWP's back said:
Simple solution is for you to not have an abortion then. Job done.
Click to expand...

No one actually uses abortions (a very traumatic, expensive, uncomfortable and/or painful procedure/experience) as contraception so there doesn’t really need to be a solution to this entirely fictitious problem.
 
Dax777 said:
No one is against a woman's choice to have or not have sex, to use condoms, to use IUDs, to demand the men they sleep with snip it or get none, or perhaps time their sexual intercourse to the 20 or so days of the month where it's almost impossible for women to get pregnant.
Click to expand...
Uh, maybe you should actually READ Thomas’s concurrence.
 
domalino said:
No one actually uses abortions (a very traumatic, expensive, uncomfortable and/or painful procedure/experience) as contraception so there doesn’t really need to be a solution to this entirely fictitious problem.
Click to expand...
Sorry to disagree with you, but I have known a few friends who have had repeated abortions. Have also nursed people who were admitted to have their 3rd or 4th abortion. Trust me it happens.
 
55yr old teenager said:
Sorry to disagree with you, but I have known a few friends who have had repeated abortions. Have also nursed people who were admitted to have ther 3rd or 4th abortion. Trust me it happens.
Click to expand...
And you think that is a lifestyle choice, failed contraception or the bloke lying that got them to that point?
 
Dax777 said:
Perhaps.

You required of women a level of self responsibility. I.e. You argued that women having sex should take responsibility for their actions, seeing as their are 20 different ways to prevent pregnancy under conditions of consent.

Should the same 'take responsibility' not apply to black people when it comes to interactions with cops?

You cant be all for taking responsibility when it comes to women and sex, but not taking responsibility when it comes to police interaction. Seeing as over 95% of police interaction with blacks people that turned deadly almost always included a failure to comply with directives from the law enforcement officer.

You can't ask women to take responsibility on one issue, while requiring no such from black men.

I mean you can do whatever you want, but that struck me as odd!



Fair enough. I generally feel the same way about your views on most issues.
Click to expand...

You're conflating issues to a point where they make no sense for correlation.

But that's par for the course for you.

I won't derail this thread further. You can engage your points better explained in 'Reality Bytes'.

I'll give you time to think of a better argument...
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
You hide behind the legal process and don‘t give a fuck about the health of women.
Click to expand...
That's just you trying to hold a moral high ground. In a sense you are using the very same tactics the religious types use. There are no moral high grounds. As all sides believe they Stand on the very same moral high ground.

One espousing the right of a woman to abort a growing Pregnancy. The other on the right of life to continue, even if true that it begun and still is in a dependent state


The legal process on the other hand IS a legitimate point of contention. Unfortunately, it's one in which those who agree with you stand on shakier grounds.

Tyranny in the name of good
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top