Keshiland wrote:Attempted Socialism wrote:Because it's an accurate description of your position, as the example you refused to answer some 10 pages ago showcased.
Kid, just because you don't feel like defending your position, doesn't mean you can strawman the hell out of any opposing position. Pro-
choice is exactly that: Giving the woman the choice of whether to terminate their pregnancy or not. Anyone proposing mandatory abortions are, by definition, taking choice away from women. They're forcing their opinion on women just as much as you are; you're both anti-choice (The only difference being that you actually hold your abhorrent position, while no 'mandatory abortion' political or policy position exists).
You didn't try to straw man my side with that ridiculous question? Look I have said constantly that I am full fledged pro life here is a list of positions I hold
Anti gun
Pro life
Pro UHC
Pro Immigration
Anti War
Anti Death penalty
Pro financial aid
Pro free schooling through college
Pro Universal income
Pro Adoption (which if it was not so expensive (50K in my state for a baby) I would do after college)
Pro Preventive birth control not the after pill!
I support changing the foster care system to make it easier for good families to keep the child and not move them around every few months
Pro free food for children in school all 3 meals!
I would support Universal Housing if it was a thing
Now tell me is this not PRO LIFE!
It's not. You're trying to mask being anti-choice and anti-women behind a bunch of other policies, while still identifying solely your anti-choice policy stance as "pro"-"life". Your "pro"-"life" stance was revealed to be either a lie, solely "pro"-birth or some double standard earlier, when you refused to explain what you based your different responses to basically the same case on. The question was never whether you'd force a mother to give up her body for 9 months in one or both cases, but
why; on what basis you arrived at such a decision. This was the start of your dodging, but the result (That you're not actually pro life, just anti-choice and anti-women, something that your absolutely despicable stance of intimidating, immobilising, socially ostracising and abusing women, to the point of purposefully setting up your relationship so that you can always make them homeless if they are unwilling to become your servant and broodmare in a relationship you have already declared is not about and will not include love reinforces beyond belief) was pretty clear already.
So people claiming to be in favour of forced abortions (Again, just to reiterate, this is not an actual political or policy position seen in reality) are decidedly anti-choice (Like you are, if with different justifications), while you're clearly a "pro"-birth, rather than any kind of sane pro-life; no matter how you try to justify it. You're also, because of your own consistent claims, obviously anti-choice and anti-women, and I'd really advice you to seek professional help if your posts containing what looks to me like signs of delusions, narcissism, megalomania and some kind of anti-social personality disorder are truly your opinions about yourself and the world. Being pro-choice is being both against forced pregnancy and forced abortion, while if any forced abortion politicians existed, you could ally with them in taking choice away from women, even if for different purposes.