What's new
By:
Filters

Roe v. Wade is going down

One Brow said:
I think of the fetus as a human being. My objections spring from my thinking of forced pregnancy as slavery.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification. I was just going from many discussions about this
Al-O-Meter said:
I don’t buy this argument at all. I think everyone understands that it is a human life. That is why the pro-choice crowd trails off with “I support a woman’s right to choose” with it being understood they aren’t talking about what toppings to have on a pizza or what to wear that day. The woman is choosing to kill a child.

It is no different from Shamaiya Hall deciding she didn’t want kids and so she killed 3 of them by stabbing them to death.

www.fox4news.com

Mother charged with capital murder in deaths of 3 children in Italy, Texas, family says

A 25-year-old woman has been charged with capital murder for the deaths of three children in Italy, Texas, on Friday. Family members say she was the mother of the kids who were killed.
www.fox4news.com www.fox4news.com

It is no different, other than the gender, than Chris Watts dropping his 2 daughters into an oil tank because he wanted to start a new family with a hot new girl.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Father 'stuffed daughters' bodies in oil tanks so they wouldn't smell

The bodies of 4-year-old Bella and 3-year-old Celeste were found inside the barrels alongside that of her pregnant mother on a Colorado oil field owned by Anadarko Petroleum.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk

Everybody knows it is a child we’re talking about, and children are a huge responsibility which some women don’t want to commit to so they go to a clinic to have the child killed while it is still legal to do so.
Click to expand...
You can argue whatever you want. I was just pointing out the futility of the argument. I have no horse in this race. Rail at OB, not me.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Thanks for the clarification. I was just going from many discussions about this

You can argue whatever you want. I was just pointing out the futility of the argument. I have no horse in this race. Rail at OB, not me.
Click to expand...
I’m not railing against anyone, merely stating the obvious. As for OB, even he doesn’t resort to the semantical misdirection that isn’t uncommon among those who believe women should be able to kill children. His take is more oddball in that he believes the responsibility of raising kids constitutes slavery. Shamaiya Hall, who stabbed her three children to death, was only trying to free herself from slavery and so the killing of her children is morally justified in his mind. Chris Watts dropping his daughters in the oil tank, and I’m unclear if his 3 and 4-year-old daughters were already dead or he forced them into the tank alive and let the oil kill them after he shut the hatch at the top of the tank, is justified because slavery is bad.

We are talking about the killing of kids, over 50 million children made dead deliberately. That doesn’t sit comfortably with me. My moral stance doesn’t rely on pretending there is no child being killed during an abortion because that is exactly what it is.
 
Al-O-Meter said:
His take is more oddball in that he believes the responsibility of raising kids constitutes slavery.
Click to expand...
I don't know if you are this bad at reading, or just this dishonest. "Forced pregnancy" is different from "raising kids". No one in the US is forced to raise kids, you can choose to sever your relationship to them and have them raised by the state or adopted. There is a movement to force women to continue pregnancy. That is slavery.

Al-O-Meter said:
We are talking about the killing of kids, over 50 million children made dead deliberately.
Click to expand...
We are talking about the enslavement of women, also, by forcing them to continue pregnancy.

Al-O-Meter said:
That doesn’t sit comfortably with me.
Click to expand...
Nor for me, but I don't let my comfort level dictate whose rights I will support. No human life has the right of use to another human's body.
 
One Brow said:
No one in the US is forced to raise kids
Click to expand...
No one in the US is legally forced to get pregnant either. As far as the ability to sever a relationship with a child, yes it is possible but it isn't instant. The timing of that severance isn't solely up to the mother. Doing something to endanger the life of a child isn't rendered unprosecutable by a mother declaring then and there that she has severed the relationship with the child. The situation with an unborn child is identical. A mother can choose to sever the relationship and put the child up for adoption, but the process isn't instant, or at least it isn't instant unless you condone the killing of a child. Make no mistake, you value the inconvenience stemming from consequences of the mother's choices above the life of a child. I'm on the other side of that. If a woman had consensual sex which led to pregnancy with a healthy baby, then she gets to live with the consequences of that decision until the baby is delivered. Living with the consequences of your own actions isn't slavery.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Honestly if they could find a low-invasive way to turn the reproductive ability on and off, with zero cost to the individual other than not being able to make babies until they choose to have it turned back on, I would be highly in favor of mandating that. Turn it off after they hit puberty so you don't have any more 15-year-old mothers, and make them make a decision when to turn it back on after they turn 18 or something. I could get behind that. Too bad there is no such thing. Vasectomies sound minor, but they are not, and they can cause real complications. I have a friend who had issues with infection and swelling after his that caused him to lose the ability to orgasm, and caused partial ED. But if that could be developed with minimal risk and minimally-invasive techniques of some kind, one way or the other, for the women or the men, then I could really get behind that.
Click to expand...
There needs to be much greater focus on men using birth control. From using condoms to vasectomies. Putting all the responsibility on women where they can’t even get birth control without first seeing a doctor, using birth control that has countless side effects, etc is just dumb. The man who’s fertile 24/7 needs some skin in the game. Yet, you never hear that.
 
May I take this thread to propose actual slavery for deadbeat dads in our lovely coming Republican utopia? Knock em up and make a run for it? Life sentence. Miss a child support payment (I suggest raising this to 90% of income)? Life sentence.

Have to give men equal skin in the game here somehow.
 
The Thriller said:
There needs to be much greater focus on men using birth control. From using condoms to vasectomies. Putting all the responsibility on women where they can’t even get birth control without first seeing a doctor, using birth control that has countless side effects, etc is just dumb. The man who’s fertile 24/7 needs some skin in the game. Yet, you never hear that.
Click to expand...
I first read about this some 20 years ago.

www.healthline.com

Male Birth Control Injection: Options, Research

The male birth control injection isn’t yet available to the public, but it could be in the next few years, along with other methods that are already in clinical trials.
www.healthline.com www.healthline.com
 
Eminence said:
Have to give men equal skin in the game here somehow.
Click to expand...
Interesting idea Eminence! Equal skin in the game. The father and mother both have to make child support payments (90% of their income) to a holding account for the child with required approval from both mother and father for any expenditures. If a father misses a payment then slavery for him and if the mother misses a payment then slavery for her. Life sentence and equal skin in the game. The mother and father, in the case of separation, both get 50% custody. The mother and father both get absolutely equal say in decisions involving the child. In the case of abortion, both the mother and father get absolute equal say. There are no tie-breakers. If mother wants an abortion and father does not then they do not have adequate consensus to take any action.

I'm not sure I'd support your dystopian idea for how you believe parenting should rightfully function but I'll admit that 'Eminence's equal-skin-in-the-game model for parenting' is an intriguing thought experiment. Good luck getting women to buy into it but fishonjazz seems to like your proposal.
 
Al-O-Meter said:
As far as the ability to sever a relationship with a child, yes it is possible but it isn't instant.
Click to expand...
One call to CPS threatening your children is all it takes. They'll be gone very quickly.

Al-O-Meter said:
Make no mistake, you value the inconvenience stemming from consequences of the mother's choices above the life of a child. I'm on the other side of that.
Click to expand...
The hypocrisy is that you are only on the other side of that for pregnant women.

Al-O-Meter said:
Living with the consequences of your own actions isn't slavery.
Click to expand...
Actually, the 13th Amendment acknowledges that prison work is equivalent to slavery/involuntary servitude. Forced continuation of pregnancy also qualifies. At least have the consistency to acknowledge you want to force women into involuntary servitude because they had sex.
 
One Brow said:
At least have the consistency to acknowledge you want to force women into involuntary servitude because they had sex.
Click to expand...
The fundamental problem with your argument is that no matter how you look at it, the mother is responsible. Either the mother's body is enslaving her, or the baby is enslaving her but because the baby is a minor it makes the mother responsible so again the mother is the one enslaving the mother. The government's role is not enslavement but only one of preventing one human from deliberately killing another. Paint the consequences of not killing another however you want but those consequences are the mother's responsibility. Enslaving yourself to yourself isn't a thing.
 
Al-O-Meter said:
Interesting idea Eminence! Equal skin in the game. The father and mother both have to make child support payments (90% of their income) to a holding account for the child with required approval from both mother and father for any expenditures. If a father misses a payment then slavery for him and if the mother misses a payment then slavery for her. Life sentence and equal skin in the game. The mother and father, in the case of separation, both get 50% custody. The mother and father both get absolutely equal say in decisions involving the child. In the case of abortion, both the mother and father get absolute equal say. There are no tie-breakers. If mother wants an abortion and father does not then they do not have adequate consensus to take any action.

I'm not sure I'd support your dystopian idea for how you believe parenting should rightfully function but I'll admit that 'Eminence's equal-skin-in-the-game model for parenting' is an intriguing thought experiment. Good luck getting women to buy into it but fishonjazz seems to like your proposal.
Click to expand...

Would you say busting a nut and a carrying a pregnancy to term are approximately equal amounts of skin?
 
Eminence said:
May I take this thread to propose actual slavery for deadbeat dads in our lovely coming Republican utopia? Knock em up and make a run for it? Life sentence. Miss a child support payment (I suggest raising this to 90% of income)? Life sentence.

Have to give men equal skin in the game here somehow.
Click to expand...
I think there needs to be significant reform in how child support is assessed. I've known several people that essentially live in poverty because of ridiculous child support payments. Amounts that I can tell you 100% are more than I've ever spent as a result of having a child (one that lives in the house with me and the mother). I think regular spending audits should be done on the recipient to determine that they are actually spending that money on their child(ren).

And it is sad that it is assumed that a father pays child support and a mother collects it. Women have a massive advantage in custody cases.
 
Gameface said:
I think there needs to be significant reform in how child support is assessed. I've known several people that essentially live in poverty because of ridiculous child support payments. Amounts that I can tell you 100% are more than I've ever spent as a result of having a child (one that lives in the house with me and the mother). I think regular spending audits should be done on the recipient to determine that they are actually spending that money on their child(ren).

And it is sad that it is assumed that a father pays child support and a mother collects it. Women have a massive advantage in custody cases.
Click to expand...

If we’re back in serious land for a moment - it’s an area that should probably avoid sweeping rules when it can and be very case by case in judging. My ‘proposal’ is certainly idiocy.

I do think mothers in our country generally do a better job as parents so even a just system could look to favor them through some lenses.
 
Al-O-Meter said:
... or the baby is enslaving her but because the baby is a minor it makes the mother responsible so again the mother is the one enslaving the mother.
Click to expand...
That means the mother has the right to decide that the embryo/fetus no longer wants to be in the womb.

Al-O-Meter said:
The government's role is not enslavement but only one of preventing one human from deliberately killing another.
Click to expand...
If you have a method of removal that allows the fetus to live, I'll support it. However, the fetus's right to live can not be enforced at the cost of the pregnant person's rights. Were that to happen in any other setting, you would be the first to be howling at people having their rights abridged.
 
Party of small government… this definitely won’t be intrusive or cause harm…

www.huffpost.com

Idaho Is About To Be The First State To Restrict Interstate Travel For Abortion Post-Roe

A bill would create a whole new crime — dubbed “abortion trafficking” — a felony offense that aims to limit minors’ ability to travel for abortion care without parental consent.
www.huffpost.com www.huffpost.com

Why stop there? Why not ban people from leaving the state to do anything that the GOP legislature disagrees with? Travel to a liberal state? Banned! Travel to a gay marriage or drag show? Banned! Travel to read a book? Banned!

Hell, why not just ban all citizens from leaving the state entirely? That’s what true freedom is about.

Imagine the outcry from the right if a blue state banned the purchase of certain guns or ammo? I bet the Supreme Court would totally support that. Oh wait…

These bans are Complete overreach. Hopefully this combined with Trump leads to a wipeout in 2024. Then we can codify Roe nationally. Every woman deserves choice. Repubs are sowing the wind. They’ll soon reap the whirlwind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVP
One Brow said:
That means the mother has the right to decide that the embryo/fetus no longer wants to be in the womb.
Click to expand...
Or the right to decide if an infant is left in the car on a hot day. The mother can choose to do these things as the mother has agency, but if the decision to remove from the womb or leave in the hot car leads to the death of the child then I think the mother should be held responsible.
 
Al-O-Meter said:
Or the right to decide if an infant is left in the car on a hot day. The mother can choose to do these things as the mother has agency, but if the decision to remove from the womb or leave in the hot car leads to the death of the child then I think the mother should be held responsible.
Click to expand...
the difference being that one is defending herself, and the other is not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top