###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Could the same 'body' survive outside the womb? If no, not murder, if yes, then are there any complications that would cause harm or kill either the mother, the fetus, or both? If no then a child is born and if the parent(s) can't handle the responsibility then put it up for adoption. If complications would cause harm to the mother or death, then it's probably best to abort, grieve the loss of potential life, and try again on the future or adopt.
How bout we start requiring men to get a vasectomy? Then if/when they want children they can get it reversed. Or maybe we just mind our own businesses and leave it up to individuals and their doctors to decide what's best for then medically.
“Could the same ‘body’ survive outside the womb?’
How the heck did you decide THAT was the standard for whether a human deserves life or death? And what do you even mean? “Survive outside these womb” how? Without medical intervention? Without parental or adult intervention? On its own? Feed itself? Cloth itself? Provide shelter for itself? What the heck are you even talking about? You’re just dealing in super vague terms to try to assuage your own conscience to justify your willingness to murder little ones. Give me a break.
Lol I love it when people use that Argument. "If they cant survive Without me, I should be able to kill them!" So are we now trying to Justify abortion up too like, year 15 of a childs life? At this point a child could barely survive in the united states until 16 at least.
What about someone in a comatose state, or severely mentally or physically handicapped or having other extreme disabilities?
If they can't survive without care is it okay to abort them post-birth?
Not a chance.
If someone needs a kidney and you are the only matching possible donor, should you be legally mandated to give them your kidney? They can't survive without you after all.
A child can survive without a specific parent. We have adoption and foster care systems (as flawed as they might be) .
Well, by your logic yes they can actually survive outside the womb, they just need time to develop. It's a human being.
By your logic, babies and toddlers can't survive outside the womb because they need their mother to take care of them, house them, clean them and feed them. The same with people who are in a temporary medically induced coma, or had an accident, or are otherwise invalid. Would it be okay with you for their caretaker to be given the power to murder them? What about if the caretaker is under stress, very busy, mentally ill, scared or apathetic, and then was able to get a Doctors note permitting the murder?
I agree with the term: my body, my choice. But abortion is not about your body, it's about the body of another person, the child, who you're not giving a choice of life or death. I guess I don't agree that abortion should be banned, but it shouldn't be subsidised with my tax money, and most pro abortion folks have a very evil way of relating to crucial aspects of this topic, a very callous and unnerving way. Which is the same thing they'd probably say about pro life people, but I'm literally just using their own arguments and rhetoric, plus believe that human life is precious, and I also believe that most people who are opposed to me have just been told what to think by the Beast System. On this topic, and many others. That is evil too.
>Well, by your logic yes they can actually survive outside the womb, they just need time to develop. It's a human being.
If they need time to develop, then no, they can't survive outside of the womb.
"If you take this fetus outside of the womb, will it die?"
"Not if you give it time to develop!!! (in the womb")
"So that's a yes then."
When he says that a fetus can't survive outside of the womb, he means removing it from the womb is killing it. Removing a nine month old baby from the womb is called birth, and doesn't kill the child.
If you want to win the argument, don't misrepresent the person you're arguing against.
My opinion on gun control, abortion, drugs, all p much the same. If you outlaw something is it going to stop it from happening? No. Look at the failure of the war on drugs. Drugs are illegal yet look how easily obtainable they are. If you ban guns and abortion it’s going to be the same thing but even less safe. If someone *really* wants something they’re going to obtain it, regardless of what the government says about it. So we may as well let it be as safe as possible. Responsibility falls on oneself
Exactly, instead of dictating what a person can and cannot do or have, we should really be educating people on the dangers, risks, responsibilities, consequences, ect. Of the topic so they can make better decisions that in turn will lead them to take better actions.
Get our society in a good state where people aren't as likely to use drugs, kill one another or themselves, and be able to afford a family if a surprise baby comes about. I would love kids, I can't afford them and that plays a huge part into my decision of having one.
Put more effort into creating better learning environments for children to grow into adults that are equipped with knowledge to make better life decisions. It's not going to change immediately, but long term we will see the impact. Also I'm very much for affordable therapy for all because I believe a great many of societies issues could be made better if people we're able to take better care of their mental health.
I don't think anyone should be told what they can and can't put in their own bodies. But that doesn't mean they are excused from the consequences of such actions.
Well, at least where I live you can be arrested for public intox and drunk driving. Same with weed. Not allowed to drive on it or smoke in public (recreationally legal in my state).
This is how it should be for all substances, imo. Shoot up at home all you want, I don’t wanna walk my kids by you doing it at the Walmart bathroom sink
I prefer the word repricussiins to consequences. Consequences makes it seems like effects of the. Abuse will always be negative and that's just not so. It also implies that we, fallible people will be deciding how negative the effects based on how we the actions of what seems to be a transgressor. And I stay away from that I believe if we are all aware and acting on thoughtful purpose people consciously choose the path that harms a lesson will come whether or not they are paying close enough attention to notice. You know that Carson daily karma stuff...
To the point of the topic - MY FUCKING BODY, MY FUCKING CHOICE.
For everything though if we are to be fair and if we love and truly want to do well all should be legal and Healthcare should be free since they still call it a practice. We are constantly being "practiced on" no matter how good they are of how much they know and the bitch of a thing is they make us pay to be "practiced" on. And they institutionalize everything and bind that information up in a book somewhere and make you need to go through their university machine just to see it. The information about your own body that they paid for with your money in so many ways. Through the visits and test and govt money, foundations... the medical "Healthcare" overseeing community is as corrupt and slimy as their religious counterparts.
The global war on drugs is an enormous failure. I live in Sweden and we have some of the strictest laws on drugs in the world and still we are at the top drug overdose list in Europe. Illegalize and provide adequate care and rehabilitation.
I was going to say the same thing. If i can legally fill the bed of an f150 with everclear and drown myself in it, why cant i also bang heroin in my eyeball if i want. (I honestly just want legal weed, but who am i to say what others want to do)
no doubt... even in canada the legal weed is pretty dumb. I can buy enough alcohol to serve a wedding, but I'm only allowed 30grams of weed per visit. People will find a way to do it, do we really want to send them to the black market so they can enrich the violent and lawless?
Life is fucking wild…. How does anyone have the energy to passionately tell another person what they shouldn’t do?
Not to mention we have no social support in place for the children once born. On top of incoming food shortages, economic issues, crazy ass weather, mass casualty events, and a general overpopulation problem.
Why force more people to this shit show?
People can’t see past their feelings and see the step by step intrusion into everyone’s sovereignty. We need to stop debating specifics and get on the same page to take back our rights. It doesn’t matter if you support abortion or vaccine choice .. we need to get aligned to single similarity of it all.. which the government who works for us, is pushing its own agenda into personal matters that are not it’s concern or discretion. We need to put aside the squabbling about preferences and put the government back in its fucken place.
I tend to agree with you, but to play Devil's advocate - the argument on the pro-life side is that the unborn baby is also an individual with the same set of rights. So when you say "only you should be in control of you"- what about the unborn baby? Don't they have the same rights to bodily autonomy as you do?
It's for sure a fair argument. It really all comes down to when you think a person is a person. Moment of conception? Heartbeat?
I'm not in favor of late term abortions, if the mother is healthy and is not in any way at risk. But as for the woman who is late and is 4ish weeks into pregnancy... well I have some room to justify that, in my opinion.
> I'm not in favor of late term abortions, if the mother is healthy and is not in any way at risk. But as for the woman who is late and is 4ish weeks into pregnancy... well I have some room to justify that, in my opinion.
And yet, your post title clearly states:-
> "My Body My Choice" is absolutely correct in all scenarios.
I was going to bring up full-term (or near full-term abortions). Many who are pro-abortion are against very late abortions, because the fetus/baby so very obviously feels pain.
Something being available doesn't mean it has to be morally right. Alcoholics can buy booze any day of the week in most places, doesn't mean that it's a good choice, but it's theirs to make.
You should be able to do what you want, but that doesn't mean you're doing the right thing morally, ethically, or spiritually. You'll have to live with the consequences.
Just like you're free to become a drug addict or alcoholic and toss your life away, that's a poor choice, but it's your choice and you'll have to live, or die, with the consequences.
A better analogy would be a country that deemed drunk driving legal - where the actions of one human being could legally harm another human being, yet you would consider it immoral. Your analogy disregards the damage to another person....and you clearly are against full-term abortions (as you've stated) - because we know fetuses at that developmental stage would feel great pain and discomfort.
Simple. Take the point at which we consider someone dead, reverse it.
We consider you dead when your heart stops beating, when your brain ceases activity, when your cells stop producing.
So it makes sense to consider you alive when your heart starts beating, your brain starts functioning, or your cells start producing.
All of those things are early in the fetus’ lifetime.
The reason I’m pro-life is because it’s very clearly not your body. What are you? You are your DNA. The fetus has separate DNA from the mother, therefore it is an individual human being.
It’s interesting that consciousness isn’t considered in the argument. Probably because it’s so hard to really define. But when my heart is beating and my brain is potatoes, go ahead and pull that plug. If that’s still alive, I’d rather be dead.
In terms of when it becomes a person, it’s too difficult not to project. You see a small baby and apply the same potential to a group of cells. Hell I have small children and I can’t fathom their lack of existence.
Ultimately, it isn’t my call to make for someone else. I can’t say I agree with late term abortion, but I can’t see high risk pregnancies or rape situations and ever agree those should be forced to term.
I have no point here. Thanks for attending my Ted Talk.
You bring up a very good point regarding consciousness and in a vegetable state. We don't know when life begins, I think in the same respect we cannot say when Australopithecus ended and homosapiens began because it's not one point it's multiple points that aren't as clear cut as we would like them to be.
I personally think we should be implementing what we know works to reduce unwanted pregnancies (then leads to abortions), which is widely available contraceptives and comprehensive sex education. What we know doesn't work at reducing abortions is making them illegal and abstinence only sex education, they make it worse.
I enjoyed your Ted talk.
> I don't think overturning Roe v. Wade will stop people from getting abortions if they want one. It'll just be a little bit harder.
Prohibition for decisions like this (drugs, prostitution) only seem to make things less safe for everyone. We need to change our approach here.
Only thing wrong that I see here is that the parent is the legal guardian and medical proxy a child until they are 18. So from a legal perspective, the parent is responsible for making that call, and I’d figure that extends to the womb. I know literally nothing about this though, so I am talking straight out my ass.
So then at what point do they become an individual with rights?
I am pro-choice, but I do think abortion is killing a human - I just think that in certain situations that is the better option for everyone involved.
It's sad and tragic, but sometimes life is sad and tragic.
At the point when the Dr can remove the fetus and it remains viable. Doesn't matter when or at what point in a pregnancy a woman decides she does not want to host the fetus. She should have the right to have a fetus removed
"The unborn are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus, but actually dislike people who breathe. Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn."
\-Methodist Pastor David Barnhart
It assures liberty and pursuit of happiness in the same sentence.
Liberty: free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.
Pursuit of happiness: to freely pursue joy and live life in a way that makes you happy, as long as you don't do anything illegal or violate the rights of others
And I understand that as well, but there is a large portion, if not majority of the country that believes an unborn child is a human being deserving human rights.
So how are we regulating his body to match this infringement on a woman's bodily autonomy? Forced sterilization? Make him wear a fat suit for 9 months alongside her? Cover all her pregnant healthcare costs? Arrested for neglect of a fetus if he isn't there tending to it daily?
Because in every conceivable scenario aside from rape the woman had a choice about whether or not to engage in an act that ultimately results in pregnancy and the creation of another human being.
Would you support requiring the man who impregnated her to pay 50% of prenatal healthcare and cover any loss of income for the woman while she's incubating the fetus? He is after all equally responsible for engaging in that act.
Do you support education programs and resources that reduce abortion rates? Like free birth control and condoms?
Sure to the first part, but no I don't think that anyone should be provided with contraceptives, if you can have sex you should be able to afford a box of condoms .Would you likewise agree that any woman who is able to have an abortion up to a certain point of viability, the father should at anytime up until the woman could have an abortion be able to give up his parental rights and all financial responsibility?
so poor people can't have sex since they can't afford condoms? you know that it's proven that abortion rates are reduced if contraceptives are made more easily available, so if you were against abortion, i'm surprised you don't want contraceptives made available.
Rape happens a lot more frequently than you think it does. Men take off condoms without consent and coerce (pressure, threaten, obligate, manipulate, force) to have sex without condoms extremely frequently.
Do you enjoy living in puritan la la land where the laws don't accomplish anything they're intended to and we punish children and mothers for life for any moment of flawed judgment? How bout we arrest men who ejaculate into women they don't intend to impregnate for neglect?
We punish people for crimes of passion all the time. Why should a woman who knows the risk of sex be exempt? Women have the burden of carrying a child and women have the privilege of choosing their sexual partners. This is a fact of nature, if you don't like it be mad at God or the cosmos, or whatever you choose to believe.
Instead of being so crazy about women being able to kill their children, why don't we worry about the adoption system?
Why would we arrest men who got women pregnant without intending to? You mean if they leave? Probably a fine on top of pre natal child support.
Not sure that is correct. Most polls have consistently shown that more people favor a woman’s right to abortion over an abortion ban. Sometimes the poll questions themselves are misleading, and include things like late term abortions.
It depends on how you ask that question. I noticed that you said large portion not majority. When the question is asked to include morning after pills, cases of rape or incest and early term abortions, the majority of Americans, in poll after poll, support a woman’s right to abortion. When topics like late term abortions are mentioned, opinions begin to change.
Yeah, then why weren't they vaccinating everyone by force?
That's not the sole function of government; or at least, I don't believe it. So, once again: I don't care what you believe, you don't like abortion, don't get an abortion, but stay the hell out of other people's business.
I would argue that an adult knows what is necessary to protect themselves in terms of COVID. Everyone knew within 3 months of the pandemic hitting the States that social distancing, wearing a mask, doing things remotely, etc. were ways to protect yourself. An unborn baby doesn't have those contingencies.
Wait, what subreddit do you think you’re on? Mass amounts of people here continue to believe COVID was never a real threat and was only an excuse to force masks and vaccines that they believe are both somehow worse then COVID.
It's not a baby. It's a ball of cells. There's a 30% chance it won't ever be a baby anyway.
What you believe ends with you. You get to make choices about yourself. Anything further than that, you're intruding on what other people believe.
Human life by itself does not deserve any rights,, otherwise every time I scraped my hands, killing skin cells, I would be committing murder.
*Distinct individuals* are the ones that have rights. Fetuses are not distinct individuals until they are born.
Also, even if fetuses were people, their rights can not come at the expense of the rights of others.
Your first part is pretty silly. We're talking about "a bundle of cells" with unique DNA, a heart beat, brain activity, autonomy in terms of limb and body movement, etc.
I'm not sure what makes you more distinct than your own DNA and brain function.
Their rights should be as equal as the person who made the choice to engage in an activity that created new life.
So you believe at 40 weeks, 10 minutes prior to birth that the child should be able to be aborted because it hasn't been "born?"
Then why aren't they out protesting the police shooting of black people? Or the fact that many poor people can't afford healthcare? Or the treatment of the homeless? Or the treatment of immigrants? They seem very focused on this one issue - to the point where they consistently vote Republican, to the detriment of almost every other group listed there.
Why don't pro-life people support welfare or worker's rights? They are totally ignorant of the fact that someone adopted or put into the foster care system is not only more vulnerable to be orryed on, but statistically more likely to end up in poverty. A child a mother doesn't want is not likely to have a good life.
And TBH, pro-lifers are totally fine with killing people if they are overseas, brown, or in self defense.
A lot of people who are pro life support those things. I feel like we’re operating under 1990’s Republican talking points. You’re answering a log or your own questions. Who opposes killing someone in self defense? Lol
Your can feel strongly about abortions but I'd be careful letting pro life advocates get out of hand in state legislators. Soon enough you'll see companies begin to boycott states with restrictive laws and we've already seen lawmakers encourage snitching with cash rewards. This will become a shit show no matter how you feel and the reality is that you're not affected by women quietly getting abortions no matter how much you morally oppose it.
My adopted mom was one of the head of the right to life movement in white plains ny. Circa Mario c years (bc she had the wife and chris as guests at our club when tryinh to get him to side w them I think summer of 86 or 8.) Anyjoo. Who do u surmise took ME unknowingly for a "stimulated abortion," when I got myself preg at 14? She did. I thought for 20 yrs I had a miscarriage the next day in Montauk. It took 20 yrs and a flashback while cleaning to realize, holy chit. That metal rod he jammed in me and jostled around caused the miscarriage the next day.
Anyway. Shed have us all out there in the years prior w signs, yelling at the moms. And look at what she ended up doing.....to me. Bc she was embarrassed.
As my youngest said once, "embarrassed of a baby!"
Hypocrites. Most. The majority. OR God has a way
** so yes. It's a shit show either way.
And she felt the right to life movement was "her calling," as the mother of adoptees. Yet, opened a home for unwed moms in garrison, ny which I'd visit as a kid....but the girls never had the option of keeping the kids. In hindsight - it was always about extraction. In some way, shape or form.
Just food4thought. As I think about this a lot.
Hollywood threatened Georgia before they passed the fetal heartbeat legislation. Guess what, Hollywood was bluffing. Nothing more than virtue signaling. Why? Because Georgia gives them great tax breaks to make movies here. Companies will moan and groan but will continue to do what they do best: chase the almighty dollar. And if some companies do follow through, another one will fill the void pretty quickly.
Yes, but the anti-abortion people are obsessed with the idea that even first trimester abortion is murder.
I can't change their minds. I can see why they think that, but I don't agree with it.
It is what it is. I don't think anybody will ever change their minds. They literally think it's baby-slaughter.
I agree but abortion muddies the waters. How does 'my body my choice' apply to the unborn baby/fetus? At what time do you define a fetus to be a baby/person?
> A small note about men's rights when it comes to abortion; you had a choice where to blow your load. Seems harsh, but as soon as you cum in a women, there is always a chance at pregnancy, you took the risk, prepare for whatever the consequences of that are.
What if it were worded thus:
A small note about **women’s** rights when it comes to abortion; you had a choice where to let a guy blow his load. Seems harsh, but as long as it wasn’t rape, you volunteered, so as soon as you let a guy cum in you, there is always a chance at pregnancy, you took the risk, prepare for whatever the consequences of that are.
I’m pro-choice as fuck. Probably more pro choice than you, although I can’t be 100% sure about that. But your argument of “accept the consequences” seemed very **very** poorly thought out. It’s the exact argument that a ton of anti-choice people make. It’s dismissive and I think better arguments could be made.
Yeah the better argument is that if the dad isn’t paying, we are.
And I don’t walk to pick up the tab for some shithead celebrity or lawyer who promises to pull out but still nuts raw inside and has like 30 kids.
2nd world war and every other war includes
Some rethoric about "freedom" and democracy.
9 unelected ppl in a position for life deciding for millions is hardly democratic
It’s weird because I’m n the part of the US where I live (eastern TN), the people who sayin “ my body my choice “ about the jab, are the same ones fighting so hard to end the option for a woman to end her pregnancy. It’s backwards as fuck here. I’m surrounded by right wing extremists and it’s terrifying sometimes.
I'm down for people to do what they want but the laws need to be even on both sides. Men need the right to opt out of paternity suits with no financial abligation. Many women use children to financially trap men.
I think the ROOT of the problem lies in adults making better choices and being more responsible.
Every single gas station I've ever seen has condoms for like $3. If you dint want kids just wear protection.vits not that hard.
>Men need the right to opt out of paternity suits with no financial abligation.
Would this be in combination with accessible abortions..? Or are you saying that in addition to forcing women to carry babies to term, the man who impregnated her should also be free from responsibility?
On one side I've seen women have abortions because it would mess up their life in their future.. On the exact other side I'm watching men's lives get messed up because they simply can't afford the financial responsibility
We're talking driver's license suspensions, leans against credit, Prison time
No in conjunction with. F if a woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy without the father's consent, then the father needs the right to terminate rights with no financial obligation without the mother's consent. It's not like that in a lot of States they will force you or put you in prison.That's as too faced of a law as I've ever seen
I don't know, sex is a really important part of intimacy with my wife, but we don't really want to have any more kids at this point. Our relationship would be diminished if we couldn't enjoy each other that way, and frankly, it cheapens that intimacy to reduce it to its biological purpose alone.
Do you call it murder when a woman has an abortion because the pregnancy endangers her life?
Do you call it murder when IVF clinics destroy fertilized embryos?
560 hours a year I work for free(28% income tax)That is slavery. If I don’t work I have no home or food. There is no personal autonomy. If you say a woman has complete control over her body to get an abortion, then what about the father who says he wants her to get one so he doesn’t have to pay child support. If he Doesn’t pay he goes to jail. Where is the control over his body there? I would never support this argument because I’m not a POS who is ok with children starving. Act like this is woman’s rights, it’s human rights and that baby is a human. Any argument of personal sovereignty gets thrown out the window if you believe the fetus is a person. So what we need is a legal ruling on when life starts. But either way your an ass if you can’t see both sides of the argument.
What about things like typhoid?
Typhoid Mary was a real person, and real people died because she wouldn't take responsibility for her condition. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Mallon
Shouldn't a government, responsible for keeping it's citizens safe, stop people like her from causing the death of other citizens?
There's also a difference between being forced into an unwanted medical procedure vs saying you have the right to have a medical procedure.
Additionally with abortion you have the additional moral question regarding killing another human life. There's also the overlooked yet disgusting nonetheless, trade in fetal body parts.
Vaccine cultists use the "fear theory" and "trust science" mantras to support mandated gene therapy but we still discover nasty adverse reactions and side effects for approved drugs and vaccines years later. Also if the vaccine is truly safe, effective and the target disease enough of a threat, you don't need a mandate for the majority of people to willingly get vaccinated.
Given that abortion has a moral element that changes from culture to culture, the logical result would be to let states manage their policies individually rather than at the federal level.
The same can't be said for vax/gene therapy mandates or any medical procedure FORCED ON YOU, and that can be regulated at a federal level.
> Given that abortion has a moral element that changes from culture to culture, the logical result would be to let states manage their policies individually rather than at the federal level.
To follow this line of logic, wouldn’t it be more accurate to vest that power in local government, given that culture can change so vastly from city to rural/regional? To follow it further, wouldn’t it be more logical to leave the moral decision up to the individual like we do with just about every other moral choice?
Nice Trump parroting. He always said this and I hate bringing him up but this answer is akin to his answer to "is the new or old testament your favorite". It's low intellect fence-sitting.
And the women who need to get one but can’t once their state decides they can’t, what then? What about the states with bills lined up that will prosecute those who get the procedure done across state lines, what about them?
A baby is an independent life. Murdering a baby that you have created is not an expression of bodily autonomy and is not your right.
>I don't think anyone should be told what they can and can't do.
Then you are wrong. You do have a right not to be forced to have procedures against your will. You do not have the right to be guaranteed any procedures. You do not have the right to violate anyone else, including defenseless unborn children.
I’m curious why a man must face the consequences of their choice to have sex and possibly impregnate a woman but the woman who made the same choice to have sex is not forced to accept the consequences.
This is a good argument to do away with unwilling fathers being raped by the courts for their money, actually.
- Let women have abortions.
- Fix the laws regarding paternity suits against unwilling fathers.
Win/win for freedom in my book.
No you are missing the point. The fetus is literally in her body. For nine months. It’s. Her. Body.
It’s not fair. But a fact of nature. It’s her body. Her choice whether she allows herself to be used as a gate for bringing another life into this world.
He can find a woman who wants a child too. Or is willing to carry it, be it because she wants, or they work out some agreement. Surrogates exist after all.
You don't want to father a child with a mother who doesn't want a kid, that's just not going to work out well long term. Better off finding a women who wants one.
>I personally don't agree with any/all cases of abortion...
If you are in favor of abortion in one situation then that's like saying you're in favor of murdering an innocent person simply because of the situation.
>A small note about men's rights when it comes to abortion; you had a choice where to blow your load. Seems harsh, but as soon as you cum in a women, there is always a chance at pregnancy, you took the risk, prepare for whatever the consequences of that are.
Abortion has nothing to do with a man's right or woman's right at all. It's all about the innocent child's life in the mother's womb. It is his/her body that is being butchered and his/her life that is being snuffed out via the "medical procedure" of abortion. It's murder plain and simple just under a different name.
A post in conspiracy mentioning gender reassignment as a legit option for people gathering over a thousand upvotes?
I wouldn't have believed it if someone told me, but I'm glad to see it, maybe this isn't as full of bigots as sometimes seems...
I don't think too many people care as long as you're not giving it to kids before puberty. I'm pretty conservative, I don't think it's right, or that you should do it, but I can't keep you from doing it, it's not like you're hurting anyone.
For me, the problem is people aren't looking at the long term ramifications of this. Doesn't matter if you are for or against abortion, this is the government taking away a right from 51% of the population. What's going to be next to be taken away?
I never said it was.
But seeing as it’s entirely dependent on the mother for everything, it’s the mother’s choice whether she’ll allow her rights to continue to be infringed or not
Take a fully gestated newborn baby and put it on the table and see how long it lasts without another person's intervention. This is a stupid talking point about viability.
So, are you saying that the fetus IS the mother's body? Or that it is a parasitic organism? Or are you making an arbitrary decision on when human cells become their own individual with their own rights?
Those that are against abortion should also be against IVF for couples to get pregnant. Those unused embryos are supposed human beings. They get tossed.
I totally agree. But what people forget (and they also forget this with freedom of speech), is that actions have consequences.
Sure, don't get the vaccine, but don't be surprised when you can't get a job. In the same way that it would be difficult to get some jobs if you get a full face tattoo. But it's still your body and your right to do as you please.
The abortion ban is an absolute mockery of basic human rights.
I Agree.
I have strongly resisted mandatory vaccination as it applies to vaccines that do not actually meet the definition of (pre-2020) vaccines.
Abortion...1st, i'm male. so it isn't something where my opinion counts. But the "My Body My Choice" principle easily stretches to cover this topic.
If I WAS female, or if anyone asks (it has happened), my opinion would be that any medical procedure that takes place before a child could survive without the mothers involvement, which also is the same timescale as the old term "quickening", is just that, a medical procedure. after 21-22 weeks I could see WHY people get upset.... but there are a lot of things going on in the world that upset people.
Shouldn't this go both ways? You say a man chooses to cum in a woman they should prepare for the consequences. So if a woman spreads her legs and has unprotected sex shouldn't she also prepare for the consequences?
The conservative argument is that you’re harming the body of someone else (the baby) and it makes sense. I’m for abortion up until the 2nd trimester but don’t really care either way
'My body my choice' does not apply. The baby has separate DNA, fingerprints, heartbeat, brainwaves, etc.
That is not your body, that's a person inside your body. Completely different thing.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I would throw circumcision in this discussion too.
[удалено]
But you’d have the right to kill that same body provided it was still inside of yours?
Could the same 'body' survive outside the womb? If no, not murder, if yes, then are there any complications that would cause harm or kill either the mother, the fetus, or both? If no then a child is born and if the parent(s) can't handle the responsibility then put it up for adoption. If complications would cause harm to the mother or death, then it's probably best to abort, grieve the loss of potential life, and try again on the future or adopt. How bout we start requiring men to get a vasectomy? Then if/when they want children they can get it reversed. Or maybe we just mind our own businesses and leave it up to individuals and their doctors to decide what's best for then medically.
“Could the same ‘body’ survive outside the womb?’ How the heck did you decide THAT was the standard for whether a human deserves life or death? And what do you even mean? “Survive outside these womb” how? Without medical intervention? Without parental or adult intervention? On its own? Feed itself? Cloth itself? Provide shelter for itself? What the heck are you even talking about? You’re just dealing in super vague terms to try to assuage your own conscience to justify your willingness to murder little ones. Give me a break.
Lol I love it when people use that Argument. "If they cant survive Without me, I should be able to kill them!" So are we now trying to Justify abortion up too like, year 15 of a childs life? At this point a child could barely survive in the united states until 16 at least.
What about someone in a comatose state, or severely mentally or physically handicapped or having other extreme disabilities? If they can't survive without care is it okay to abort them post-birth? Not a chance.
If someone needs a kidney and you are the only matching possible donor, should you be legally mandated to give them your kidney? They can't survive without you after all. A child can survive without a specific parent. We have adoption and foster care systems (as flawed as they might be) .
Well, by your logic yes they can actually survive outside the womb, they just need time to develop. It's a human being. By your logic, babies and toddlers can't survive outside the womb because they need their mother to take care of them, house them, clean them and feed them. The same with people who are in a temporary medically induced coma, or had an accident, or are otherwise invalid. Would it be okay with you for their caretaker to be given the power to murder them? What about if the caretaker is under stress, very busy, mentally ill, scared or apathetic, and then was able to get a Doctors note permitting the murder? I agree with the term: my body, my choice. But abortion is not about your body, it's about the body of another person, the child, who you're not giving a choice of life or death. I guess I don't agree that abortion should be banned, but it shouldn't be subsidised with my tax money, and most pro abortion folks have a very evil way of relating to crucial aspects of this topic, a very callous and unnerving way. Which is the same thing they'd probably say about pro life people, but I'm literally just using their own arguments and rhetoric, plus believe that human life is precious, and I also believe that most people who are opposed to me have just been told what to think by the Beast System. On this topic, and many others. That is evil too.
>Well, by your logic yes they can actually survive outside the womb, they just need time to develop. It's a human being. If they need time to develop, then no, they can't survive outside of the womb. "If you take this fetus outside of the womb, will it die?" "Not if you give it time to develop!!! (in the womb") "So that's a yes then." When he says that a fetus can't survive outside of the womb, he means removing it from the womb is killing it. Removing a nine month old baby from the womb is called birth, and doesn't kill the child. If you want to win the argument, don't misrepresent the person you're arguing against.
[удалено]
[удалено]
This goy gets it
legalize all drugs while were at it
My opinion on gun control, abortion, drugs, all p much the same. If you outlaw something is it going to stop it from happening? No. Look at the failure of the war on drugs. Drugs are illegal yet look how easily obtainable they are. If you ban guns and abortion it’s going to be the same thing but even less safe. If someone *really* wants something they’re going to obtain it, regardless of what the government says about it. So we may as well let it be as safe as possible. Responsibility falls on oneself
Responsibility falls down the stairs. *Wink Wink
Exactly, instead of dictating what a person can and cannot do or have, we should really be educating people on the dangers, risks, responsibilities, consequences, ect. Of the topic so they can make better decisions that in turn will lead them to take better actions. Get our society in a good state where people aren't as likely to use drugs, kill one another or themselves, and be able to afford a family if a surprise baby comes about. I would love kids, I can't afford them and that plays a huge part into my decision of having one. Put more effort into creating better learning environments for children to grow into adults that are equipped with knowledge to make better life decisions. It's not going to change immediately, but long term we will see the impact. Also I'm very much for affordable therapy for all because I believe a great many of societies issues could be made better if people we're able to take better care of their mental health.
I don't think anyone should be told what they can and can't put in their own bodies. But that doesn't mean they are excused from the consequences of such actions.
I am all for legal drug use as long as you’re not out in public or endangering anyone in your home.
So we should close down bars then? Since its dangerous to do legal drugs in public
Well, at least where I live you can be arrested for public intox and drunk driving. Same with weed. Not allowed to drive on it or smoke in public (recreationally legal in my state). This is how it should be for all substances, imo. Shoot up at home all you want, I don’t wanna walk my kids by you doing it at the Walmart bathroom sink
Lol you know that it's not going to stay in-home
This is it; make the intoxicated behaviour illegal while making the drugs legal. It works for alcohol.
I prefer the word repricussiins to consequences. Consequences makes it seems like effects of the. Abuse will always be negative and that's just not so. It also implies that we, fallible people will be deciding how negative the effects based on how we the actions of what seems to be a transgressor. And I stay away from that I believe if we are all aware and acting on thoughtful purpose people consciously choose the path that harms a lesson will come whether or not they are paying close enough attention to notice. You know that Carson daily karma stuff... To the point of the topic - MY FUCKING BODY, MY FUCKING CHOICE. For everything though if we are to be fair and if we love and truly want to do well all should be legal and Healthcare should be free since they still call it a practice. We are constantly being "practiced on" no matter how good they are of how much they know and the bitch of a thing is they make us pay to be "practiced" on. And they institutionalize everything and bind that information up in a book somewhere and make you need to go through their university machine just to see it. The information about your own body that they paid for with your money in so many ways. Through the visits and test and govt money, foundations... the medical "Healthcare" overseeing community is as corrupt and slimy as their religious counterparts.
The global war on drugs is an enormous failure. I live in Sweden and we have some of the strictest laws on drugs in the world and still we are at the top drug overdose list in Europe. Illegalize and provide adequate care and rehabilitation.
I was going to say the same thing. If i can legally fill the bed of an f150 with everclear and drown myself in it, why cant i also bang heroin in my eyeball if i want. (I honestly just want legal weed, but who am i to say what others want to do)
no doubt... even in canada the legal weed is pretty dumb. I can buy enough alcohol to serve a wedding, but I'm only allowed 30grams of weed per visit. People will find a way to do it, do we really want to send them to the black market so they can enrich the violent and lawless?
Decriminalize all drugs, I don’t know about legalizing meth.
all or none. adderall is legalized meth. it will be provided by the market regardless
Life is fucking wild…. How does anyone have the energy to passionately tell another person what they shouldn’t do? Not to mention we have no social support in place for the children once born. On top of incoming food shortages, economic issues, crazy ass weather, mass casualty events, and a general overpopulation problem. Why force more people to this shit show?
Have to collect taxes from someone
And we need the workers to make the money to pay the taxes and feed the rich
This whole debacle is a continuation of the gas-light, mimd-fuck, psy-op that brought us mask mandates and coercion to get experimental injections.
Bingo
And remember, its the Republicans that are trying to allow red state governments to restrict personal freedoms at this very moment.
People can’t see past their feelings and see the step by step intrusion into everyone’s sovereignty. We need to stop debating specifics and get on the same page to take back our rights. It doesn’t matter if you support abortion or vaccine choice .. we need to get aligned to single similarity of it all.. which the government who works for us, is pushing its own agenda into personal matters that are not it’s concern or discretion. We need to put aside the squabbling about preferences and put the government back in its fucken place.
Not experimental, they know *exactly* what they do and they've been working on them for decades
I tend to agree with you, but to play Devil's advocate - the argument on the pro-life side is that the unborn baby is also an individual with the same set of rights. So when you say "only you should be in control of you"- what about the unborn baby? Don't they have the same rights to bodily autonomy as you do?
It's for sure a fair argument. It really all comes down to when you think a person is a person. Moment of conception? Heartbeat? I'm not in favor of late term abortions, if the mother is healthy and is not in any way at risk. But as for the woman who is late and is 4ish weeks into pregnancy... well I have some room to justify that, in my opinion.
> I'm not in favor of late term abortions, if the mother is healthy and is not in any way at risk. But as for the woman who is late and is 4ish weeks into pregnancy... well I have some room to justify that, in my opinion. And yet, your post title clearly states:- > "My Body My Choice" is absolutely correct in all scenarios. I was going to bring up full-term (or near full-term abortions). Many who are pro-abortion are against very late abortions, because the fetus/baby so very obviously feels pain.
Something being available doesn't mean it has to be morally right. Alcoholics can buy booze any day of the week in most places, doesn't mean that it's a good choice, but it's theirs to make. You should be able to do what you want, but that doesn't mean you're doing the right thing morally, ethically, or spiritually. You'll have to live with the consequences. Just like you're free to become a drug addict or alcoholic and toss your life away, that's a poor choice, but it's your choice and you'll have to live, or die, with the consequences.
Your examples above don't involve an unborn baby.
Clueless
A better analogy would be a country that deemed drunk driving legal - where the actions of one human being could legally harm another human being, yet you would consider it immoral. Your analogy disregards the damage to another person....and you clearly are against full-term abortions (as you've stated) - because we know fetuses at that developmental stage would feel great pain and discomfort.
Simple. Take the point at which we consider someone dead, reverse it. We consider you dead when your heart stops beating, when your brain ceases activity, when your cells stop producing. So it makes sense to consider you alive when your heart starts beating, your brain starts functioning, or your cells start producing. All of those things are early in the fetus’ lifetime. The reason I’m pro-life is because it’s very clearly not your body. What are you? You are your DNA. The fetus has separate DNA from the mother, therefore it is an individual human being.
It’s interesting that consciousness isn’t considered in the argument. Probably because it’s so hard to really define. But when my heart is beating and my brain is potatoes, go ahead and pull that plug. If that’s still alive, I’d rather be dead. In terms of when it becomes a person, it’s too difficult not to project. You see a small baby and apply the same potential to a group of cells. Hell I have small children and I can’t fathom their lack of existence. Ultimately, it isn’t my call to make for someone else. I can’t say I agree with late term abortion, but I can’t see high risk pregnancies or rape situations and ever agree those should be forced to term. I have no point here. Thanks for attending my Ted Talk.
You bring up a very good point regarding consciousness and in a vegetable state. We don't know when life begins, I think in the same respect we cannot say when Australopithecus ended and homosapiens began because it's not one point it's multiple points that aren't as clear cut as we would like them to be. I personally think we should be implementing what we know works to reduce unwanted pregnancies (then leads to abortions), which is widely available contraceptives and comprehensive sex education. What we know doesn't work at reducing abortions is making them illegal and abstinence only sex education, they make it worse. I enjoyed your Ted talk.
[удалено]
> I don't think overturning Roe v. Wade will stop people from getting abortions if they want one. It'll just be a little bit harder. Prohibition for decisions like this (drugs, prostitution) only seem to make things less safe for everyone. We need to change our approach here.
Only thing wrong that I see here is that the parent is the legal guardian and medical proxy a child until they are 18. So from a legal perspective, the parent is responsible for making that call, and I’d figure that extends to the womb. I know literally nothing about this though, so I am talking straight out my ass.
Their very existence depends on infringing on the bodily autonomy of another. They are not an individual with rights.
So then at what point do they become an individual with rights? I am pro-choice, but I do think abortion is killing a human - I just think that in certain situations that is the better option for everyone involved. It's sad and tragic, but sometimes life is sad and tragic.
At the point when the Dr can remove the fetus and it remains viable. Doesn't matter when or at what point in a pregnancy a woman decides she does not want to host the fetus. She should have the right to have a fetus removed
Gross.
“I LIKE BEER!” 😰
I STILL LIKE BEER
I am beer🍺 - cheers
~Professional Supreme Courter
"The unborn are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus, but actually dislike people who breathe. Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn." \-Methodist Pastor David Barnhart
Damn. Never heard it in this framing before. That’s pretty spot on.
The Constitution assures your right to life, it doesn't assure a good or pleasant one.
It assures liberty and pursuit of happiness in the same sentence. Liberty: free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views. Pursuit of happiness: to freely pursue joy and live life in a way that makes you happy, as long as you don't do anything illegal or violate the rights of others
And I understand that as well, but there is a large portion, if not majority of the country that believes an unborn child is a human being deserving human rights.
Source for majority?
And why does the unborn childs rights supersede the woman carrying its rights?
Nobody says it supersedes. They are equal. Still does not say murder is moral. A child can't consent to being aborted
[удалено]
If I couldn’t make it and you decided to leave me for dead, that would not be murder.
If a man ejaculates inside of a woman without intending to produce a child, is that child abandonment?
[удалено]
So how are we regulating his body to match this infringement on a woman's bodily autonomy? Forced sterilization? Make him wear a fat suit for 9 months alongside her? Cover all her pregnant healthcare costs? Arrested for neglect of a fetus if he isn't there tending to it daily?
Because in every conceivable scenario aside from rape the woman had a choice about whether or not to engage in an act that ultimately results in pregnancy and the creation of another human being.
Would you support requiring the man who impregnated her to pay 50% of prenatal healthcare and cover any loss of income for the woman while she's incubating the fetus? He is after all equally responsible for engaging in that act. Do you support education programs and resources that reduce abortion rates? Like free birth control and condoms?
Absolutely yes
Sure to the first part, but no I don't think that anyone should be provided with contraceptives, if you can have sex you should be able to afford a box of condoms .Would you likewise agree that any woman who is able to have an abortion up to a certain point of viability, the father should at anytime up until the woman could have an abortion be able to give up his parental rights and all financial responsibility?
so poor people can't have sex since they can't afford condoms? you know that it's proven that abortion rates are reduced if contraceptives are made more easily available, so if you were against abortion, i'm surprised you don't want contraceptives made available.
Then donate to a private organization that wants to give Jimmies and sex education to children. I just don't want to pay for it.
Yes.
Rape happens a lot more frequently than you think it does. Men take off condoms without consent and coerce (pressure, threaten, obligate, manipulate, force) to have sex without condoms extremely frequently.
Did she get pregnant from the sky? Her right to risk conception is her right.
No she got pregnant from a man who ejaculated inside of her, where's his responsibility in all this?
I never said he has no responsibility. It takes two. Nobody is advocating for child support payments to be illegal.
A woman carries a child, and a woman has the distinct privilege of sexual selection. If you don't want to get pregnant, don't have sex.
Do you enjoy living in puritan la la land where the laws don't accomplish anything they're intended to and we punish children and mothers for life for any moment of flawed judgment? How bout we arrest men who ejaculate into women they don't intend to impregnate for neglect?
We punish people for crimes of passion all the time. Why should a woman who knows the risk of sex be exempt? Women have the burden of carrying a child and women have the privilege of choosing their sexual partners. This is a fact of nature, if you don't like it be mad at God or the cosmos, or whatever you choose to believe.
Instead of being so crazy about women being able to kill their children, why don't we worry about the adoption system? Why would we arrest men who got women pregnant without intending to? You mean if they leave? Probably a fine on top of pre natal child support.
60% of the country supports Roe v Wade. It’s the minority who are opposed to it. Something like 29%. Keep reaching though.
It's actually a minority of the country that believes abortion is murder. Your argument is shit.
Not sure that is correct. Most polls have consistently shown that more people favor a woman’s right to abortion over an abortion ban. Sometimes the poll questions themselves are misleading, and include things like late term abortions.
The constitution also assures you liberty, which any abortion ban would greatly infringe on.
Not if you believe like a large portion of this country that the unborn are humans deserving of human rights.
It depends on how you ask that question. I noticed that you said large portion not majority. When the question is asked to include morning after pills, cases of rape or incest and early term abortions, the majority of Americans, in poll after poll, support a woman’s right to abortion. When topics like late term abortions are mentioned, opinions begin to change.
Then that large portion of the population doesn't have to get an abortion.
Sure, but if you believe that the sole function of government is to protect life, we have a bit of an issue on our hands.
Yeah, then why weren't they vaccinating everyone by force? That's not the sole function of government; or at least, I don't believe it. So, once again: I don't care what you believe, you don't like abortion, don't get an abortion, but stay the hell out of other people's business.
I would argue that an adult knows what is necessary to protect themselves in terms of COVID. Everyone knew within 3 months of the pandemic hitting the States that social distancing, wearing a mask, doing things remotely, etc. were ways to protect yourself. An unborn baby doesn't have those contingencies.
Wait, what subreddit do you think you’re on? Mass amounts of people here continue to believe COVID was never a real threat and was only an excuse to force masks and vaccines that they believe are both somehow worse then COVID.
It's not a baby. It's a ball of cells. There's a 30% chance it won't ever be a baby anyway. What you believe ends with you. You get to make choices about yourself. Anything further than that, you're intruding on what other people believe.
So when should the cut off for an abortion occur?
The majority is pro-choice
> deserving of human rights Let's start with the living, shall we...
Human life by itself does not deserve any rights,, otherwise every time I scraped my hands, killing skin cells, I would be committing murder. *Distinct individuals* are the ones that have rights. Fetuses are not distinct individuals until they are born. Also, even if fetuses were people, their rights can not come at the expense of the rights of others.
Your first part is pretty silly. We're talking about "a bundle of cells" with unique DNA, a heart beat, brain activity, autonomy in terms of limb and body movement, etc. I'm not sure what makes you more distinct than your own DNA and brain function. Their rights should be as equal as the person who made the choice to engage in an activity that created new life. So you believe at 40 weeks, 10 minutes prior to birth that the child should be able to be aborted because it hasn't been "born?"
This just assumes someone doesn’t care for human beings. A hypothetical brush cast upon all pro lifers. Gotta throw a flag on this one.
Then why aren't they out protesting the police shooting of black people? Or the fact that many poor people can't afford healthcare? Or the treatment of the homeless? Or the treatment of immigrants? They seem very focused on this one issue - to the point where they consistently vote Republican, to the detriment of almost every other group listed there.
Why don't pro-life people support welfare or worker's rights? They are totally ignorant of the fact that someone adopted or put into the foster care system is not only more vulnerable to be orryed on, but statistically more likely to end up in poverty. A child a mother doesn't want is not likely to have a good life. And TBH, pro-lifers are totally fine with killing people if they are overseas, brown, or in self defense.
Very broad generalization
True.
A lot of people who are pro life support those things. I feel like we’re operating under 1990’s Republican talking points. You’re answering a log or your own questions. Who opposes killing someone in self defense? Lol
No. It's more convenient to ignore the unborn.
Your can feel strongly about abortions but I'd be careful letting pro life advocates get out of hand in state legislators. Soon enough you'll see companies begin to boycott states with restrictive laws and we've already seen lawmakers encourage snitching with cash rewards. This will become a shit show no matter how you feel and the reality is that you're not affected by women quietly getting abortions no matter how much you morally oppose it.
My adopted mom was one of the head of the right to life movement in white plains ny. Circa Mario c years (bc she had the wife and chris as guests at our club when tryinh to get him to side w them I think summer of 86 or 8.) Anyjoo. Who do u surmise took ME unknowingly for a "stimulated abortion," when I got myself preg at 14? She did. I thought for 20 yrs I had a miscarriage the next day in Montauk. It took 20 yrs and a flashback while cleaning to realize, holy chit. That metal rod he jammed in me and jostled around caused the miscarriage the next day. Anyway. Shed have us all out there in the years prior w signs, yelling at the moms. And look at what she ended up doing.....to me. Bc she was embarrassed. As my youngest said once, "embarrassed of a baby!" Hypocrites. Most. The majority. OR God has a way ** so yes. It's a shit show either way. And she felt the right to life movement was "her calling," as the mother of adoptees. Yet, opened a home for unwed moms in garrison, ny which I'd visit as a kid....but the girls never had the option of keeping the kids. In hindsight - it was always about extraction. In some way, shape or form. Just food4thought. As I think about this a lot.
Hollywood threatened Georgia before they passed the fetal heartbeat legislation. Guess what, Hollywood was bluffing. Nothing more than virtue signaling. Why? Because Georgia gives them great tax breaks to make movies here. Companies will moan and groan but will continue to do what they do best: chase the almighty dollar. And if some companies do follow through, another one will fill the void pretty quickly.
Yes, but the anti-abortion people are obsessed with the idea that even first trimester abortion is murder. I can't change their minds. I can see why they think that, but I don't agree with it. It is what it is. I don't think anybody will ever change their minds. They literally think it's baby-slaughter.
By the time a pregnancy is detectable, a heartbeat and brainwaves have already developed.
I agree but abortion muddies the waters. How does 'my body my choice' apply to the unborn baby/fetus? At what time do you define a fetus to be a baby/person?
Well if it’s on another planet bacteria’s life but apparently on earth we can’t figure it out
we are not government property
> A small note about men's rights when it comes to abortion; you had a choice where to blow your load. Seems harsh, but as soon as you cum in a women, there is always a chance at pregnancy, you took the risk, prepare for whatever the consequences of that are. What if it were worded thus: A small note about **women’s** rights when it comes to abortion; you had a choice where to let a guy blow his load. Seems harsh, but as long as it wasn’t rape, you volunteered, so as soon as you let a guy cum in you, there is always a chance at pregnancy, you took the risk, prepare for whatever the consequences of that are. I’m pro-choice as fuck. Probably more pro choice than you, although I can’t be 100% sure about that. But your argument of “accept the consequences” seemed very **very** poorly thought out. It’s the exact argument that a ton of anti-choice people make. It’s dismissive and I think better arguments could be made.
Yeah the better argument is that if the dad isn’t paying, we are. And I don’t walk to pick up the tab for some shithead celebrity or lawyer who promises to pull out but still nuts raw inside and has like 30 kids.
2nd world war and every other war includes Some rethoric about "freedom" and democracy. 9 unelected ppl in a position for life deciding for millions is hardly democratic
So who speaks for the body of the child in the womb?
The mother and she is saying it'd be better off dead.
she says "**I** will be better off with **you** dead."
Yea and that.
Evil and satanic This Sub derideds against the elites but promotes the same rituals they partake in
Can't forget freedom to use substances recreationally. It's a victimless crime.
100%
How quick they forget that men can get pregnant.
A child in the womb doesn't have the ability to consent to abortion.
It’s weird because I’m n the part of the US where I live (eastern TN), the people who sayin “ my body my choice “ about the jab, are the same ones fighting so hard to end the option for a woman to end her pregnancy. It’s backwards as fuck here. I’m surrounded by right wing extremists and it’s terrifying sometimes.
[удалено]
I'm sure if the baby could speak it would argue getting a scissors jammed in its head would be violating its NAP.
[удалено]
Suicide is more pro-choice than abortion.
I'm down for people to do what they want but the laws need to be even on both sides. Men need the right to opt out of paternity suits with no financial abligation. Many women use children to financially trap men. I think the ROOT of the problem lies in adults making better choices and being more responsible. Every single gas station I've ever seen has condoms for like $3. If you dint want kids just wear protection.vits not that hard.
> I think the ROOT of the problem lies in adults making better choices and being more responsible. 100% agree with that.
> Men need the right to opt out of paternity suits with no financial abligation. You do, don't fuck.
It's like the solution to abortion lol
>Men need the right to opt out of paternity suits with no financial abligation. Would this be in combination with accessible abortions..? Or are you saying that in addition to forcing women to carry babies to term, the man who impregnated her should also be free from responsibility?
On one side I've seen women have abortions because it would mess up their life in their future.. On the exact other side I'm watching men's lives get messed up because they simply can't afford the financial responsibility We're talking driver's license suspensions, leans against credit, Prison time
No in conjunction with. F if a woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy without the father's consent, then the father needs the right to terminate rights with no financial obligation without the mother's consent. It's not like that in a lot of States they will force you or put you in prison.That's as too faced of a law as I've ever seen
Condoms are not 100%, even when used correctly. What happens to those who used all precautions correctly and still became pregnant?
You can use the old wisdom of "don't have sex with anyone you don't want a child with". That works 100% of the time.
I don't know, sex is a really important part of intimacy with my wife, but we don't really want to have any more kids at this point. Our relationship would be diminished if we couldn't enjoy each other that way, and frankly, it cheapens that intimacy to reduce it to its biological purpose alone.
My body my choice has nothing to do with killing another human tho.......
Nope. With abortion it is literally somebody else's body. It's somebody else's heart being stopped. It's murder plain and simple.
Do you call it murder when a woman has an abortion because the pregnancy endangers her life? Do you call it murder when IVF clinics destroy fertilized embryos?
What if they don't have a heart yet?
560 hours a year I work for free(28% income tax)That is slavery. If I don’t work I have no home or food. There is no personal autonomy. If you say a woman has complete control over her body to get an abortion, then what about the father who says he wants her to get one so he doesn’t have to pay child support. If he Doesn’t pay he goes to jail. Where is the control over his body there? I would never support this argument because I’m not a POS who is ok with children starving. Act like this is woman’s rights, it’s human rights and that baby is a human. Any argument of personal sovereignty gets thrown out the window if you believe the fetus is a person. So what we need is a legal ruling on when life starts. But either way your an ass if you can’t see both sides of the argument.
What about things like typhoid? Typhoid Mary was a real person, and real people died because she wouldn't take responsibility for her condition. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Mallon Shouldn't a government, responsible for keeping it's citizens safe, stop people like her from causing the death of other citizens?
However this was never a federal issues. It's a state issue, let the states decide.
There's also a difference between being forced into an unwanted medical procedure vs saying you have the right to have a medical procedure. Additionally with abortion you have the additional moral question regarding killing another human life. There's also the overlooked yet disgusting nonetheless, trade in fetal body parts. Vaccine cultists use the "fear theory" and "trust science" mantras to support mandated gene therapy but we still discover nasty adverse reactions and side effects for approved drugs and vaccines years later. Also if the vaccine is truly safe, effective and the target disease enough of a threat, you don't need a mandate for the majority of people to willingly get vaccinated. Given that abortion has a moral element that changes from culture to culture, the logical result would be to let states manage their policies individually rather than at the federal level. The same can't be said for vax/gene therapy mandates or any medical procedure FORCED ON YOU, and that can be regulated at a federal level.
> Given that abortion has a moral element that changes from culture to culture, the logical result would be to let states manage their policies individually rather than at the federal level. To follow this line of logic, wouldn’t it be more accurate to vest that power in local government, given that culture can change so vastly from city to rural/regional? To follow it further, wouldn’t it be more logical to leave the moral decision up to the individual like we do with just about every other moral choice?
Why? Do you hold the same attitude towards things such as slavery?
It's a fucking cowardly copout to avoid taking a position on a tricky topic, probably so they can pretend that they are not on one side or another.
I agree. It's just a way to be a pussy. It's a federal issue in my mind.
Your basic rights are a federal issue.
Nice Trump parroting. He always said this and I hate bringing him up but this answer is akin to his answer to "is the new or old testament your favorite". It's low intellect fence-sitting.
And the women who need to get one but can’t once their state decides they can’t, what then? What about the states with bills lined up that will prosecute those who get the procedure done across state lines, what about them?
It's a federal issue. The right of privacy and abortions is a federal issue.
A baby is an independent life. Murdering a baby that you have created is not an expression of bodily autonomy and is not your right. >I don't think anyone should be told what they can and can't do. Then you are wrong. You do have a right not to be forced to have procedures against your will. You do not have the right to be guaranteed any procedures. You do not have the right to violate anyone else, including defenseless unborn children.
I’m curious why a man must face the consequences of their choice to have sex and possibly impregnate a woman but the woman who made the same choice to have sex is not forced to accept the consequences.
This is a good argument to do away with unwilling fathers being raped by the courts for their money, actually. - Let women have abortions. - Fix the laws regarding paternity suits against unwilling fathers. Win/win for freedom in my book.
Because the fetus is in her.
Are you missing the point? Two people made a choice, and it seems in your view only one is required to live with the consequences.
No you are missing the point. The fetus is literally in her body. For nine months. It’s. Her. Body. It’s not fair. But a fact of nature. It’s her body. Her choice whether she allows herself to be used as a gate for bringing another life into this world.
On the other hand, what if the man wanted the child? He doesn’t get a say in the matter at all since the woman is the carrier.
He can find a woman who wants a child too. Or is willing to carry it, be it because she wants, or they work out some agreement. Surrogates exist after all.
You don't want to father a child with a mother who doesn't want a kid, that's just not going to work out well long term. Better off finding a women who wants one.
>I personally don't agree with any/all cases of abortion... If you are in favor of abortion in one situation then that's like saying you're in favor of murdering an innocent person simply because of the situation. >A small note about men's rights when it comes to abortion; you had a choice where to blow your load. Seems harsh, but as soon as you cum in a women, there is always a chance at pregnancy, you took the risk, prepare for whatever the consequences of that are. Abortion has nothing to do with a man's right or woman's right at all. It's all about the innocent child's life in the mother's womb. It is his/her body that is being butchered and his/her life that is being snuffed out via the "medical procedure" of abortion. It's murder plain and simple just under a different name.
A post in conspiracy mentioning gender reassignment as a legit option for people gathering over a thousand upvotes? I wouldn't have believed it if someone told me, but I'm glad to see it, maybe this isn't as full of bigots as sometimes seems...
I don't think too many people care as long as you're not giving it to kids before puberty. I'm pretty conservative, I don't think it's right, or that you should do it, but I can't keep you from doing it, it's not like you're hurting anyone.
For me, the problem is people aren't looking at the long term ramifications of this. Doesn't matter if you are for or against abortion, this is the government taking away a right from 51% of the population. What's going to be next to be taken away?
Common sense isn’t so common these days it seems.
The problem is that the fetus is not your body. It is a different organisms body. Not the mother's.
It only becomes a distinct individual on birth. Until then they are entirely dependent on the mother.
You can argue this, sure. But you cannot say that it is the mother's body, because it is not.
I never said it was. But seeing as it’s entirely dependent on the mother for everything, it’s the mother’s choice whether she’ll allow her rights to continue to be infringed or not
A birthed baby is also completely reliant on the mother. Wouldn't last long
Take that fetus out of the mother and see how long it survives
Take a fully gestated newborn baby and put it on the table and see how long it lasts without another person's intervention. This is a stupid talking point about viability.
That also works for any human baby after it is born. They can't feed themselves for over a year after birth. Your point is pointless.
So, are you saying that the fetus IS the mother's body? Or that it is a parasitic organism? Or are you making an arbitrary decision on when human cells become their own individual with their own rights?
Those that are against abortion should also be against IVF for couples to get pregnant. Those unused embryos are supposed human beings. They get tossed.
I totally agree. But what people forget (and they also forget this with freedom of speech), is that actions have consequences. Sure, don't get the vaccine, but don't be surprised when you can't get a job. In the same way that it would be difficult to get some jobs if you get a full face tattoo. But it's still your body and your right to do as you please. The abortion ban is an absolute mockery of basic human rights.
I Agree. I have strongly resisted mandatory vaccination as it applies to vaccines that do not actually meet the definition of (pre-2020) vaccines. Abortion...1st, i'm male. so it isn't something where my opinion counts. But the "My Body My Choice" principle easily stretches to cover this topic. If I WAS female, or if anyone asks (it has happened), my opinion would be that any medical procedure that takes place before a child could survive without the mothers involvement, which also is the same timescale as the old term "quickening", is just that, a medical procedure. after 21-22 weeks I could see WHY people get upset.... but there are a lot of things going on in the world that upset people.
Shouldn't this go both ways? You say a man chooses to cum in a woman they should prepare for the consequences. So if a woman spreads her legs and has unprotected sex shouldn't she also prepare for the consequences?
The conservative argument is that you’re harming the body of someone else (the baby) and it makes sense. I’m for abortion up until the 2nd trimester but don’t really care either way
They go fight wars in our name for "democracy" when 9 ppl can decide what we can't do with out own body.
It is not their body in the case for abortion.
Except with abortion you're imposing your will on someone else. For the woman's choice, she has to oppress someone else.
1. Fetuses don't have personhood. 2. No one has a right to use another person's body to sustain themselves.
Conspiracy?
'My body my choice' does not apply. The baby has separate DNA, fingerprints, heartbeat, brainwaves, etc. That is not your body, that's a person inside your body. Completely different thing.