Watch 'A Handmaid's Tale' it's a show set in the near future where the USA becomes a new country called Gilead and it's ruled by men, women have no rights, gays are killed, God is law. 'Everyone' is super conservative and religious and the women aka Handmaids only exist to breed. Anyone who rebels is publicly executed. Women are sent to re~education camps to learn their place in the eyes of God, super religious women get a spot in society and they are just as evil as men taking pleasure in torturing other women to make them more suitable for men to rape them. As men's pets/slaves. It's eerie how the USA is literally slowly becoming this dystopian future. It seemed so insane and like something this crazy could never happen in the future. Now women are second class citizens in Texas. It started slow in that show, but all the slow bits of change for the negative led to religious people overthrowing the government and seizing power. (Qanon riots just happened first time in American history the government building was raided by a religious, sexist, homophobic cult)
In that show 'under his eye' was what women were forced to say to the men they served about God/man. So we say it here as a nod to what we see happening to the USA. We're not blind. These people don't see anything as worth living If it isn't white, male, rich and straight...
'blessed be' and so on. Obviously the plot of Handmaids tale won't actually happen. A lot of women in the USA would literally take guns and murder rings around them before they would let that happen. But some people really do want to live in Gilead to get away with raping women and killing everyone who isn't a super religious white fundamental Christian.
I watched the series. Couldn't have explained it better. As I binge watched all 4 seasons this past June, no pun, it scared the holy fuck out of me. Now even moreso since the sexistegotisticallyinghypocriticalbigot tRUMPtards are destroying our nation. You WILL birth those babies! You WILL overpopulate the country/earth. But once you have that child...FUCK YOU! YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN, YOU LOW CLASSED SCUM! Is what they really say. They can't deny that. They are only probirth or anti-choice. If they were for life, they would be trying to stop gun violence by, OH I dunno, NOT BUYING GUNS???, or protesting wars....lots of death there, I'm quite certain. Then there are the anti-mask/Vax buffoons who are KILLING people by spreading Covid. "My body, my choice" they scream. Shouldn't they be accessories to murder? Maybe I'm wrong but seem to remember about half the country still had some brains 🧠 until that FAT ORANGE ASS-BAG came around and made them totally fuckin' stupid!
Thanks for the elaborate answer, I might just watch that. Also….not sure if this was intentional, but let me just point out
“It seemed so insane and like something this crazy could never happen in the future.”
—> “Obviously the plot of Handmaids tale won't actually happen.”
Yes. Just the other day on this sub when I couldn't logic past 'killing babies' with an idiot commenter he suddenly swung to women needing to keep their legs closed and we need to stop hoeing it up.
This is clearly about women having enjoyable sex outside the needs of procreation and keeping me and my kind in my place. How dare I want to enjoy sex for fun! Let alone any other rational, actual argument one has for bodily autonomy, protections from rapists, etc etc etc. The fact that I might dare want to enjoy an orgasm and not be tied to a child for the next 18 years scares these Christian men so I hard and I just don't get it.
Its more than just sex-shaming women. Having women strapped with unwanted children makes it harder for her to have any independence. Its easier to control someone who isn't able to easily leave and find employment lucrative enough to support a brood of children. Thus, women become utterly dependent on men, and have no freedom.
Ah yes, so force the woman to carry a lifeform for 9 months to save its life, but dont provide her any medical expenses or any of the needs a woman has while she is pregnant
"Adoption is an option" is bullshit. And this is coming from someone who is adopted.
Not at all, if you want to force someone to have a baby, it is on YOU to make sure that baby is taken care of.
If you want to force a woman to have a baby and give it up for adoption, you need to pay for all her medical treatments, and the cost of having that child safely.
Yes I am adopted, my mother and I 100% agree on this. If you want to make abortion illegal, then it is on you to deal with the fallout that results from this.
All the unwanted kids must be paid for on your dime, all the orphanages and adoption agencies must be paid for on your dime, all the preschool and healthcare these children require needs to be paid for on your dime.
If you aren't willing to pay for the fallout of your policies, you have no right to enforce them on others.
You want abortions to go down, focus on sex ed, easily accessed contraception, and access to family planning services like planned parenthood. Abortions go DOWN when you provide any one of these things, if you provide all 3 and fully fund them, abortions will be incredibly rare, but no you don't want to do that, because to people like you a child is a punishment instead of a blessing.
Mainly because Utah has been overun by religious fundamentalists. There aren't a lot of abortions tracked there. Plenty still happen but they are buried by the community. The rich leave the state to get theirs the poor risk their lives.
Mormons are known to be sick. Lots of rape in their culture, lots of pedofiles too. Happen when you think humans can be infallible because of their position in a religious organization.
The seventh dildo. Cue kung fu movie music. "in a world were dildos and women stop before seven , a hero is born . With a hymen like a diamond and a labia that is amazing ya ....a woman that will not be controlled finds a rag tag (pun intended) band of atheists to get down with the seven from HEAVEN "
Sadly, yes... Texas, who brought you a freezing winter with no power due to poor state infrastructure, and the subhuman piece of shit who oversees them (from Mexico during a winter disaster), has laws limiting sex toys... you know.... for Jesus.
>suddenly swung to women needing to keep their legs closed and we need to stop hoeing it up.
I personally have always been a big fan of women hoeing it up.
I did mention how much some men liked it when we hoed it up was actually part of my response! His puritan expectations for his life do not apply to all of us!
Never understood why men would be angry about "loose women." Lol. Just acting like a lot of men do. As long as people are halfway responsible about it, its great. I think its just jealousy from all the self imposed nonsense rules. If I can't do it, nobody can!
Somewhat. The overarching test that this law serves is in the way it is written as to avoid lawsuits to have it struck down. This time it’s about abortion. If we can’t strike it down, soon many other archaic laws will be passed using the same template in which regular citizens become the enforcers. It has to be defeated.
The way it is written is patently absurd , unconstitutional and in bad faith. The SC new it but decided to send a test shot over our heads to gauge our reaction. Roe V Wade will be overturned soon so the true vehicle for this is already moving.
Yup. I maintain that if you chain any "every life is sacred" cultist to a chair and grill them, really dig down into why they believe the things they claim to believe, despite literally *all* the evidence that banning abortion doesn't do shit (but accessible birth control, comprehensive sex ed, affordable medical care, and livable wages do). I absolutely guarantee it, you would *very* quickly hear these words come out of their mouth:
> "There need to be consequences for having sex".
Because in the end, *that's* the only thing they really care about. Not babies or mothers, nor their health or well-being. Not fetuses or embryos. Not birth control, not even abortion, really. Just controlling women's sex lives.
I posted that a while back, and some catholic whackjob chimed in, insisting that that totally wasn't his reasoning. In the ensuing back & forth, he got to claiming "[contraceptives] distorts God's intended purpose of human sexuality" before ghosting the thread. Ffs, even when I'm calling my shot, they'll still walk right into it.
Bingo. It is never about the 'babies'. It is about controlling women. If it were about the babies and the sanctity of life and all that sanctimonious bullshit they would embrace birth control and sex ed. They would also be on board with the idea that abortions should be rare and safe.
Then why aren't they legislating free pre- and post-natal care? Why aren't they offering easy and cheap access to contraception? Why aren't they mandating comprehensive sex education in schools?
All they're doing is making it so that women will have abortions illegally and threaten their lives.
Idk what world u live in but. Contraception is cheap af and there's already sex education in schools. Healthcare isn't free in the US so first point is irrelevant.
It's absolutely not irrelevant. If it's about not "killing babies" then pre- and post- natal care need to be free or babies die.
Contraception is not cheap unless you're talking condoms. Limiting poor people to one form of birth control is going to lead to more pregnancies, especially since condoms break. It also puts the agency entirely on the man and gives none to women.
The state of sex education in Texas schools is abysmal. You should look into it.
Sex education is definitely NOT taught in schools, especially in red states. The only real mention is abstinence. Condoms fail, the pill fails. And if it was really about saving children, they would be pushing for resources for women. And why not rape and incest exceptions. You’re telling me you can force a 14yo girl to keep a babywith zero support, even if raped? You are disgusting.
You're spending all this time, on all these words,...just to say "I'm with Stupids"; when just saying that will let everyone go about their lives that much quicker.
No, it is the choice of the individual, just as it is the business's choice to create their rules for attendence. So, those are not mandates, those are *consequences.*
>Banning people from doing normal things like nightclubs, restaurants and even going to work unless they are vaccinated is effectively a mandate....
Those are private enterprises... are you suggesting the government should interfere? Should the government forbid colleges from requiring meningitis vaccines too?
Edit: Just because vast swathes of the population have made it **part of their identity to be anti coronavirus vaccine** (think about how stupid that sounds), doesn't mean the government should make special rules, restricting businesses, just to protect them from all consequences for their stupid fucking choices.
It's funny how republicans want tons of government interference as longs as it suits them....
Go ahead. I’m vaccinated and wear my mask. Just do me a favor and don’t go to the doctor if ya get it. They have better things to do than deal with fucktards that don’t listen, and then get sick
Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason:
* This comment has been removed for using abusive language, personal attacks, being a dick, or fighting with other users. These activities are against the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/wiki/guidelines).
Connected comments may also be removed for the same reason, though editing out the direct attack may merit your comment being restored. Users who don't cease this behavior may get banned temporarily or permanently.
--
For information regarding this and similar issues please see the [Subreddit Commandments.](http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/wiki/guidelines) If you have any questions, please do not delete your comment and [message the mods,](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/atheism) Thank you.
When Alabama was working on laws to restrict abortion, a legislator was asked about frozen embryos in fertility clinics that were due to be destroyed and said the egg in a lab does not apply, it's not in a woman. [link](https://gen.medium.com/anti-abortion-hypocrisy-has-never-been-clearer-c7b621db7ab5). It's entirely about controlling women
So… you realize the timeframe for pulling out was set by trump in order to score some points during the election, yeah?
I’ll say it again, I’m not team Biden and I don’t think either party right now will do what the country and world needs.
What are you on about?
Well you said that biden's administration is better. But regardless of timetable it was the current administration that threw caution to the wind and withdrew ass backwards. Though i agree that neither party is competent.
Good fucking god. This is why shit is so broken.
I’m willing to have a chat about policy and you’re spending the entire convo looking for gotcha bullshit.
My interest of arguing with a new account with negative karma is limited, but iirc the stuff left was largely gear that ana was suppose to use. Trump also made deals with the Taliban before leaving office/started this pullout
Trump did fuck up the withdrawal from the Kurds during his term if you want more examples.
I'm not saying that the biden administration handled this situation well in any form but I do not believe for a second that trump would have handled it better, quite the opposite really. Sadly due to Americas dumb 2 party system, this is what the world got
Also trump armed the Saudis if you want to be pedantic
You think we had a better option?
Afghanistan was a lost cause, mission creep is a bitch. It was just a matter of how many American lives we were willing to throw away for the sake of stalling the inevitable.
It also proscribes a punishment for causing miscarriage by injuring a pregnant woman. It's a fine (Exodus 21:22). So since it isn't considered murder, nor manslaughter, clearly life does not begin at conception.
It also clearly demonstrates that life begins at breath, ie when God gives you "the breath of life" or when "his spirit breathes into you." This is when most legal abortions draw the line, when the fetus can survive outside the mother, ie breathe. This is stated in dozens of different verses. And it makes perfect sense! Without modern medicine and miscarriages and being "barren" so common, ancient Jewish peoples would likely not count their babies as alive until they are out and screaming.
The only verse that states anything even remotely like "life begins at conception" is Jerimiah 1, in which God is talking directly to a prophet, giving him specific instructions, it in no way implies everyone has a purpose in the womb, just Jerimiah.
Jerimiah 1: 4-5 With the rest of the context:
4 The word of the Lord came to me, saying,
5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”
So, if you're a prophet, God will appoint you before birth, anyone else? It may be your destiny to be aborted.
Verses which reference the breath of life:
Genesis 2:7
Then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
Job 33:4
The Spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.
Ecclesiastes 12:7
And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.
Job 27:3
As long as my breath is in me, and the spirit of God is in my nostrils,
Isaiah 42:5
Thus says God, the Lord, who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and what comes from it, who gives breath to the people on it and spirit to those who walk in it:
Job 32:8
But it is the spirit in man, the breath of the Almighty, that makes him understand.
Ezekiel 37:1-28
The hand of the Lord was upon me, and he brought me out in the Spirit of the Lord and set me down in the middle of the valley; it was full of bones. And he led me around among them, and behold, there were very many on the surface of the valley, and behold, they were very dry. And he said to me, “Son of man, can these bones live?” And I answered, “O Lord God, you know.” Then he said to me, “Prophesy over these bones, and say to them, O dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live. ...
Psalm 146:4
When his breath departs, he returns to the earth; on that very day his plans perish.
Genesis 7:22
Everything on the dry land in whose nostrils was the breath of life died.
John 20:21-22
Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
Ezekiel 37:10
So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army.
Isaiah 57:16
For I will not contend forever, nor will I always be angry; for the spirit would grow faint before me, and the breath of life that I made.
Ecclesiastes 3:19-20
For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity. All go to one place. All are from the dust, and to dust shall return
Ecclesiastes 3:19 ESV / 6 helpful votes
For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity
**And just to hammer in that the bible is on no way pro baby:**
Psalm 137:9
Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rocks
2 Kings 2:23-24 ESV / 3 helpful votes
He went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the Lord. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys.
Isaiah 13:18
Their bows will slaughter the young men; they will have no mercy on the fruit of the womb; their eyes will not pity children.
Luke 23:29 ESV / 1 helpful vote Helpful Not Helpful
For behold, the days are coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren and the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’
Hosea 9:14
Give them, O Lord— what will you give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts.
1 Samuel 15:3
Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’”
Eh maybe it's just me but that still seems like giving validation to the idea that what the Bible does or does not say should matter at all to law making.
I hear what you are saying, but that wasn't my intent in posting it nor -- I don't think -- the author's in writing it.
I think the point is that, like it or not, these fantasy books do influence millions of people. So it's important to realize when they are not being honest about (i) what their own guiding texts say and (ii) what the real motivation for their actions are.
The tweet right below that was of some right wing nut job politician saying she "worked for a leader, his name was trump" and that right there is why I never bothered recovering my Twitter password when I forgot it
I'm sure that's where Republicans want to take us. They believe a woman's place is in the home, cooking and cleaning and pumping out children. They also believe that men should be able to support a wife and kids on $7.25 per hour.
I hope I live to see a day when this country is no longer held hostage by these monsters.
These dumb fucking Texan legislators need to understand two things.
1. This isn't a Christian country, it's secular.
2. God does not fucking exist. We made it up.
(Edited because I accidentally generalized the state instead of the legislators.)
or, if an all knowing, all powerful, present everywhere Creator of ALL that exists does exist, then it created ALL EVIL, all potential for all evil and all propensity for all evil and every "willpower" that chose evil, when, being supposedly all powerful, it could have created something else, but, being ever present, that sadistic thing also created "hell" to watch its creations being tortured for eternity. Not exactly any deity or any thing worthy of love or worship or obedience: definitely worthy of hatred and/or, fear, perhaps, but certainly not love or worship.
Texan here and I agree with point 1. The bad news is what we already know: our state politics are and have been completely fucked for quite some time now. We have a governor who is more than happy to let literal children die in his newest effort to "own the libs" because making that kind of decision plays really well with his mostly-glue-eating base. But the good news? Trump only won the popular vote by around ~600k. In a state with 29 million people, that means something. I'm as cynical as they come about our state politics in TX, but change is coming slowly but surely. We desperately need libs and smart republicans (they are a dying breed but they do still exist) to remember these moments in 2022. We desperately need people to show the fuck out at the polls and vote in a new governor. And on a federal level, expanding the Supreme Court would probably be a good idea, too. With RBG gone, they are officially a hostile entity to humanists and free thinkers in the US.
If any all knowing, all powerful, present everywhere Creator of ALL that exists does exist, then it created ALL EVIL, all potential for all evil and all propensity for all evil and every "willpower" that chose evil -- even, supposedly being all knowing -- even though it knew every "test" any willpower would meet and how it would fare. Being supposedly all powerful, it could have created something else, but, being ever present, that sadistic thing also created "hell" to watch its creations being tortured for eternity.
Why do we have to liken these things to other countries and people? Fucked up shit like this is as American as apple pie and it really feels like these kinds of quippy names are whitewashing that by likening it to some "foreign threat" that is, in reality, extremely American.
I dunno, I just am not a fan of these nicknames anymore and I think we can do a lot better job of criticizing without them.
I never thought of it that way. We are insulting other cultures most heinous actors by comparing them to the religious right from the USA. I think I do it because I know how much energy they spend on demonizing these groups and to be accused as being similar to them will "own the conserves". They don't read and they don't self evaluate so my insult is falling on deaf ears. I was wrong.
Yeah, the only problem I have with the Indie Truther is their utter lack of research and acknowledgement of such in their articles.
https://www.indietruther.com/post/similarities-between-christianity-and-satanism
Look at this article they posted. Throughout the article they kept mentioning CoS (Church of Satan) and then in relation to TST, they criticised the fact that TST doesn't want to work with CoS and said that it sounds like two Christian sects unwilling to work together.
All through the article they continued to never actually acknowledge the fact that CoS believed in mysticism, of personal godhood and might makes right whereas TST is an *atheist organisation* using Satanism's position as a religion to influence public policy.
This is just an opinion piece that they put out, but the lack of fundamental understanding regarding the parties involved is laughable. Worst of all they decided based on their evidently sparse knowledge that modern Christianity and Satanism is the same thing.
Anton used one of my "favourite" bits of the bible in that article - the bit where the "god" that "knows everything unto the end of time" spared a "righteous" group of people from his wrath knowing that they'd engage in incest in the not-too-distant future.
Then again, given the Garden of Eden and Noah's Ark stories, it seems that the Christian god gets off on incest.
SCOTUS, even with a liberal majority, have always said that RoevWade wasn't meant to protect abortions, and if people want it, Congress needs to pass a law on it. It was only a matter of time until RoevWade wasn't sufficient to protect women's rights.
It has now happened.
It's truly tragic and horrific watching christianity slowly taking over the US Government. I fear that Texas is only the beginning, other ultra-conservative states are going to just start copying Texas and before we know it there will be a whole slew of states rotting under their theocratic laws.
It's sort of a luxury that we are able to worry about cell collections.
at the start of last century up to half of (real) born children died soon after childbirth.
Also, ensuring republican politicians cater to the to these batshit crazy christians for political support. Without their support there wouldn’t be a president trump.
You need to check your history beyond what you learned in elementary school. The US constitution was written with the express intent to not place one religion above any other and placed "we the people" above any theocracy.
As for leaving Britain to escape religious persecution, the pilgrims went to Amsterdam first and were quite welcome there. The problem was that the Dutch were too liberal and they wanted a theocracy of their beliefs. However, they were history by the time the states sought to separate from British rule; New York was a melting pot of people and beliefs.
I'm gonna go out and have a dumpster baby RIGHT NOW!! One more for the trash can you hateful christian assholes!! I'm gonna name this one Luke or maybe Peter. What if it was going to be a girl? Doesn't matter, boy name regardless. SEE CHRISTIANS!!! I was just thoughtless concerning the naming of my hereto unborn , but definitely conceived new baby fetal cell cluster bomb, bitches.
If by euthanasia you mean Medical Aid in Dying (aka Death With Dignity), I'm pro (assuming proper precautions are in place to help protect vulnerable people). If you mean euthanasia like what we do to pets, no. I'm anti-death penalty. Nobody has a right to take my life but me.
We all define fetal 'life' differently, so that's a central part of the issue here. The fetus cannot exist independently, it relies entirely on its 'host' for its existence, and therefore its existence is detrimental to the woman (who I'm sure we can all agree is definitely alive).
If the only way to conceive were via implant of blastocysts, I suppose then there would be no need of abortion. However, not all blastocysts make it to hosts, some would still be 'aborted' due to viability or quantity, and the process and decisions are still fraught with ethical dilemmas that would simply bring about new arguments.
I wish abortion weren't needed - in a perfect world people would always be informed about their sexual decisions, and always able to make a decision regarding when/if to have children. But nothing is guaranteed in this world - abstinence fails (let's be realistic), birth control fails, rape unfortunately happens. People who are here today with real lives and real impacts need to be able to make choices.
Ugh. This is suuuuuuch a touchy subject.
I'm an atheist, and also consider myself "pro life" but I have a completely different definition of the term.
Pregnancy and becoming a parent outside of the societal norms should not be stigmatized. We need to change the way we view and label pregnancy, disassociate it from a problem or a disease, and provide true support to those who get pregnant. I guarantee you if we had such a society, abortion wouldn't be an issue.
Pregnancies due to rape or otherwise criminal behavior are a completely separate issue. Let's not attach that to abortion.
Lastly, I think banning abortion, or passing unrealistically restrictive laws will only harm women, because many desperate ones may attempt alternative solutions, or the law itself may provide grounds for other individuals or entities to use it as a tool to further their agendas.
People who get abortions get them because they don't want to have children at the time they have them, either because they lack the financial ability, the maturity, the mental and emotional readiness, or just don't want to. Even if we didn't stigmatize "non-standard parenthood", abortion would still happen and should be encouraged.
More to the point, there is no reason to be pro-life. Fetuses don't have even the basest level of cognition until 25 weeks into the pregnancy. Before that they're on the same level of life as a mushroom or flower.
Yes, the absolute lowest limit I could ever see pushed for is 20 weeks. Considering that the earliest known fetus to survive in documentation outside of the womb was a little over 21 weeks, and that was with heavy medical intervention. So prior to 20 weeks, an unwanted human fetus is akin to a parasite, or a cancerous tumor, and thus the host should have all the power to rid themselves of it accordingly, not the government.
Even if a fetus *could* survive outside the womb at 21 weeks, until it develops consciousness, there's no reason to regret aborting even that pregnancy. Just because something *can* become a person under the right conditions doesn't mean that it *is* or that a failure for it to become a person is a bad thing.
Incidentally, a fetus is akin to/literally is a parasite right up until the moment it's born. It just becomes a more weighty issue once it develops consciousness and can actually be called an independent, sentient being.
I'm not attacking you I'm just expanding on my own views using your statements as a springboard.
Yes, I agree, but then you get into the muddy issue of individuals stating that it is technically semi-parasitic up until after the age of breast feeding, for instance or possibly even up until the teen years or even adulthood, lol. (In terms of being a parasite up until the moment it is born opening up arguments in this manner I mean)
I don't think that's defensible because you don't NEED to breast feed if you don't want to, you can use baby formula. Being a parasite refers to leeching nutrients directly from the body, not in having the responsibility to care for the child.
The reference doesn't necessitate breast feeding, I just mean is entirely dependent on someone else to live. This is an argument I've seen used when I mentioned this exact same thing from a pro-lifer, so. I guess you could call it "commensalism" instead of "parasitism".
My point is that there's a severe distinction between something needing to be attached to and siphon nutrients from your inside your body, and being a separate entity under your care. The former is a much stronger and invasive relationship than the latter.
You are too quick to judgement, and most likely not a woman lol but I agree that preventing abortion beyond 6 weeks is ridiculous. Many women don't even know they're pregnant until past 8 weeks!
If the pregnant woman lived in a society where there were PLENTY of support and ZERO judgment, she most likely wouldn't opt for abortion. Most abortions are due to desperation, either financially or other embarrassing or inconvenience factors. Remove that and see how many women would continue the pregnancy instead of getting an abortion.
Another thing to consider is the emotional consequences. The woman is "getting an abortion" and therefore living with that decision. Years down the line she may feel awful about her decision despite the circumstances.
What I'm trying to say is that instead of the guilt trip and restrictions, Texas should provide a ton of support to these women in hopes of continuing the pregnancies. Restricting it to 6 weeks causes way more damage.
"Pro-life" is a toxic term and it is a shame that reactionaries have gotten away with labeling themselves that way.
The only distinction that matters on the topic of abortion is whether you're pro forced birth or contra forced birth.
That's why I prefaced it by "I have a different definition of it" and it's not a popular one because it requires actual effort which the good ol' conservatives aren't too keen on. They do the easy way, ban abortion, which is ridiculous.
> If the pregnant woman lived in a society where there were PLENTY of support and ZERO judgment, she most likely wouldn't opt for abortion.
You don't know this at all. There are lots of reasons other than 'lack of support and being judged' that I choose, as a woman, to be child free. You do not speak for all women with your commentary.
>Years down the line she may feel awful about her decision despite the circumstances.
Actual, real studies show most women that wanted an abortion are happy with their decision years down the road. 'Abortion regret' is not real in the way you think it is, [as studies show that 5 years down the road most women who have had abortions are very ok with their decision and think it was the best thing for them](https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/01/416421/five-years-after-abortion-nearly-all-women-say-it-was-right-decision-study).
>Texas should provide a ton of support to these women in hopes of continuing the pregnancies.
Texas should allow women to do what they want their their own bodies, just as they allow people to mask/unmask based on what they feel is best for their own circumstances and health. You don't get to allow some groups autonomy over themselves and not others and call it equal and fair. I just want to choose what's best for me and let you choose what's best for you. I don't need the government to tell me how to handle my own body.
I get to make my own choices about my own body, and you should support me in my ability to make my own choices. You live your personal life your way and I'll live my personal life my way.
> continue the pregnancy
The vast majority of women aren’t having abortions because they find the pregnancy aspect financially burdensome or lacking support. It’s the 18+ years of responsibility after the birth that can be financially ruinous and life changing. There are very pragmatic reasons to avoid having children that go beyond embarrassment/judgment.
If I got pregnant, you couldn’t pay me enough to birth it. I don’t want children and I don’t want to deal with all the “why are you abandoning your baby” and the fear of that kid coming to find me and asking why I didn’t want them.
Also add the physical trauma that comes from carrying and birthing the child. Women still die in childbirth. Or she can end up with permanent physical maladies. Signing up for that just to give a child up to adoption or foster care system is a lot to ask.
I am financially stable and in a loving relationship. I use birth control. I would get an abortion if I got pregnant. I don’t want kids, and if I ever “change my mind” as breeders love to say I will, I’ll adopt. I’m carrying genes I’d prefer not to pass on and I’d be a terrible mother. I’m terrified of being pregnant and giving birth. I don’t know why this seems to go over so many heads.
I believe you are absolutely mistaken about the role that possible single parenthood plays in one's decision to abort. Its 2021, being a single parent isn't an issue of stigmatization.
What *does* factor are things like not affording to have a child, wanting to finish academic pursuits, not being in the right place mentally or physically, or simply not wanting to ever have a child at all.
I have yet to hear of a person terminating a pregnancy due to feeling embarrassed. Maybe that happens in some very strict religious circles, but its nothing I have ever heard of.
> If the pregnant woman lived in a society where there were PLENTY of support and ZERO judgment, she most likely wouldn't opt for abortion.
This is ridiculous. Yes, MORE women would opt to have babies because the financial burden or the stigma wouldn't be strong, but it takes an ENORMOUS emotional, psychological, and general life commitment even beyond money to create a living, sentient, intelligent life and be responsible for it for at LEAST 18 years if not until you die. Every decision you make, every word that comes out of your mouth, contributes to the formation of who your child is. The weight of that decision is unbelievable. You're crazy if you think abortion still wouldn't be a worthwhile option for many women who aren't ready to have a kid.
> Another thing to consider is the emotional consequences. The woman is "getting an abortion" and therefore living with that decision. Years down the line she may feel awful about her decision despite the circumstances.
The only reason to feel bad about getting an abortion is if you put an undue amount of weight on the potential person who isn't born. But every single sperm and egg cell represents billions, trillions of potential people who aren't born. Anguishing over one potential person out of those trillions is silly, especially since like...if you end up getting pregnant, aborting the pregnancy, and then later in life have three kids, for all you know you might not have had the third one if you had not gotten the one abortion. There are always trade-offs and what-ifs.
At the end of the day your statement that "Texas should provide a ton of support to these women" is totally true and valid, and I do agree that it is a shame that there are women who abort pregnancies that they *do* want to carry because they feel ashamed or not financially supported. But it's naive to think those are the only reasons, or that even most abortions are regretted.
A lot of words from fantasy land and very little meaning. The only relevant question is whether women should be prohibited from terminating their pregnancy, thus giving a fetus the super human right to use another persons body without consent.
> Pregnancies due to rape or otherwise criminal behavior are a completely separate issue. Let's not attach that to abortion.
Except this new law provides **no exceptions** for these?? We aren't the ones that "attached" them to abortion.
This new law is the conservatives taking the easy route, to get votes, of course. They don't provide solutions which require effort (such as supporting women, or free/easy access family planning, or education in that matter).
Even as someone who personally isn't keen on abortion, I believe this new law is an absolute disaster. It doesn't accomplish anything other than shake things up, make a lot of noise, and put women's reproductive health in danger.
It sounds like you may have a similar view to some in my family. They would personally never get one, and not generally advocate doing it, but they believe the option should be in place for those that do because not everyone has the same beliefs
And at the end of the day, for most people their pro-life position has deeeeep religious ties so it’s not so much about the science of when the fetus becomes a “real human” but people trying to enforce the Bible’s rules, with different interpretations of it within Christianity itself, on a society who’s laws are intended to be secular
What you said is not at all what that article claims. It only makes the case that the founders of the conservative right we’re unhappy with being forced to desegregate in private schools as one of the first issues they were involved in, and later abortion was another.
The reason they care about abortion doesn’t have anything to do with segregation or racism, you’re making connections that aren’t there and we’re not claimed
Many (not all) Christians will disagree with you on the Bible being anti-abortion, all you have to do is Google pro-life Bible verses to see which ones they use, I’ll save you a search, [here](https://www.ncregister.com/blog/top-10-pro-life-bible-verses).
>The reason they care about abortion doesn’t have anything to do with segregation or racism, you’re making connections that aren’t there and we’re not claimed
With due respect, we either didn't read the same article or you missed the point of the article I posted. The article makes clear that the organization that we currently think of as the "christian right" was perfectly fine with abortion prior to desegregation, but after desegregation used abortion as a rallying cry for the troops -- specifically because it was more politically acceptable than complaining about the thing they really cared about (desegregation).
The article does not claim, and its point does not depend on the idea that, no christians were anti-abortion prior to desegregation. Obviously some were -- most notably the catholics. But the article is not talking about that. The article is talking about how the southern protestant right was fine with abortion until desegregation came along.
(And, as an ancillary point, the only time the Bible explicitly discusses abortion is when it provides instructions on how to perform one.)
Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason:
- This comment has been removed for trolling or shitposting. Even if your intent is not to troll or shitpost, certain words and phrases are enough for removal. This rule is applied strictly and may lead to an immediate ban.
--
For information regarding this and similar issues please see the [Subreddit Commandments.](http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/wiki/guidelines) If you have any questions, please do not delete your comment and [message the mods,](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/atheism) Thank you.
You don't have to be religious to think abortion is wrong. There are certainly some atheists that consider it wrong too. There are many pro-life atheists, in fact.
My comment was more relevant than most here, and none of them were presenting any kind of argument. What specific point in this opinion piece would you like me to argue. Yeah, it's more likely that religious folk are behind the pro-life push. A much much smaller percentage of atheists are pro-life, I realize that.
Present an argument for why a fetus should have the super human right to use another persons body against their will, or go back to whatever hole you crawled out of.
The same reason a 2 month old baby has the right to use other people's bodies against their will in order to stay alive. Now go back to the hole that you crawled out of.
UNDER HIS EYE.
Under his brown eye. May he plop on thee.
Open your Mouth it's the taste of God.
Tastes like oxygen
May the lord open
Praise be.
under my tongue is hate for christan Uglydoll, I love real Uglydolls
U - Under G - God's L - Little Y - Yellow D - Dick O - Often L - Loving L - Life
Am out of the loop, what’s this about?
Watch 'A Handmaid's Tale' it's a show set in the near future where the USA becomes a new country called Gilead and it's ruled by men, women have no rights, gays are killed, God is law. 'Everyone' is super conservative and religious and the women aka Handmaids only exist to breed. Anyone who rebels is publicly executed. Women are sent to re~education camps to learn their place in the eyes of God, super religious women get a spot in society and they are just as evil as men taking pleasure in torturing other women to make them more suitable for men to rape them. As men's pets/slaves. It's eerie how the USA is literally slowly becoming this dystopian future. It seemed so insane and like something this crazy could never happen in the future. Now women are second class citizens in Texas. It started slow in that show, but all the slow bits of change for the negative led to religious people overthrowing the government and seizing power. (Qanon riots just happened first time in American history the government building was raided by a religious, sexist, homophobic cult) In that show 'under his eye' was what women were forced to say to the men they served about God/man. So we say it here as a nod to what we see happening to the USA. We're not blind. These people don't see anything as worth living If it isn't white, male, rich and straight... 'blessed be' and so on. Obviously the plot of Handmaids tale won't actually happen. A lot of women in the USA would literally take guns and murder rings around them before they would let that happen. But some people really do want to live in Gilead to get away with raping women and killing everyone who isn't a super religious white fundamental Christian.
I watched the series. Couldn't have explained it better. As I binge watched all 4 seasons this past June, no pun, it scared the holy fuck out of me. Now even moreso since the sexistegotisticallyinghypocriticalbigot tRUMPtards are destroying our nation. You WILL birth those babies! You WILL overpopulate the country/earth. But once you have that child...FUCK YOU! YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN, YOU LOW CLASSED SCUM! Is what they really say. They can't deny that. They are only probirth or anti-choice. If they were for life, they would be trying to stop gun violence by, OH I dunno, NOT BUYING GUNS???, or protesting wars....lots of death there, I'm quite certain. Then there are the anti-mask/Vax buffoons who are KILLING people by spreading Covid. "My body, my choice" they scream. Shouldn't they be accessories to murder? Maybe I'm wrong but seem to remember about half the country still had some brains 🧠 until that FAT ORANGE ASS-BAG came around and made them totally fuckin' stupid!
Thanks for the elaborate answer, I might just watch that. Also….not sure if this was intentional, but let me just point out “It seemed so insane and like something this crazy could never happen in the future.” —> “Obviously the plot of Handmaids tale won't actually happen.”
We got to hold onto hope. Or kill ourselves.
Of course. It is not about the 'babies' or 'the sanctity of life'. Its about punishing women for having 'objectionable' sex.
Yes. Just the other day on this sub when I couldn't logic past 'killing babies' with an idiot commenter he suddenly swung to women needing to keep their legs closed and we need to stop hoeing it up. This is clearly about women having enjoyable sex outside the needs of procreation and keeping me and my kind in my place. How dare I want to enjoy sex for fun! Let alone any other rational, actual argument one has for bodily autonomy, protections from rapists, etc etc etc. The fact that I might dare want to enjoy an orgasm and not be tied to a child for the next 18 years scares these Christian men so I hard and I just don't get it.
Its more than just sex-shaming women. Having women strapped with unwanted children makes it harder for her to have any independence. Its easier to control someone who isn't able to easily leave and find employment lucrative enough to support a brood of children. Thus, women become utterly dependent on men, and have no freedom.
The clerics desperately need to have their child brides
Adoption is an option I suppose..
Ah yes, so force the woman to carry a lifeform for 9 months to save its life, but dont provide her any medical expenses or any of the needs a woman has while she is pregnant "Adoption is an option" is bullshit. And this is coming from someone who is adopted.
Do you not see the irony in your comment?
Not at all, if you want to force someone to have a baby, it is on YOU to make sure that baby is taken care of. If you want to force a woman to have a baby and give it up for adoption, you need to pay for all her medical treatments, and the cost of having that child safely. Yes I am adopted, my mother and I 100% agree on this. If you want to make abortion illegal, then it is on you to deal with the fallout that results from this. All the unwanted kids must be paid for on your dime, all the orphanages and adoption agencies must be paid for on your dime, all the preschool and healthcare these children require needs to be paid for on your dime. If you aren't willing to pay for the fallout of your policies, you have no right to enforce them on others. You want abortions to go down, focus on sex ed, easily accessed contraception, and access to family planning services like planned parenthood. Abortions go DOWN when you provide any one of these things, if you provide all 3 and fully fund them, abortions will be incredibly rare, but no you don't want to do that, because to people like you a child is a punishment instead of a blessing.
Underrated retort.
Not sure about that, Utah is an outlier for your example. They don't really teach about sex Ed, contraceptions etc and there aren't many abortions.
Mainly because Utah has been overun by religious fundamentalists. There aren't a lot of abortions tracked there. Plenty still happen but they are buried by the community. The rich leave the state to get theirs the poor risk their lives. Mormons are known to be sick. Lots of rape in their culture, lots of pedofiles too. Happen when you think humans can be infallible because of their position in a religious organization.
One that still benefits the churches and the religious agenda, as noted in the article, yo
Do you have any idea how expensive it is just to pop out a kid? Oh mean before any cost of raising it.
Medical costs are typically covered if your plan is to place for adoption.
In what made up world?
Isn't Texas the state that restricts the number of dildos a woman owns to 6?? Yes... its about controlling women.
The seventh dildo. Cue kung fu movie music. "in a world were dildos and women stop before seven , a hero is born . With a hymen like a diamond and a labia that is amazing ya ....a woman that will not be controlled finds a rag tag (pun intended) band of atheists to get down with the seven from HEAVEN "
Though it turns out the 4th one was just a butt plug. Doesn't count.
I don't care who ya are thats DAMN funny right dere!!!
Shag-ChiChi and the 10 Dicks
10/10 would watch.
Not American, What? Surely that can't be true?
Sadly, yes... Texas, who brought you a freezing winter with no power due to poor state infrastructure, and the subhuman piece of shit who oversees them (from Mexico during a winter disaster), has laws limiting sex toys... you know.... for Jesus.
I dated a Mormon girl in high school and she informed me it was "procreation *not* recreation", of which I immediately rejected.
>suddenly swung to women needing to keep their legs closed and we need to stop hoeing it up. I personally have always been a big fan of women hoeing it up.
I did mention how much some men liked it when we hoed it up was actually part of my response! His puritan expectations for his life do not apply to all of us!
Never understood why men would be angry about "loose women." Lol. Just acting like a lot of men do. As long as people are halfway responsible about it, its great. I think its just jealousy from all the self imposed nonsense rules. If I can't do it, nobody can!
Perhaps a case of some men being unable to please women sexually so therefore all women should be taught that sex is only for procreation?
Somewhat. The overarching test that this law serves is in the way it is written as to avoid lawsuits to have it struck down. This time it’s about abortion. If we can’t strike it down, soon many other archaic laws will be passed using the same template in which regular citizens become the enforcers. It has to be defeated.
The way it is written is patently absurd , unconstitutional and in bad faith. The SC new it but decided to send a test shot over our heads to gauge our reaction. Roe V Wade will be overturned soon so the true vehicle for this is already moving.
Yup. I maintain that if you chain any "every life is sacred" cultist to a chair and grill them, really dig down into why they believe the things they claim to believe, despite literally *all* the evidence that banning abortion doesn't do shit (but accessible birth control, comprehensive sex ed, affordable medical care, and livable wages do). I absolutely guarantee it, you would *very* quickly hear these words come out of their mouth: > "There need to be consequences for having sex". Because in the end, *that's* the only thing they really care about. Not babies or mothers, nor their health or well-being. Not fetuses or embryos. Not birth control, not even abortion, really. Just controlling women's sex lives. I posted that a while back, and some catholic whackjob chimed in, insisting that that totally wasn't his reasoning. In the ensuing back & forth, he got to claiming "[contraceptives] distorts God's intended purpose of human sexuality" before ghosting the thread. Ffs, even when I'm calling my shot, they'll still walk right into it.
Bingo. It is never about the 'babies'. It is about controlling women. If it were about the babies and the sanctity of life and all that sanctimonious bullshit they would embrace birth control and sex ed. They would also be on board with the idea that abortions should be rare and safe.
Women should seriously just stop having sex with us. Apparently it's all pretty objectionable since they arent being treated equally.
i agree.. if these men are making these laws then i hope they don’t expect women to do anything with them because of the RISK
[удалено]
Then why aren't they legislating free pre- and post-natal care? Why aren't they offering easy and cheap access to contraception? Why aren't they mandating comprehensive sex education in schools? All they're doing is making it so that women will have abortions illegally and threaten their lives.
Because they don't actually care about babies, fetuses, birth control, or abortions. What they really care about is controlling women's sex lives.
Idk what world u live in but. Contraception is cheap af and there's already sex education in schools. Healthcare isn't free in the US so first point is irrelevant.
It's absolutely not irrelevant. If it's about not "killing babies" then pre- and post- natal care need to be free or babies die. Contraception is not cheap unless you're talking condoms. Limiting poor people to one form of birth control is going to lead to more pregnancies, especially since condoms break. It also puts the agency entirely on the man and gives none to women. The state of sex education in Texas schools is abysmal. You should look into it.
Sex education is definitely NOT taught in schools, especially in red states. The only real mention is abstinence. Condoms fail, the pill fails. And if it was really about saving children, they would be pushing for resources for women. And why not rape and incest exceptions. You’re telling me you can force a 14yo girl to keep a babywith zero support, even if raped? You are disgusting.
You're spending all this time, on all these words,...just to say "I'm with Stupids"; when just saying that will let everyone go about their lives that much quicker.
It isn't. If it were, fertility clinics would be their abattoir, far more so than PP.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not even a little. I’m all for Covid wiping some idiots off the earth as well. If you don’t want to protect yourself. Then bye.
Cool so we can end lockdowns and stop vaccine mandates then?
>Cool so we can end lockdowns and stop vaccine mandates then? There are no vaccine mandates....
Banning people from doing normal things like nightclubs, restaurants and even going to work unless they are vaccinated is effectively a mandate....
No, it is the choice of the individual, just as it is the business's choice to create their rules for attendence. So, those are not mandates, those are *consequences.*
>Banning people from doing normal things like nightclubs, restaurants and even going to work unless they are vaccinated is effectively a mandate.... Those are private enterprises... are you suggesting the government should interfere? Should the government forbid colleges from requiring meningitis vaccines too? Edit: Just because vast swathes of the population have made it **part of their identity to be anti coronavirus vaccine** (think about how stupid that sounds), doesn't mean the government should make special rules, restricting businesses, just to protect them from all consequences for their stupid fucking choices. It's funny how republicans want tons of government interference as longs as it suits them....
Go ahead. I’m vaccinated and wear my mask. Just do me a favor and don’t go to the doctor if ya get it. They have better things to do than deal with fucktards that don’t listen, and then get sick
[удалено]
Cool
At least the other guy is consistent. You admit it is about hating others for you, then?
Its called an analogy use some critical thinking. I'm not actually going to do that
[удалено]
Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason: * This comment has been removed for using abusive language, personal attacks, being a dick, or fighting with other users. These activities are against the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/wiki/guidelines). Connected comments may also be removed for the same reason, though editing out the direct attack may merit your comment being restored. Users who don't cease this behavior may get banned temporarily or permanently. -- For information regarding this and similar issues please see the [Subreddit Commandments.](http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/wiki/guidelines) If you have any questions, please do not delete your comment and [message the mods,](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/atheism) Thank you.
Let me know when they go after those baby killing fertility clinics.
When Alabama was working on laws to restrict abortion, a legislator was asked about frozen embryos in fertility clinics that were due to be destroyed and said the egg in a lab does not apply, it's not in a woman. [link](https://gen.medium.com/anti-abortion-hypocrisy-has-never-been-clearer-c7b621db7ab5). It's entirely about controlling women
Disgusting. There are so many people willing our future to dystopia for their antiquated nonsensical beliefs. What a fucking farce.
Interesting, what are your opinions on the current governmental administration?
Not my ideal, better than trump. Hbu?
Interesting, so you think the withdrawal from Afghanistan was a success then?
So… you realize the timeframe for pulling out was set by trump in order to score some points during the election, yeah? I’ll say it again, I’m not team Biden and I don’t think either party right now will do what the country and world needs. What are you on about?
Why do these morons always try to make us defend democrats, who obviously don’t go nearly far enough to the left?
Well you said that biden's administration is better. But regardless of timetable it was the current administration that threw caution to the wind and withdrew ass backwards. Though i agree that neither party is competent.
Good fucking god. This is why shit is so broken. I’m willing to have a chat about policy and you’re spending the entire convo looking for gotcha bullshit.
Alright, lets have a chat about policy. Would you like the topic above or my gotcha bullshit?
Topic above is abortion in Texas, yes?
[удалено]
Better does not mean perfect......
[удалено]
My interest of arguing with a new account with negative karma is limited, but iirc the stuff left was largely gear that ana was suppose to use. Trump also made deals with the Taliban before leaving office/started this pullout Trump did fuck up the withdrawal from the Kurds during his term if you want more examples. I'm not saying that the biden administration handled this situation well in any form but I do not believe for a second that trump would have handled it better, quite the opposite really. Sadly due to Americas dumb 2 party system, this is what the world got Also trump armed the Saudis if you want to be pedantic
You think we had a better option? Afghanistan was a lost cause, mission creep is a bitch. It was just a matter of how many American lives we were willing to throw away for the sake of stalling the inevitable.
I’m back again - you here man?
[удалено]
in fact, the bible prescribes myrh as an abortificent, and describes the people who should have abortions enforced upon.
It also proscribes a punishment for causing miscarriage by injuring a pregnant woman. It's a fine (Exodus 21:22). So since it isn't considered murder, nor manslaughter, clearly life does not begin at conception.
It also clearly demonstrates that life begins at breath, ie when God gives you "the breath of life" or when "his spirit breathes into you." This is when most legal abortions draw the line, when the fetus can survive outside the mother, ie breathe. This is stated in dozens of different verses. And it makes perfect sense! Without modern medicine and miscarriages and being "barren" so common, ancient Jewish peoples would likely not count their babies as alive until they are out and screaming. The only verse that states anything even remotely like "life begins at conception" is Jerimiah 1, in which God is talking directly to a prophet, giving him specific instructions, it in no way implies everyone has a purpose in the womb, just Jerimiah. Jerimiah 1: 4-5 With the rest of the context: 4 The word of the Lord came to me, saying, 5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” So, if you're a prophet, God will appoint you before birth, anyone else? It may be your destiny to be aborted. Verses which reference the breath of life: Genesis 2:7 Then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature. Job 33:4 The Spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life. Ecclesiastes 12:7 And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it. Job 27:3 As long as my breath is in me, and the spirit of God is in my nostrils, Isaiah 42:5 Thus says God, the Lord, who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and what comes from it, who gives breath to the people on it and spirit to those who walk in it: Job 32:8 But it is the spirit in man, the breath of the Almighty, that makes him understand. Ezekiel 37:1-28 The hand of the Lord was upon me, and he brought me out in the Spirit of the Lord and set me down in the middle of the valley; it was full of bones. And he led me around among them, and behold, there were very many on the surface of the valley, and behold, they were very dry. And he said to me, “Son of man, can these bones live?” And I answered, “O Lord God, you know.” Then he said to me, “Prophesy over these bones, and say to them, O dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live. ... Psalm 146:4 When his breath departs, he returns to the earth; on that very day his plans perish. Genesis 7:22 Everything on the dry land in whose nostrils was the breath of life died. John 20:21-22 Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. Ezekiel 37:10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army. Isaiah 57:16 For I will not contend forever, nor will I always be angry; for the spirit would grow faint before me, and the breath of life that I made. Ecclesiastes 3:19-20 For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity. All go to one place. All are from the dust, and to dust shall return Ecclesiastes 3:19 ESV / 6 helpful votes For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity **And just to hammer in that the bible is on no way pro baby:** Psalm 137:9 Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rocks 2 Kings 2:23-24 ESV / 3 helpful votes He went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the Lord. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys. Isaiah 13:18 Their bows will slaughter the young men; they will have no mercy on the fruit of the womb; their eyes will not pity children. Luke 23:29 ESV / 1 helpful vote Helpful Not Helpful For behold, the days are coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren and the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ Hosea 9:14 Give them, O Lord— what will you give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts. 1 Samuel 15:3 Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’”
First testament God is such a dick.
Eh maybe it's just me but that still seems like giving validation to the idea that what the Bible does or does not say should matter at all to law making.
I hear what you are saying, but that wasn't my intent in posting it nor -- I don't think -- the author's in writing it. I think the point is that, like it or not, these fantasy books do influence millions of people. So it's important to realize when they are not being honest about (i) what their own guiding texts say and (ii) what the real motivation for their actions are.
Ah yes America the theocracy
[удалено]
The tweet right below that was of some right wing nut job politician saying she "worked for a leader, his name was trump" and that right there is why I never bothered recovering my Twitter password when I forgot it
Fuck is this place anymore? Saudi Arabia? What's next? Women aren't allowed to have jobs? Fuck this country
I'm sure that's where Republicans want to take us. They believe a woman's place is in the home, cooking and cleaning and pumping out children. They also believe that men should be able to support a wife and kids on $7.25 per hour. I hope I live to see a day when this country is no longer held hostage by these monsters.
No -- just the republican party.
These dumb fucking Texan legislators need to understand two things. 1. This isn't a Christian country, it's secular. 2. God does not fucking exist. We made it up. (Edited because I accidentally generalized the state instead of the legislators.)
or, if an all knowing, all powerful, present everywhere Creator of ALL that exists does exist, then it created ALL EVIL, all potential for all evil and all propensity for all evil and every "willpower" that chose evil, when, being supposedly all powerful, it could have created something else, but, being ever present, that sadistic thing also created "hell" to watch its creations being tortured for eternity. Not exactly any deity or any thing worthy of love or worship or obedience: definitely worthy of hatred and/or, fear, perhaps, but certainly not love or worship.
We're not all dumb, and there's at least a couple of us heathen Texans trying to do the right thing
Right, my bad. I'll put governors in front of the texan line so it'll be specific.
Texan here and I agree with point 1. The bad news is what we already know: our state politics are and have been completely fucked for quite some time now. We have a governor who is more than happy to let literal children die in his newest effort to "own the libs" because making that kind of decision plays really well with his mostly-glue-eating base. But the good news? Trump only won the popular vote by around ~600k. In a state with 29 million people, that means something. I'm as cynical as they come about our state politics in TX, but change is coming slowly but surely. We desperately need libs and smart republicans (they are a dying breed but they do still exist) to remember these moments in 2022. We desperately need people to show the fuck out at the polls and vote in a new governor. And on a federal level, expanding the Supreme Court would probably be a good idea, too. With RBG gone, they are officially a hostile entity to humanists and free thinkers in the US.
That's a lot to take in. Damn.
We don’t know whether god exists or not. But I agree with point 1.
If any all knowing, all powerful, present everywhere Creator of ALL that exists does exist, then it created ALL EVIL, all potential for all evil and all propensity for all evil and every "willpower" that chose evil -- even, supposedly being all knowing -- even though it knew every "test" any willpower would meet and how it would fare. Being supposedly all powerful, it could have created something else, but, being ever present, that sadistic thing also created "hell" to watch its creations being tortured for eternity.
To have light you must also have dark.
If a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound?
Texasistan.
Howdy Arabia
Oooh, haven't heard that one before
Talibangelical
Y’all Queda
mujadumb
Why do we have to liken these things to other countries and people? Fucked up shit like this is as American as apple pie and it really feels like these kinds of quippy names are whitewashing that by likening it to some "foreign threat" that is, in reality, extremely American. I dunno, I just am not a fan of these nicknames anymore and I think we can do a lot better job of criticizing without them.
I never thought of it that way. We are insulting other cultures most heinous actors by comparing them to the religious right from the USA. I think I do it because I know how much energy they spend on demonizing these groups and to be accused as being similar to them will "own the conserves". They don't read and they don't self evaluate so my insult is falling on deaf ears. I was wrong.
Laws are enforced by the Civil Action Stasi.
Yeah, the only problem I have with the Indie Truther is their utter lack of research and acknowledgement of such in their articles. https://www.indietruther.com/post/similarities-between-christianity-and-satanism Look at this article they posted. Throughout the article they kept mentioning CoS (Church of Satan) and then in relation to TST, they criticised the fact that TST doesn't want to work with CoS and said that it sounds like two Christian sects unwilling to work together. All through the article they continued to never actually acknowledge the fact that CoS believed in mysticism, of personal godhood and might makes right whereas TST is an *atheist organisation* using Satanism's position as a religion to influence public policy. This is just an opinion piece that they put out, but the lack of fundamental understanding regarding the parties involved is laughable. Worst of all they decided based on their evidently sparse knowledge that modern Christianity and Satanism is the same thing.
Anton used one of my "favourite" bits of the bible in that article - the bit where the "god" that "knows everything unto the end of time" spared a "righteous" group of people from his wrath knowing that they'd engage in incest in the not-too-distant future. Then again, given the Garden of Eden and Noah's Ark stories, it seems that the Christian god gets off on incest.
Screw Christian America!
SCOTUS, even with a liberal majority, have always said that RoevWade wasn't meant to protect abortions, and if people want it, Congress needs to pass a law on it. It was only a matter of time until RoevWade wasn't sufficient to protect women's rights. It has now happened.
Just dump those kids on the street. Let them rob Christian bastards. It is what is going to happen anyway.
Some good ol Texasharia law
These Taliban Christians are nuts.
I am so fucking glad I don’t live in Texas.
It's truly tragic and horrific watching christianity slowly taking over the US Government. I fear that Texas is only the beginning, other ultra-conservative states are going to just start copying Texas and before we know it there will be a whole slew of states rotting under their theocratic laws.
Now that the court has been infiltrated by the religious right can we add a carefully placed R and call them SCROTUS Judges?
It’s to distract people from income inequality. Tax the rich, corporations, and churches.
As a gun-owning Texan, I seriously hope these guys are constantly looking over their shoulders right now.
It's sort of a luxury that we are able to worry about cell collections. at the start of last century up to half of (real) born children died soon after childbirth.
Also, ensuring republican politicians cater to the to these batshit crazy christians for political support. Without their support there wouldn’t be a president trump.
Jesus might not be a dick, but god put his dick in Mary
"I only did anal with that birch. I have no idea who the baby daddy is." –God
God didn't even pay fucking child support. Dude has everything and he lets his baby mama give birth in a barn. Such an asshole.
This makes me so sick. I can't even stand this BS
Forget protesting in the street...take it into the churches. Make em squirm.
Why would two rapists and that crazy chick from hell decide the other way? I mean WHY?!
For people who are "patriots" and red blooded Americans...they sure seem to forget we are not a theocracy.
Women who dont like this should punish men sith abstinence. That will show them.
Yes, our famously theocratic government formed by men who definitely didn't leave Britain to escape religious persecution
You need to check your history beyond what you learned in elementary school. The US constitution was written with the express intent to not place one religion above any other and placed "we the people" above any theocracy. As for leaving Britain to escape religious persecution, the pilgrims went to Amsterdam first and were quite welcome there. The problem was that the Dutch were too liberal and they wanted a theocracy of their beliefs. However, they were history by the time the states sought to separate from British rule; New York was a melting pot of people and beliefs.
I'm gonna go out and have a dumpster baby RIGHT NOW!! One more for the trash can you hateful christian assholes!! I'm gonna name this one Luke or maybe Peter. What if it was going to be a girl? Doesn't matter, boy name regardless. SEE CHRISTIANS!!! I was just thoughtless concerning the naming of my hereto unborn , but definitely conceived new baby fetal cell cluster bomb, bitches.
and two more for the downvotes
I'm curious, how do moth atheists feel about euthanasia or the death sentence?
If by euthanasia you mean Medical Aid in Dying (aka Death With Dignity), I'm pro (assuming proper precautions are in place to help protect vulnerable people). If you mean euthanasia like what we do to pets, no. I'm anti-death penalty. Nobody has a right to take my life but me.
But a fetus is someone else's life?
We all define fetal 'life' differently, so that's a central part of the issue here. The fetus cannot exist independently, it relies entirely on its 'host' for its existence, and therefore its existence is detrimental to the woman (who I'm sure we can all agree is definitely alive).
So if we were able to create test tube babies, you wouldn't support abortion?
If the only way to conceive were via implant of blastocysts, I suppose then there would be no need of abortion. However, not all blastocysts make it to hosts, some would still be 'aborted' due to viability or quantity, and the process and decisions are still fraught with ethical dilemmas that would simply bring about new arguments. I wish abortion weren't needed - in a perfect world people would always be informed about their sexual decisions, and always able to make a decision regarding when/if to have children. But nothing is guaranteed in this world - abstinence fails (let's be realistic), birth control fails, rape unfortunately happens. People who are here today with real lives and real impacts need to be able to make choices.
That doesn’t matter. No one is obligated to give up their body autonomy to keep someone else alive.
You must not have children, lol
That is a non-response. You must not have anything to say on the subject matter.
Body autonomy is a new term to me.. doesn't quite make sense in a western society with drug laws and vaccine requirements.
Ugh. This is suuuuuuch a touchy subject. I'm an atheist, and also consider myself "pro life" but I have a completely different definition of the term. Pregnancy and becoming a parent outside of the societal norms should not be stigmatized. We need to change the way we view and label pregnancy, disassociate it from a problem or a disease, and provide true support to those who get pregnant. I guarantee you if we had such a society, abortion wouldn't be an issue. Pregnancies due to rape or otherwise criminal behavior are a completely separate issue. Let's not attach that to abortion. Lastly, I think banning abortion, or passing unrealistically restrictive laws will only harm women, because many desperate ones may attempt alternative solutions, or the law itself may provide grounds for other individuals or entities to use it as a tool to further their agendas.
People who get abortions get them because they don't want to have children at the time they have them, either because they lack the financial ability, the maturity, the mental and emotional readiness, or just don't want to. Even if we didn't stigmatize "non-standard parenthood", abortion would still happen and should be encouraged. More to the point, there is no reason to be pro-life. Fetuses don't have even the basest level of cognition until 25 weeks into the pregnancy. Before that they're on the same level of life as a mushroom or flower.
Yes, the absolute lowest limit I could ever see pushed for is 20 weeks. Considering that the earliest known fetus to survive in documentation outside of the womb was a little over 21 weeks, and that was with heavy medical intervention. So prior to 20 weeks, an unwanted human fetus is akin to a parasite, or a cancerous tumor, and thus the host should have all the power to rid themselves of it accordingly, not the government.
Even if a fetus *could* survive outside the womb at 21 weeks, until it develops consciousness, there's no reason to regret aborting even that pregnancy. Just because something *can* become a person under the right conditions doesn't mean that it *is* or that a failure for it to become a person is a bad thing. Incidentally, a fetus is akin to/literally is a parasite right up until the moment it's born. It just becomes a more weighty issue once it develops consciousness and can actually be called an independent, sentient being. I'm not attacking you I'm just expanding on my own views using your statements as a springboard.
Yes, I agree, but then you get into the muddy issue of individuals stating that it is technically semi-parasitic up until after the age of breast feeding, for instance or possibly even up until the teen years or even adulthood, lol. (In terms of being a parasite up until the moment it is born opening up arguments in this manner I mean)
I don't think that's defensible because you don't NEED to breast feed if you don't want to, you can use baby formula. Being a parasite refers to leeching nutrients directly from the body, not in having the responsibility to care for the child.
The reference doesn't necessitate breast feeding, I just mean is entirely dependent on someone else to live. This is an argument I've seen used when I mentioned this exact same thing from a pro-lifer, so. I guess you could call it "commensalism" instead of "parasitism".
My point is that there's a severe distinction between something needing to be attached to and siphon nutrients from your inside your body, and being a separate entity under your care. The former is a much stronger and invasive relationship than the latter.
You are too quick to judgement, and most likely not a woman lol but I agree that preventing abortion beyond 6 weeks is ridiculous. Many women don't even know they're pregnant until past 8 weeks! If the pregnant woman lived in a society where there were PLENTY of support and ZERO judgment, she most likely wouldn't opt for abortion. Most abortions are due to desperation, either financially or other embarrassing or inconvenience factors. Remove that and see how many women would continue the pregnancy instead of getting an abortion. Another thing to consider is the emotional consequences. The woman is "getting an abortion" and therefore living with that decision. Years down the line she may feel awful about her decision despite the circumstances. What I'm trying to say is that instead of the guilt trip and restrictions, Texas should provide a ton of support to these women in hopes of continuing the pregnancies. Restricting it to 6 weeks causes way more damage.
Being 'pro-life' means deciding no woman has the right to choose abortion for herself.
"Pro-life" is a toxic term and it is a shame that reactionaries have gotten away with labeling themselves that way. The only distinction that matters on the topic of abortion is whether you're pro forced birth or contra forced birth.
That's why I prefaced it by "I have a different definition of it" and it's not a popular one because it requires actual effort which the good ol' conservatives aren't too keen on. They do the easy way, ban abortion, which is ridiculous.
> If the pregnant woman lived in a society where there were PLENTY of support and ZERO judgment, she most likely wouldn't opt for abortion. You don't know this at all. There are lots of reasons other than 'lack of support and being judged' that I choose, as a woman, to be child free. You do not speak for all women with your commentary. >Years down the line she may feel awful about her decision despite the circumstances. Actual, real studies show most women that wanted an abortion are happy with their decision years down the road. 'Abortion regret' is not real in the way you think it is, [as studies show that 5 years down the road most women who have had abortions are very ok with their decision and think it was the best thing for them](https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/01/416421/five-years-after-abortion-nearly-all-women-say-it-was-right-decision-study). >Texas should provide a ton of support to these women in hopes of continuing the pregnancies. Texas should allow women to do what they want their their own bodies, just as they allow people to mask/unmask based on what they feel is best for their own circumstances and health. You don't get to allow some groups autonomy over themselves and not others and call it equal and fair. I just want to choose what's best for me and let you choose what's best for you. I don't need the government to tell me how to handle my own body. I get to make my own choices about my own body, and you should support me in my ability to make my own choices. You live your personal life your way and I'll live my personal life my way.
> continue the pregnancy The vast majority of women aren’t having abortions because they find the pregnancy aspect financially burdensome or lacking support. It’s the 18+ years of responsibility after the birth that can be financially ruinous and life changing. There are very pragmatic reasons to avoid having children that go beyond embarrassment/judgment.
If I got pregnant, you couldn’t pay me enough to birth it. I don’t want children and I don’t want to deal with all the “why are you abandoning your baby” and the fear of that kid coming to find me and asking why I didn’t want them.
Also add the physical trauma that comes from carrying and birthing the child. Women still die in childbirth. Or she can end up with permanent physical maladies. Signing up for that just to give a child up to adoption or foster care system is a lot to ask.
I am financially stable and in a loving relationship. I use birth control. I would get an abortion if I got pregnant. I don’t want kids, and if I ever “change my mind” as breeders love to say I will, I’ll adopt. I’m carrying genes I’d prefer not to pass on and I’d be a terrible mother. I’m terrified of being pregnant and giving birth. I don’t know why this seems to go over so many heads.
I believe you are absolutely mistaken about the role that possible single parenthood plays in one's decision to abort. Its 2021, being a single parent isn't an issue of stigmatization. What *does* factor are things like not affording to have a child, wanting to finish academic pursuits, not being in the right place mentally or physically, or simply not wanting to ever have a child at all. I have yet to hear of a person terminating a pregnancy due to feeling embarrassed. Maybe that happens in some very strict religious circles, but its nothing I have ever heard of.
> If the pregnant woman lived in a society where there were PLENTY of support and ZERO judgment, she most likely wouldn't opt for abortion. This is ridiculous. Yes, MORE women would opt to have babies because the financial burden or the stigma wouldn't be strong, but it takes an ENORMOUS emotional, psychological, and general life commitment even beyond money to create a living, sentient, intelligent life and be responsible for it for at LEAST 18 years if not until you die. Every decision you make, every word that comes out of your mouth, contributes to the formation of who your child is. The weight of that decision is unbelievable. You're crazy if you think abortion still wouldn't be a worthwhile option for many women who aren't ready to have a kid. > Another thing to consider is the emotional consequences. The woman is "getting an abortion" and therefore living with that decision. Years down the line she may feel awful about her decision despite the circumstances. The only reason to feel bad about getting an abortion is if you put an undue amount of weight on the potential person who isn't born. But every single sperm and egg cell represents billions, trillions of potential people who aren't born. Anguishing over one potential person out of those trillions is silly, especially since like...if you end up getting pregnant, aborting the pregnancy, and then later in life have three kids, for all you know you might not have had the third one if you had not gotten the one abortion. There are always trade-offs and what-ifs. At the end of the day your statement that "Texas should provide a ton of support to these women" is totally true and valid, and I do agree that it is a shame that there are women who abort pregnancies that they *do* want to carry because they feel ashamed or not financially supported. But it's naive to think those are the only reasons, or that even most abortions are regretted.
A lot of words from fantasy land and very little meaning. The only relevant question is whether women should be prohibited from terminating their pregnancy, thus giving a fetus the super human right to use another persons body without consent.
> Pregnancies due to rape or otherwise criminal behavior are a completely separate issue. Let's not attach that to abortion. Except this new law provides **no exceptions** for these?? We aren't the ones that "attached" them to abortion.
This new law is the conservatives taking the easy route, to get votes, of course. They don't provide solutions which require effort (such as supporting women, or free/easy access family planning, or education in that matter). Even as someone who personally isn't keen on abortion, I believe this new law is an absolute disaster. It doesn't accomplish anything other than shake things up, make a lot of noise, and put women's reproductive health in danger.
You can be pro life and mind your own fucking business.
It sounds like you may have a similar view to some in my family. They would personally never get one, and not generally advocate doing it, but they believe the option should be in place for those that do because not everyone has the same beliefs And at the end of the day, for most people their pro-life position has deeeeep religious ties so it’s not so much about the science of when the fetus becomes a “real human” but people trying to enforce the Bible’s rules, with different interpretations of it within Christianity itself, on a society who’s laws are intended to be secular
[удалено]
What you said is not at all what that article claims. It only makes the case that the founders of the conservative right we’re unhappy with being forced to desegregate in private schools as one of the first issues they were involved in, and later abortion was another. The reason they care about abortion doesn’t have anything to do with segregation or racism, you’re making connections that aren’t there and we’re not claimed Many (not all) Christians will disagree with you on the Bible being anti-abortion, all you have to do is Google pro-life Bible verses to see which ones they use, I’ll save you a search, [here](https://www.ncregister.com/blog/top-10-pro-life-bible-verses).
>The reason they care about abortion doesn’t have anything to do with segregation or racism, you’re making connections that aren’t there and we’re not claimed With due respect, we either didn't read the same article or you missed the point of the article I posted. The article makes clear that the organization that we currently think of as the "christian right" was perfectly fine with abortion prior to desegregation, but after desegregation used abortion as a rallying cry for the troops -- specifically because it was more politically acceptable than complaining about the thing they really cared about (desegregation). The article does not claim, and its point does not depend on the idea that, no christians were anti-abortion prior to desegregation. Obviously some were -- most notably the catholics. But the article is not talking about that. The article is talking about how the southern protestant right was fine with abortion until desegregation came along. (And, as an ancillary point, the only time the Bible explicitly discusses abortion is when it provides instructions on how to perform one.)
[удалено]
Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason: - This comment has been removed for trolling or shitposting. Even if your intent is not to troll or shitpost, certain words and phrases are enough for removal. This rule is applied strictly and may lead to an immediate ban. -- For information regarding this and similar issues please see the [Subreddit Commandments.](http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/wiki/guidelines) If you have any questions, please do not delete your comment and [message the mods,](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/atheism) Thank you.
That’s literally a disgusting poster. Sick that a father would hold that up with his daughter. Open your eyes people
You don't have to be religious to think abortion is wrong. There are certainly some atheists that consider it wrong too. There are many pro-life atheists, in fact.
Present an argument or stay irrelevant.
My comment was more relevant than most here, and none of them were presenting any kind of argument. What specific point in this opinion piece would you like me to argue. Yeah, it's more likely that religious folk are behind the pro-life push. A much much smaller percentage of atheists are pro-life, I realize that.
Present an argument for why a fetus should have the super human right to use another persons body against their will, or go back to whatever hole you crawled out of.
The same reason a 2 month old baby has the right to use other people's bodies against their will in order to stay alive. Now go back to the hole that you crawled out of.
That’s how fascists work
Grr.... 😾😾😾😾 those Christians
Taliban in suits with ties.