US Supreme Court is set to overturn Roe v. Wade

[Julgran]

I mean access to abortion should not be determined by the financial status of the person who wants it.

Sure, but since you didn't elaborate any further, I would need to specify that I do agree with womens' rights to abortion of the man also agrees, and if the woman and/or woman can pay for the procedure.

To be clearn, I think that the state - meaning "government" - should have no say on the personal decisions - be it abortion or anything else, in which case abortion should be allowed, if the woman and/or man can pay for it, and a doctor or nurse is willing to carry out the procedure.

Agree to disagree on the first point. An example of why I try not to engage with bad faith arguments, your forcing doctors point. First, that will never happen and second, there's something called the Hippocratic Oath. I don't feel like elaborating further because your point is either ignorance or bad faith and I only have so much energy dude. I am baked RN.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean, but I would agree with the right to abortion if the woman/and man would pay the full cost, and if a doctor or nurse would agree to carry out the procedure in a safe way.

 

[Chinaski]

Sure, but since you didn't elaborate any further, I would need to specify that I do agree with womens' rights to abortion of the man also agrees, and if the woman and/or woman can pay for the procedure.

To be clearn, I think that the state - meaning "government" - should have no say on the personal decisions - be it abortion or anything else, in which case abortion should be allowed, if the woman and/or man can pay for it, and a doctor or nurse is willing to carry out the procedure.

It didn't need elaborating beyond the fact they should be free at the point of request. As soon as you attach a price tag to something, you are going to price some people out and there is no material difference between someone being priced out of accessing something they need and this same thing being outlawed. Do l need to elaborate further once more?

 

[Feeding Pigeons]

no punches were thrown.

That isn't true, your post was full of venom and condescension but I accept your apology anyway.

I mean access to abortion should not be determined by the financial status of the person who wants it.

Woah, slow down there my friend. You're acting like human rights should be held above profit. Say things like that loud enough and you'll get a reticle on you.

Anyway, I believe people should have the right to choose what happens with their own body, but I think it should be applied across the board. Nobody should be forced to receive ECT if they don't want it; nobody should have to go to a back alley to get an abortion; people should not be put in jail for getting high, unless of course they hurt someone or are being a public nuisance.

Whether the vaccine is legitimate or not is missing the point, the fact that people were forced to either take it or be locked out of society was a crime against humanity, and people are already forgetting about it.

 

[Julgran]

It didn't need elaborating beyond the fact they should be free at the point of request. As soon as you attach a price tag to something, you are going to price some people out and there is no material difference between someone being priced out of accessing something they need and this same thing being outlawed. Do l need to elaborate further once more?

Sure, but as I pointed out ealier, not having sex and not having an unplanned pregnancy is free.

In comprasion, if I would leave something on the stove and cause the whole apartment complex that I live in to burn down, that would be my fault. So, in comparison, any woman who decides to have unprotected sex with a man should understand that the sex could result in pregnancy, which they will be responsible for.

 

[Feeding Pigeons]

Sure, but as I pointed out ealier, not having sex and not having an unplanned pregnancy is free.

and unrealistic.

 

[Julgran]

and unrealistic.

Do you meant that becoming pregnant from having sex is unrealistic - or did I misinterprest your input?

 

[Feeding Pigeons]

Do you meant that becoming pregnant from having sex is unrealistic - or did I misinterprest your input?

No, I meant that people not having sex to avoid unwanted pregnancies is unrealistic. People aren't going to exercise restraint like that. Thats what I meant, its correct but its also not going to happen.

 

[Iamchickenhat]

The opposite is actually happening, it surprises me that in America they haven't legalized pedophilia and zoophilia

Give us a minute.

 

[Julgran]

No, I meant that people not having sex to avoid unwanted pregnancies is unrealistic. People aren't going to exercise restraint like that. Thats what I meant, its correct but its also not going to happen.

I see, but then the full cost of an eventual abortion - or a full up-bringing of a child - if a child should be thrust upon those parents. I meanl, adult always have the final say of whether a child will be born, or not.

 

[Lullaby]

Thank you to the creators of this forum for including the "ignore" function. It's getting a workout today a with all the RWNJs and incels popping up.

It really is just a total blessing, isn't it?

 

[Chinaski]

Sure, but as I pointed out ealier, not having sex and not having an unplanned pregnancy is free.

In comprasion, if I would leave somethign on the stove and cause the whole apartment complex that I live in to burn down, that would be my fault. So, in comparison, any woman who decides to have unprotected sex with a man should understand that the sex could result in pregnancy, which they will be responsible for.

This is a disgusting post. A woman should not be forced to raise a child she does not want as penance for that most serious offence of *having sex*, although it's frankly unsurprising that this is considered healthy by individual members of this forum.

 

[Iamchickenhat]

I am in favor or some of the exceptions- in cases of rape, severe disability, and some others- these apply to only a small percent of cases. Healthy babies have many chances to go into good, stable homes, so this is not an issue at all. I do have somewhat mixed feelings on overturning Roe v Wade, it would be better if women were choosing on their own to give birth and then let them be adopted rather than to kill them, but this really hasn't happened much.

There are currently over 200000 kids in foster care that no one wants

 

[Feeding Pigeons]

This is a disgusting post. A woman should not be forced to raise a child she does not want as penance for that most serious offence of *having sex*, although it's frankly unsurprising that this is considered healthy by individual members of this forum.

Would you stop fucking acting like we all share the same opinions?

 

[Julgran]

This is a disgusting post. A woman should not be forced to raise a child she does not want as penance for that most serious offence of *having sex*, although it's frankly unsurprising that this is considered healthy by individual members of this forum.

I'm not sure if you and I mean the same thing. If a woman and man have sex, they are both eqaully as responsible for the outcomes. However, if a woman is raped, for example, she is not as responsible. in my opinion.

What's your opinion? Please specifiy.

 

[Chinaski]

Would you stop fucking acting like we all share the same opinions?

What do these words even mean, you're quite at liberty to agree and disagree with who you like, idgi, what's your fucking point here

 

[Feeding Pigeons]

What do these words even mean, you're quite at liberty to agree and disagree with who you like, idgi, what's your fucking point here

You always have to address a vague group of posters when you address an opinion you disagree with. Who said a woman being forced to raise a child as penance for having sex is healthy? Thats ludicrous.

 

[Chinaski]

I'm not sure if you and I mean the same thing. If a woman and man have sex, they are both eqaully as responsible for the outcomes. However, if a woman is raped, for example, she is not as responsible. in my opinion.

What's your opinion? Please specifiy.

Well you drew an analogy of responsibility which suggests the woman is singularly responsible for the outcomes of the sex she has. Women and men are not held equally responsible in reality and you know it. If I'm honest here your post illustrated a desire to impose child-bearing as an essentially punitive measure on people you consider to be socially irresponsible, these people being "female sex havers".

You always have to address a vague group of posters when you address an opinion you disagree with. Who said a woman being forced to raise a child as penance for having sex is healthy? Thats ludicrous.

The guy who drew equivalence with burning a house down who l literally replied to directly in my post, wtf

 

[Julgran]

Well you drew an analogy of responsibility which suggests the woman is singularly responsible for the outcomes of the sex she has. Women and men are not held equally responsible in reality and you know it. If I'm honest here your post illustrated a desire to impose child-bearing as an essentially punitive measure on people you consider to be socially irresponsible, these people being "female sex havers".

I agree half-way, because I see both the man and the woman as responsible of the birth of their eventual child, in which case both are resposible of their child's birth, in which case both the man and the woman should pay for the child's upbringing or their abortion.

If I'm allowed to be crass - since we are having this converation- both the man and the woman is irresponisble. Please understand that I'm not trying to blame women specifially, but both men and women.

I would appreciate it if you would ask more questions, in case something is unclear.

 

[Feeding Pigeons]

The guy who drew equivalence with burning a house down who l literally replied to directly in my post, wtf

Okay fair enough. Though I don't think he was expressing something insane like that.

 

[odradek]

your post was full of venom and condescension

True.

 

[Someone123]

There are currently over 200000 kids in foster care that no one wants

That is true, but babies are different because parents can shape them from the start- the demand for babies is way higher than the supply. Children in foster care often come from abusive backgrounds and more work needs to be done to help them- sadly, may potential adopters don't want to do that.

 

[YourNeighbor]

I mean access to abortion should not be determined by the financial status of the person who wants it.

Whether government should *provide* abortions is a policy question, and should be decided through policymaking (I agree with your point, fwiw). The question the Court seems poised to decide, however, is whether government can compel women to carry pregnancies to term and ban access to abortions in the first place. This is a question of whether there is a protected *right* of a pregnant woman to control what happens to her body in the first place that is not subject to the whims of a given election. (Also lost in a lot of the noise is the fact that carrying to term is many times more likely to result in death than is an early abortion--this is absolutely a healthcare decision).

I know you get the distinction Chinaski, but pointing it out just generally. Just like prohibiting the government from restricting free speech is not the same as requiring government to provide media/subsidies for people to exercise that right.

 

[Iamchickenhat]

That is true, but babies are different because parents can shape them from the start- the demand for babies is way higher than the supply. Children in foster care often come from abusive backgrounds and more work needs to be done to help them- sadly, may potential adopters don't want to do that.

So you're saying existing children don't count as much? If they're all about the children, take care of the children who are already here.

 

[Someone123]

So you're saying existing children don't count as much? If they're all about the children, take care of the children who are already here.

That's not what I'm saying at all, I agree with you that this is what should be done. What I'm saying is that there is a lot more demand for baboes from people who want to adopt than there is for older children.

 

[wljourney]

That is true, but babies are different because parents can shape them from the start- the demand for babies is way higher than the supply. Children in foster care often come from abusive backgrounds and more work needs to be done to help them- sadly, may potential adopters don't want to do that.

Demand and supply, eh?!
You are seeing babies and their "producers" as a resource and completely disregarding the human sacrifice women have to make.

 

[Feeding Pigeons]

Demand and supply, eh?!
You are seeing babies and their "producers" as a resource and completely disregarding the human sacrifice women have to make.

Yeah I got your "producers" riiiiight here.

 

[LastLoveLetter]

if a woman is raped, for example, she is not as responsible. in my opinion.

To start with, I disagree with restricting the right of access to abortion in the first place. I disagree with prohibiting it and imposing childbirth, I disagree with slapping a price tag on it, and I disagree with the narrative that has emerged here which is essentially misogynistic shaming of any woman who has sex.

This line was particularly striking, the implication that rape victims are not as responsible, but still nonetheless somehow accountable for the utter violation that they have been subjected to by force. I can't believe this needs to be said, but rape victims are not responsible or to blame for the fact they have been raped at all.

 

[RainAndSadness]

It's disappointing to see that so many people who demand a choice when it comes to own their end-to-life decisions celebrate a decision that would take away a deeply personal choice from women, a decision that affects their body and nothing else. A fetus isn't a baby and the autonomy and well-being of a female adult definitely should have a higher priority than a bunch of cells.

Here are some numbers. ~92% of abortions happen before 13 weeks, ~98% happen before 21 weeks, that means most fetuses that are aborted in the US barely developed a central nervous system, therefore lack the ability to feel pain. They're not sentient by any means.

Who is getting abortions and at what stage of pregnancy?

According to the National Women's Law Center, nearly 1 in 9 women lived in poverty in 2019. Those women made up almost 1 in 2 abortions in the U.S.

www.kgun9.com

 

[CrossroadsCurious]

1) A fetus is not a part of the womans body. It is a seperate entity (evidence by its own unique gentic code) that happens to be attached and inside the womans body.

2) Yes a fetus is a baby, albiet an unborn one. It's not like its going to magically turn into an animal or something else. It's a human being from conception to birth to old age to death.

3) It's disappointing to see so many people without any humanity or empathy casually talking about murdering a helpless human being. At least when this was first being debated abortion was being talked about as a necessary evil of last resort. Decades of brainwashing have turned it into just another medical procedure.

 

[RainAndSadness]

1) A fetus is not a part of the womans body. It is a seperate entity (evidence by its own unique gentic code) that happens to be attached and inside the womans body.

2) Yes a fetus is a baby, albiet an unborn one. It's not like its going to magically turn into an animal or something else. It's a human being from conception to birth to old age to death.

3) It's disappointing to see so many people without any humanity or empathy casually talking about murdering a helpless human being. At least when this was first being debated abortion was being talked about as a necessary evil of last resort. Decades of brainwashing have turned it into just another medical procedure.

1. no, a fetus is 100% dependant on the body of the pregnant woman. You can compare it to a parasite that's growing and leeching in your body, especially if it's an unwanted fetus - you have every right to remove it, even more so if it's going to impact your life in a very negative way. As I said in my previous post, a fetus doesn't experience pain and isn't conscious when most abortions happen. The US doesn't even have proper childcare, maybe we should have a conversation about the well-being of already born children before we start going after humans who decide bringing a child into this life is the wrong decision. And as I've already pointed out in the past: anti-natalism brings forward many excellent arguments that support the decision to have an abortion.[1]

2. every definition of a baby refers to a born human.[1][2][3][4]

3. you can use emotionally charged language all you want, it remains a false talking point. Abortion isn't murder because murder describes the unlawful killing of another human without any justification or valid excuse.[1] There are plenty of very coherent reasons why a woman would want to abort a fetus. I don't know why you think it's a good idea to use anti-choice language in this forum. The pro-lifers call us murderers because we advocate for the right to die for consenting and autonomous adults and you're doing exactly the same thing to women who want to have a choice when it comes to questions concering their own bodily autonomy. If you're unable to have a civil conversation, maybe you shouldn't engage in this thread.