Ruth Bader Ginsburg has passed (Replaced by Amy Coney Barrett)(Now Abortion Discussion) (4 Viewers)

[GrandAdmiral]

Ugh... breaking news I DID NOT want to see.

ETA: Reported on CNN.

 

[wardorican]

Thanks but I remember seeing ACAB all over during the summer of love. Do you not, or you just remember the graffiti from London in the 80s?

I like not having my own ideas. It makes it easier to digest graphs and pie charts from the media that has never been wrong on anything. You can parrot NPR, I will parrot Qannon.com and that way, we are both happy in our ignorance.

I never poke fun, this site is all serious business and I appreciate you trying to help me not look like an idiot. Hard work indeed and your diligence has been noted and loved and my momma says thank you too.

I literally said "and is now used by BLM types". I'm acknowledging your point. Was it confusing?

What did I parrot from NPR?

If you don't want to believe crime charts and just make stuff up, ok, I guess. (acting like I don't vet things or question data...) I'll shake the dust off my sandals. Sad, being you're one of the few 'conservatives' here. But, you wonder why? You make no attempt at actual discussion. You want to treat it all like a joke, then be prepared to be treated like a Clown.

Friendly advice. Joking around is one thing, trolling is another.

 

[brandon]

You can parrot NPR, I will parrot Qannon.com

This false equivalency just annihilated the known universe.

 

[MT15]

This false equivalency just annihilated the known universe.

He’s kinda telling on himself with that one,

 

[Farb]

You need to look up the word parasite.

Definition of parasite​

1: an organism living in, on, or with another organism in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host

What am I missing?

 

[Farb]

I literally said "and is now used by BLM types". I'm acknowledging your point. Was it confusing?

What did I parrot from NPR?

If you don't want to believe crime charts and just make stuff up, ok, I guess. (acting like I don't vet things or question data...) I'll shake the dust off my sandals. Sad, being you're one of the few 'conservatives' here. But, you wonder why? You make no attempt at actual discussion. You want to treat it all like a joke, then be prepared to be treated like a Clown.

Friendly advice. Joking around is one thing, trolling is another.

Can you give me some examples of me trolling?
Unless not agreeing with someone despite how strong they think they proved their case is considered trolling, I am curious on what you will come with.

 

[MT15]

Can you give me some examples of me trolling?
Unless not agreeing with someone despite how strong they think they proved their case is considered trolling, I am curious on what you will come with.

Are you saying you don’t troll?

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

Definition of parasite​

1: an organism living in, on, or with another organism in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host

What am I missing?

Pregnancy basically be like...

 

[CoolBrees]

A parasite is exactly what a baby is.

And much like any other parasite, it demands nutrients, etc first so the relationships is not mutually beneficial….like a tape worm

 

[Taurus]

Just so we are clear, you are claiming a baby claims nonconsensual ownership of the mothers body? Like a parasite?

The fetus doesn't claim anything, it can't. This is about the State claiming ownership on its behalf. Does the State own you?

 

[Farb]

Are you saying you don’t troll?

I honestly don't think I troll. I get snarky at times but other than that, I think I am usually kind of light an funny but also stating exactly what I believe. I do understand text doesn't always translate sarcasm and or humor. Probably because I am not funny, but think I am, so thanks for playing along sometimes.

 

[Farb]

A parasite is exactly what a baby is.

And much like any other parasite, it demands nutrients, etc first so the relationships is not mutually beneficial….like a tape worm

So it is alive, regardless of how you rank the life, you agree it is alive?

 

[Farb]

The fetus doesn't claim anything, it can't. This is about the State claiming ownership on its behalf. Does the State own you?

Good question. I like to think the state does not own me, but lately and during this Covid thing, I am not so sure anymore.

So the state has no directive to protect life and especially vulnerable life? Do you think medical care is a basic human right?

 

[MT15]

So it is alive, regardless of how you rank the life, you agree it is alive?

Nobody has ever said an embryo isn’t alive. Nobody. That’s absurd. What it isn’t is a full person with rights that take precedence over another full person’s rights.

 

[CoolBrees]

So it is alive, regardless of how you rank the life, you agree it is alive?

Alive yes?

More important than the mother? No

And just like the tape worm, a women should have the decision if she provides it nutrients to the detriment to her own body.

 

[Farb]

I thought it was a 'clump of cells'? That is good we agree on that.

So a full person has the right to kill another, not yet full person?

 

[MT15]

The gubmint doesn’t have the right to force a woman to give birth. That’s what this boils down to.

And yes, until viability we aren’t talking about a full person. We are talking about a potential full person.

And nobody really likes abortion. Nobody. They just believe, like I do, that a woman should have control of her body.

If people don’t have bodily autonomy they are not full people. They’re subordinate to the government.

Bodily autonomy is a basic right. Nobody can force you to donate blood or bone marrow or do any other thing with your body that you don’t want to do.

That all changes with these bills. The government is now forcing women to give up control of their bodies.

They could come after blood, bone marrow or a kidney. What’s to stop them once bodily autonomy is no longer a thing?

 

[Farb]

The gubmint doesn’t have the right to force a woman to give birth. That’s what this boils down to.

And yes, until viability we aren’t talking about a full person. We are talking about a potential full person.

And nobody really likes abortion. Nobody. They just believe, like I do, that a woman should have control of her body.

If people don’t have bodily autonomy they are not full people. They’re subordinate to the government.

Bodily autonomy is a basic right. Nobody can force you to donate blood or bone marrow or do any other thing with your body that you don’t want to do.

That all changes with these bills. The government is now forcing women to give up control of their bodies.

They could come after blood, bone marrow or a kidney. What’s to stop them once bodily autonomy is no longer a thing?

It is not the womans body we are worried about. It is the innocent body we are worried about. Unfortunately, women are the only humans that birth other humans.

The gubmint has been really active with everyone body lately. Not just females either and I am not a fan, so I see your point and understand it, but I just can't agree with it.

Again, the larger argument for me at least is that people act like you can just catch 'pregnant' walking down the street. There is a very specific thing that takes a lot of time, effort and privacy to create a pregnancy.

Why should someone's bad decisions result in an innocent life being destroyed for the mere sake of convenience?

I know most people don't like abortions and the folks like you, I can have reasonable discussions with. The folks that do like abortion and 'champion' abortion are the ones that are incapable of seeing another solution, most likely due to the overwhelming guilt they have (IMO) are the ones that pollute, what should be a everybody issue. There should be a fairly easily reached middle ground.

 

[MT15]

It is not the womans body we are worried about. It is the innocent body we are worried about. Unfortunately, women are the only humans that birth other humans.

The gubmint has been really active with everyone body lately. Not just females either and I am not a fan, so I see your point and understand it, but I just can't agree with it.

Again, the larger argument for me at least is that people act like you can just catch 'pregnant' walking down the street. There is a very specific thing that takes a lot of time, effort and privacy to create a pregnancy.

Why should someone's bad decisions result in an innocent life being destroyed for the mere sake of convenience?

I know most people don't like abortions and the folks like you, I can have reasonable discussions with. The folks that do like abortion and 'champion' abortion are the ones that are incapable of seeing another solution, most likely due to the overwhelming guilt they have (IMO) are the ones that pollute, what should be a everybody issue. There should be a fairly easily reached middle ground.

Actually RoevWade is middle ground and has worked for 50 some years. But it seems we are going to throw it away along with any exceptions for rape or incest or danger to the life of the woman.

I would be fine with people who oppose abortion working to eliminate the reasons for abortion as best they can. Or trying to convince people not to have abortions by preaching their religious beliefs. But forcing women to give birth is a step too far.

And honestly, convenience is really not usually a reason for an abortion. There are usually far reaching reasons, and it’s a decision women are capable of making. Most women have a natural affinity for having a baby, it’s built into them. If they are making the decision to terminate a pregnancy, there is almost always a really compelling reason. We need to allow women to have dominion over their own bodies.