-
Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.
U.S. Supreme Court set to overturn Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision
- Thread starter Ericzander
- Start date
- Views 74,700
- Replies 1,931
- Likes 9
Legally, consent and biological processes are two separate things.
You can't use the argument that because a woman had an orgasm, that she consented to sex.
Therefore you can't use consenting to sex and getting pregnant as consenting to the pregnancy either.
I am asking you how it ended up in there. Are you answering the question or not? Funnily enough, if abortion worked according to the same principles you guys have regarding evictions, your entire argument would be fucked. You don’t want to tell the truth, or operate from a point of mutual understanding, so I’m not interested in discussing anything with you.
I made a rational point which you ignored and instead you focused on that I didn't tell you how babies were made, which I had assumed was a rhetorical question.
So it falls upon you, as it always does, as the person who is wasting everyone's time.
Women are born with all the eggs that they will ever ovulate, they did not consent to them being put in their bodies.
Men's testicles create sperm all the time, without the man's consent.
The sperm reaches the egg and fertilizes it, without either the man or woman's consent.
Happy now?
It's the rule of unintended consequences, the best option is always a compromise that everyone hates equally than trying to go for something you like.took me a bit to realize but yea your right
Roe vs Wade was the closest to perfect you'll ever have, it's all down hill from here.
Here’s why it matters. When I go for a nice drive, I do so for the purposes of entertainment. This activity carries some risks - I accept them as a given when stepping into the vehicle. I endeavour to drive safely, and getting into an accident isn’t my goal, but the possibility that I will get into one is always there. Should I plow right into a pedestrian and the accident is my fault, I am responsible for it regardless of whether I intended to do that or not. I operate on the assumption that even an amoeba realised that, so all this nonsense about consenting to the fetus being there is poppycock. Someone’s actions put it there, and it is now encumbent on them to deal with it, whatever that may entail. You can keep your red herring to yourself - a woman doesn’t “catch pregnancy” because someone sneezed on her. Even if the sex is recreational, the possibility of becoming pregnant is a known quantity she must necessarily accept when engaging in a risky activity. Her “lack of consent to being pregnant” doesn’t absolve her of responsibility. This is not a good pro choice argument, and never was.
There's recent buzz on social media and in liberal news media that points towards acceptance of having abortions at any time during the pregnancy. It's mainly stemming from the Colorado Governor's recent law he passed. I read a lot of posts from liberals on twitter, facebook and reddit relating to news and current events and most of the liberals think this is a great idea. Don't believe me? Go browse for a few hours or simply keep your head in the sand. Either way it doesn't bother me.
As for the bill Colorado Democratic Governor Jared Polis just signed you'll notice when reading about the bill that it codifies the existing laws in which there is no gestational time limit. That's where most of the discussion is happening - the lack of a gestational time limit, which in layman's terms allows abortions at any time during the pregnancy.
Colorado Governor Signs Bill Legalizing Abortion Up Until Birth
- https://dailycaller.com/2022/04/04/colorado-governor-signs-bill-legalizing-abortion-birth/
Colorado governor signs bill codifying the right to abortion in state law
- https://www.cbsnews.com/news/colorado-abortion-law-2022-governor-jared-polis-signs-bill/
Colorado governor signs bill to protect access to abortion
- https://edition.cnn.com/2022/04/04/...ts-bill-governor-jared-polis-signs/index.html
EDIT:
There's also this (unrelated to the Colorado bill);
Backlash builds after Dems vote to legalize abortion up to birth
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...e-to-legalize-abortion-up-to-birth/ar-AAXo7hr
Last edited by Deleted member 559230,
Not really dehumanizing if the main thing is any brain function at all, thus no actual harm. They didn't feel that pain, not aware of being alive or their own heart or needs.
At that point it's still a shell. the shell develops first before "the soul" if you want me to put it in one of your guys spiritual beliefs.
...
BRUUUUH
Do you think people can get abortions because they don't have sex? An abortion without fucking?
Like... Last time I checked in order to get an abortion you need to have a fetus developing, which requires getting it on. That's a really ridiculous statement. Incel logic much?
You've made plenty of statements, all troubling but only a couple quite worrying.
An abortion of a dead fetus, instead of forcing them to go to term. In cases of saving the mothers life, they would usually try to save the fetus if possible by inducing the birth or caesarean section.
Similar to roe v wade cut off in usual circumstances, but then the buzz on social media probably overlooks that (as have you).
Similar threads
-
- Locked
