dowhatmelo t1_ixo4kcd wrote
Reply to comment by unovayellow in France moves closer to making abortion a constitutional right by Lakerlion
Murder is not a right.
TheSmallLebowsky1 t1_ixo7wil wrote
Bahahahah
AlexandersWonder t1_ixoajj3 wrote
You’re right, it’s not. But this about abortion, not murder.
dowhatmelo t1_ixofaoq wrote
if you call a baby a fetus and a murder an abortion, suddenly it becomes all good with you.
AlexandersWonder t1_ixogg99 wrote
Before fetal viability it’s really just a clump of cells, it’s a glorified tumor. After fetal viability it was never really legal to abort anyways, and I think most people would agree with that approach.
But also, if fetuses are people then why don’t they get citizenship rights when they’re conceived in the US instead of at birth? Why don’t pregnant mothers get child tax breaks? Why aren’t fetuses counted in the census? Seems like the law doesn’t exactly regard them as people either.
14DusBriver t1_ixoks1u wrote
> Why don’t pregnant mothers get child tax breaks?
dowhatmelo t1_ixogtnw wrote
Mate they’re never going to limit abortions to just the first few weeks which is the only period you could legitimately call it a clump of cells. This sort of stuff always pushed later and later meanwhile actual fetal viability gets earlier and earlier as medical tech improves. As for legal classifications that’s a bad faith argument, there’s always stuff you can do at some ages and not others. Why can 18 year olds vote and buy guns but not drink alcohol etc. it’s not a proof of anything.
AlexandersWonder t1_ixoikjh wrote
Viability takes quite a bit longer than the “first couple weeks” of a pregnancy. Before Roe was overturned in the US, viability was where the law drew the line nationwide.
People below 18 are still entitled to citizenship, still get counted in the census, are still eligible for child tax breaks. Pretty disingenuous to compare those to guns and voting and alcohol, which are widely regarded as adult things which require some degree of maturity to handle responsibly.
NormalSociety t1_ixocnyv wrote
You going to pay for all the kids who will need financial, mental, physical, emotional help?
You going to pay for food, clothes, school, medical, and any special needs they may have?
Are you going to forfeit part if your bodily rights?
14DusBriver t1_ixojzat wrote
> You going to pay for all the kids who will need financial, mental, physical, emotional help?
A normal, functioning society should absolutely do that because it’s a moral good to support the less fortunate and less able. It is also morally good to ensure the practice of elective abortions not justified by some absolute necessity like rape or medical complications is banned, criminalized, and assigned social stigma.
> You going to pay for food, clothes, school, medical, and any special needs they may have?
What do you think taxes and charity is for?
Are you seriously suggesting that the answer to the question of “what if a child is born in poverty?” is to kill them but only at a point where they cannot resist?
Do you just assume everyone in the anti-abortion crowd doesn’t care for the life of children and mothers after birth?
dowhatmelo t1_ixohu36 wrote
People can deal with the consequences of their own actions, i didnt make them go out and get pregnant. Just because a homeless dude has no money doesn't mean it's ok to kill them. Frankly though i'm fine with halving the military budget and using that budget instead for better social services for children. Bodily rights is just made up bullshit.
AlexandersWonder t1_ixoiw10 wrote
Is getting raped a “consequence of one’s own actions” to you?
If body rights are just made up bullshit then surely you wouldn’t care about the government making medical decisions about treatment on your behalf? You’re not a hypocrite, right? You don’t care about the right to make your own decisions about your health and medical care?
Bodydysmorphiaisreal t1_ixpk1h1 wrote
Wow, you actually don’t give a single fuck about these children nor women who get pregnant. People have sex for pleasure, sometimes, even when being responsible, accidental pregnancy happens, this will never stop being the case and it’s outright malicious to treat children as punishment for women that are put in an unfortunate, heartbreaking situation. We already don’t have the capacity to care for Americas children in the system and you want to stress it more? You want more human beings to suffer because it’s important they be born? Halving the military budget will not cover the cost needed to care for every child you would ask be in the system and, even if it did, they’ll never (virtually never) know the love of a family that wanted a child. Be pragmatic, have some empathy, and be realistic about this situation. We cannot do this currently, it’s just not in the cards and I doubt it ever will be. If you’re so passionate about life, give back, foster children, donate time to help those who need it (we always need more people helping out). Fuck, my partner and I have elected to not have biological children so we can foster and possibly someday adopt. THERES CHILDREN/YOUNG ADULTS WHO NEED HELP NOW!!!
I’m sure you’d feel much different the second you’re asked to forfeit your bodily autonomy. Compelling birth is gonna fuck a lot of women and children over.
dowhatmelo t1_ixqg5vv wrote
Murder trumps all that bullshit you just spewed.
Bodydysmorphiaisreal t1_ixqogag wrote
I mean, if you’re not going to consider the entirety of the situation, not let new information effect your conclusions, and grandstand from a place of believed moral superiority all the while being dismissive of the suffering of very real, already existing, and unique whole persons… then sure, I guess you could say that. I would rather we take a pragmatic look at how we best improve the livelihoods of society as a whole and prevent overall pain and suffering as much as possible….. but, again, MuRder or whatever.
dowhatmelo t1_ixtw3r3 wrote
I’m not dismissing it, I’m saying it doesn’t justify murder.
Stranger0nTheWeb t1_ixojtnq wrote
>People can deal with the consequences of their own actions, i didnt make them go out and get pregnant.
So a smoker shouldn't be allowed to get treatment for lung cancer? A drunk driver shouldn't get medical treatment when they crash? Those are consequences of ther actions. Oh wait no those things can also happen to men...
dowhatmelo t1_ixonsys wrote
Not if the "treatment" is murdering someone else.
This is not a men vs women thing, this is about the rights of the unborn child.
Stranger0nTheWeb t1_ixout14 wrote
The unborn child does not have the right to use the mother's organs to sustain itself if she does not want it to. And pregnancy is dangerous for women. It's the mother's choice whether it stays inside her or not.
And why not consider male masturbation/ ejaculating into a condom mass murder? Why is a sperm only considered an "unborn child" the moment it touches an egg and its the woman's problem?
dowhatmelo t1_ixpffxn wrote
Sure it does.
Because sperm on its own is not viable.
14DusBriver t1_ixokkmw wrote
> People can deal with the consequences of their own actions, i didnt make them go out and get pregnant
They can have sex all they want, they must simply accept that the life of the unborn is more important than the orgasm.
> Just because a homeless dude has no money doesn't mean it's ok to kill them.
This same point applies to those with deformities and disabilities. Abortion should never be used as a method of cleansing the gene pool - that is called eugenics. We do not go out and stone people with Down syndrome. Unless the medical condition is on the level where it is incompatible with living, we should not strip agency from people who have done nothing wrong on their own
“Bodily rights” has become a sham word to cover up what is essentially infanticide excused by rampant hedonism
dowhatmelo t1_ixonifs wrote
Yeah i've had that eugenics discussion with people before. It's crazy what people find acceptable after dehumanising the victim.
ValiantFullOfHoons t1_ixoocbr wrote
exactly. It never was. But this is not about murder. And you know that.
[deleted] t1_ixo8ms9 wrote
[removed]
14DusBriver t1_ixojwuq wrote
Remember, murder implies that the victim is a human being.
If we’ve stripped away the quality of humanity from the target, it no longer becomes murder.
According to the pro abort crowd, abortion is somehow healthcare, even if it means the termination of a potential life who could have went on.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments