U.S. Supreme Court set to overturn Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision

[Xzi]

It's progressive because it allows us to escalate our points of interest.

So... You don't think it's just to get a kidney to replace a kidney that was taken from you because it's "old testament".

To force that person to give up their kidney is not necessary, there's a 99% chance that there's a better, healthier donor available anyway.

But you'd be okay with dying ,due to lack of a transplant, as long as your estate (family) can sue?

Obviously not. A person can survive with a single kidney for a long time.

 

[smf]

I am not trolling, just because you cannot handle the fact that someone has a different opinion doesn't mean they're trolling.

I am perfectly happy discussing opinions respectfully with people I disagree with, I do it all the time.

I'm only accusing you of trolling, because of your behavior. The whole gaslighting act confirmed it.

 

[smf]

To force that person to give up their kidney is not necessary, there's a 99% chance that there's a better, healthier donor available anyway.

You're assuming they are willing, we are talking about if they are not.

 

[smf]

So they're going to kill themselves to get an abortion? That sounds stupid.

They are going to kill themselves because they can't cope with trauma of having to go through a pregnancy.

Not only does that not sound stupid, but it happens already.

If you didn't hate women, you would have compassion for them.

 

[Foxi4]

But you can live with only one kidney.

You can live after 12 pregnancies. What point are you making, exactly?

The analogy is bad. Adding 865 provisos or additional conditions to it won’t make it any less bad. If we’re not going to agree that the theft of an organ and a pregnancy are not equivalent, there’s really no point in continuing with this thought experiment - the premise is ludicrous, for the reasons mentioned above and more. Even if the risks involved in the two procedures were indentical, one assumes the state directly acting upon a citizen to deprive them of an organ (as in, literally tearing into their body and removing it) while the other assumes the state does absolutely nothing to the body in question (and nature takes its course). One is a clear violation, the other is not. The two situations are not alike, regardless of the risks involved. Even someone who *doesn’t* advocate for such a solution can see that.

 

[KennyAtom]

I am perfectly happy discussing opinions respectfully with people I disagree with, I do it all the time.

I'm only accusing you of trolling, because of your behavior. The whole gaslighting act confirmed it.

just because i misunderstood the meaning of the word doesn't mean I'm trolling.

 

[smf]

You can live after 12 pregnancies. What point are you making, exactly?

I made a point very clearly. The fact you then make a non point, is irrelevant.

 

[KennyAtom]

Not only does that not sound stupid, but it happens already.

If you didn't hate women, you would have compassion for them.

Here we go again with the "you hate women" drivel spouted by dumbasses.

Yes, it sucks when people kill themselves, yes i feel sorry for anyone who is driven to that.

Doing it because you have to give birth is kinda stupid.

 

[smf]

just because i misunderstood the meaning of the word doesn't mean I'm trolling.

Using words wrong and refusing to accept that you use them wrong and that you will never stop using them wrong, is though.

 

[Foxi4]

I made a point very clearly. The fact you then make a non point, is irrelevant.

Your point boils down to “you can live with one kidney, so it’s okay to steal organs”, which is the single dumbest thing I’ve heard all day. You don’t believe that, so I don’t know why you’d use it as an argument in a discussion.

 

[tabzer]

To force that person to give up their kidney is not necessary, there's a 99% chance that there's a better, healthier donor available anyway.


Obviously not. A person can survive with a single kidney for a long time.

I am not interested in playing D&D with you. No offense. I was trying approach a point of mutual understanding, but you are very attached to your "ackshually" persona. You win, and you suck for it.

 

[smf]

Doing it because you have to give birth is kinda stupid.

I don't think you understand quite what it's like for the women that go through an abortion.

You don't want to understand. You just want to judge them from your ivory tower.

 

[smf]

Your point boils down to “you can live with one kidney, so it’s okay to steal organs”, which is the single dumbest thing I’ve heard all day. You don’t believe that, so I don’t know why you’d use it as an argument in a discussion.

I don't believe that, I'm saying that the state forcing you to give up a kidney when you have two is no different to forcing a woman go through a single pregnancy rather than having an abortion. Women don't repeatedly have abortions, so why would my analogy include taking organs multiple times?

Single dumbest thing? Well from where I'm sitting, I have to say you lot are far ahead of me.

Do all pro lifers act like trolls, as I'm starting to see a trend here.

 

[Foxi4]

I don't believe that, I'm saying that stealing a kidney from someone who has two is no different to forcing a woman go through a single pregnancy rather than having an abortion.

Forcing? There’s no force involved - she’s already pregnant. It’s different than stealing a kidney, in every possible way. The biggest way it’s different in is the part where you open someone’s body and tear an organ out - that doesn’t normally happen.

You guys are something else. I’ve lost interest in discussing the kidney scenario, it’s obviously not being argued in good faith anyway, so there’s nothing to be gained from delving deeper.

For the record, I haven’t even stated an opinion on this matter - I just saw a stupid analogy, and pointed it out. In response, all of you got together single file and started jumping off a cliff like lemmings to double down. It’s like watching a movie.

 

[KennyAtom]

I don't think you understand quite what it's like for the women that go through an abortion.

You don't want to understand. You just want to judge them from your ivory tower.

Or maybe I hate seeing babies die.

 

[smf]

Forcing? There’s no force involved - she’s already pregnant. It’s different than stealing a kidney, in every possible way.

No it's not, you already have two kidneys. We can take one and you'll live.

She already has a fetus inside her, we'll force her to carry it to term and she'll live.

If she doesn't want to carry the fetus, but you take away her right to an abortion then you are forcing her.

 

[smf]

Or maybe I hate seeing babies die.

Why are you watching them die then?

 

[tabzer]

For the record, I haven’t even stated an opinion on this matter - I just saw a stupid analogy, and pointed it out. In response, all of you got together single file and started jumping off a cliff like lemmings to double down. It’s like watching a movie.

This is a good analogy, about a bad analogy, for anyone paying attention.

 

[Foxi4]

No it's not, you already have two kidneys. We can take one and you'll live.

It’s my kidney. You actually *can’t* take it, regardless of whether it threatens my life or not. You don’t have my permission. If you’re planning to take it against my will, you’ll have to use force.

She already has a fetus inside her, we'll force her to carry it to term and she'll live.

If she doesn't want to carry the fetus, but you take away her right to an abortion then you are forcing her.

I’m not forcing her to do anything - I don’t have to participate in every single endeavour offered to me.

 

[smf]

It’s my kidney. You actually *can’t* take it, regardless of whether it threatens my life or not. You don’t have my permission. If you’re planning to take it against my will, you’ll have to use force.

And the fetus doesn't have the woman's permission to stay.