Advertisement
by Neutraligon » Sun Mar 24, 2019 6:09 am
by Genivaria » Sun Mar 24, 2019 7:58 am
Neutraligon wrote:So how do pro-life people deal with the fact that it is the poor who get a large percentage of abortions. In the US women who are less then 100% of the poverty level had half of all abortions. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5678377/
by Katganistan » Sun Mar 24, 2019 8:24 am
by Katganistan » Sun Mar 24, 2019 8:24 am
by Kowani » Sun Mar 24, 2019 8:29 am
by Katganistan » Sun Mar 24, 2019 8:30 am
Neutraligon wrote:So how do pro-life people deal with the fact that it is the poor who get a large percentage of abortions. In the US women who are less then 100% of the poverty level had half of all abortions. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5678377/
by Aellex » Sun Mar 24, 2019 8:33 am
Katganistan wrote:Neutraligon wrote:So how do pro-life people deal with the fact that it is the poor who get a large percentage of abortions. In the US women who are less then 100% of the poverty level had half of all abortions. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5678377/
They complain about women and children on welfare, obviously, once they've prevented women from taking the measures that would keep them from needing welfare. And they tut about how horrible it is that there are kids languishing in foster care when they could have reduced that number too, by not preventing women from having abortions and telling them 'you can just put it up for adoption anyhow.'
by Katganistan » Sun Mar 24, 2019 8:50 am
Aellex wrote:Katganistan wrote:
They complain about women and children on welfare, obviously, once they've prevented women from taking the measures that would keep them from needing welfare. And they tut about how horrible it is that there are kids languishing in foster care when they could have reduced that number too, by not preventing women from having abortions and telling them 'you can just put it up for adoption anyhow.'
I suppose it really is an inhuman stance not to want to kill the poors so they don't end up on welfare.
by Neutraligon » Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:09 am
Katganistan wrote:Aellex wrote:I suppose it really is an inhuman stance not to want to kill the poors so they don't end up on welfare.
What's inhuman is preventing women from having the ability to control their own bodies, then shaming them for needing help when you've wrested that control from them.
But thanks for being obtuse.
by Jebslund » Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:47 am
Neutraligon wrote:Katganistan wrote:What's inhuman is preventing women from having the ability to control their own bodies, then shaming them for needing help when you've wrested that control from them.
But thanks for being obtuse.
I wonder if the number of abortions would go down if those women did not need to worry about supporting a child.
by Katganistan » Sun Mar 24, 2019 11:02 am
Neutraligon wrote:Katganistan wrote:What's inhuman is preventing women from having the ability to control their own bodies, then shaming them for needing help when you've wrested that control from them.
But thanks for being obtuse.
I wonder if the number of abortions would go down if those women did not need to worry about supporting a child.
by Liriena » Sun Mar 24, 2019 11:07 am
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Cruciland » Sun Mar 24, 2019 11:13 am
Socialdemokraterne wrote:If the absence of secularism wasn't enough to scare our people, the rate of which the doomsday button is pressed by them sure settled the matter.
Prussia-Steinbach wrote:Cruciland, I just want to say, your nation is frightening.
The Inevitable Syndicate wrote:My advice to you, dear Gordano-Lysandus, is to run. Or hide. Maybe not hiding, because the Crucilandians will find you, and by their god, you will be assimilated.
by The Feylands » Sun Mar 24, 2019 11:54 am
You don't have to teach me about men who put women on a piedestal, thank you. In my experience, these are often the emotionally repressed superficially “submissive” guys that (again, in my experience.. not saying this is a "fact" or anything) are plenty in both left-wing and X-tian groups of folks.Katganistan wrote:Oh, seriously, fuck that noise.
That bullshit of "greater beauty and dignity" is a dogwhistle some men have used to put women on a pedestal they then chain her to.
Yeh I'm totally a typical toxic submissive. Really. Always quiet. Never going against the flow. Or against the flow in the couter-flow. Heh.Katganistan wrote:Women who are not submissive and suboordinate are deemed 'ugly' and 'undignified', if not outright whores.
Katganistan wrote:And to be blunt, if men are less empathic, they are mentally ill. Now I don't know about you, but as a rule, men are not 'less empathic' -- I know plenty of caring compassionate men. "Men don't care as much" is the kind of toxic masculinity bullshit that harms both men and women, so please, just stop.
There are studies documenting behavioral differences in the recall of emotional events by men and women: women seem to have stronger and more detailed memories of emotional events and are able to bring them to mind more quickly. So the idea is that the increase in memory strength that happens with emotion is bigger in women than in men, on average.
And while this memory enhancement sounds like a benefit, it might also be one of the reasons why women tend to be diagnosed more frequently with disorders like depression, anxiety and PTSD. And there’s some evidence that memory for things that happened just before an emotional event is worse in women than in men.
Spearheaded by Hugh Hefner/Playboy, Big Pharma and the sexual predator Alfred Kinsey. Yeh. I'm sure none of those have anything to do with male sexual exploitation of women... or making money of it.Katganistan wrote:The sexual revolution was NOT about "men's desires and women have to suffer the consequences." That's how YOU see it, and how a certain toxic strain of men see it.
I certainly got nothing against enjoying sex. If you have a beef with submissive Christians you too.. take it with them.Katganistan wrote:The sexual revolution was recognizing that everyone, men and women, have a right to enjoy sex.
You know, I think you're preaching to the wrong person here. I've basically stated this myself – YHWH (who I suspect is like a demon to use their own terminology) is on many occasions like a perfect deity for insecure and jealous men and women who feel inferior and wants to deny others the strengths nature gave them to feel better themselves. I suspect the seeds of the ideas that a lot of the red tapist "equality" stuff that's so popular in this thread actually came from X-tianity in the beginning. But that's a discussion for another topic.. I know..Katganistan wrote:Certain men don't like that idea because then women do not have to cater to men's sexual wishes if the woman can pursue their own -- and God forbid women have other partners' skills to compare to their current one's? Male insecurity in knowing a woman may consider their prowess inferior to others -- or that a woman may choose to find a more satisfying partner -- is the basis of this patronizing and frankly possessive 'women should remain virgins til married' idiocy.
But abortions do hurt women. Big time. Both physically and emotionally. This is not strange at all – nature made women feel bad to lose a child. The sheer lack of basis in reality of these post-modern ideologies thought up by some “intellectual” male weirdos somewhere is staggering. And as always, women are the ones to suffer the consequences.Katganistan wrote:Women DON'T have to suffer the consequences. Roe v. Wade saw to that in the US and in most civilized nations of the world -- which is why toxic men who want to control women are fighting so very fucking hard to erode the ability of women to seek abortions. Close Planned Parenthood -- which also, by the way, provides mammography services and helps families that PLAN to have children to do that. Make laws that make it impossible for clinics to operate with the bullshit excuse 'they can go elsewhere' -- when 'elsewhere' might be hundreds of miles away and someone too poor to get there. The only reason women 'suffer the consequences' is because men force it on them, to keep them under male control.
Of the women surveyed, only 6.6 percent reported using psychotropic drugs prior to their first pregnancy resulting in an abortion, compared to 51 percent who stated they used prescription drugs for mental health issues after their abortion. The results of the study demonstrate abortion’s dynamic nature, and successfully capture the kaleidoscope of emotions that women internalize after having the procedure.
Yeh. Word.Aellex wrote:I suppose it really is an inhuman stance not to want to kill the poors so they don't end up on welfare.
Afaik... this over-repeated claim is about as "factual" as any X-tian belief in virgin births.Katganistan wrote:What's inhuman is preventing women from having the ability to control their own bodies, then shaming them for needing help when you've wrested that control from them.
But thanks for being obtuse.
Yeh and in fact - the availability of condoms etc. is one of the reasons I can't feel on-demand abortion is justifiable. If a guy refuses to wear a rubber - throw him out ffs... -.-Katganistan wrote:Probably. But one side seems to like punishing women twice for having sex.
Anyone who's been in these threads knows I am a strong supporter of accessible birth control and comprehensive sex education. I don't like abortion, personally, but refusing access to birth control, refusing comprehensive sex ed in favor of abstinence programs, refusing access to reproductive services seems to squarely place women in an untenable position -- and then they are shamed for it. Then we hear about how much is going to social welfare programs -- well, if there were easy access to birth control and real sex ed, there would be less need for abortion, foster care, and welfare.
Hey there u! I'm Fey - the Celestial Fairy Princess! "Mᴀᴋɪɴɢ NS ᴄᴏsɪᴇʀ sɪɴᴄᴇ 2017!"® (◕‿◕✿) ♀, Vegetarian, Crazy Cat Lady, Dharmic Pagan, Metal, Fantasy, Elf/Fairy, Chinaboo, Yogi etc. How can I be so cuddly and huggable? ♥♥♥ Because I exist to ease the suffering of this world! (⌒▽⌒) #TheBuddhaRocks Little secret: I have a superpower called "ADHD". (^̮^) | ♥Her Radiance's Celestial Thought♥ Neat: Essentialism, Monarchy, Difference Feminism, Animal rights, Green Conservatism, 中国, Beauty, Dignity of all life ಠ~ಠ: Passive aggressive dorks, Abrahamic/Antropocentric world-view(s), the EU, celebrating ugliness.. I support Israel and everyone who suffer needlessly because of their own compassion.♥ (ಥ﹏ಥ) |
by Vassenor » Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:10 pm
by The New California Republic » Sun Mar 24, 2019 1:14 pm
The Feylands wrote:The baby fetus is not part of the woman's body. It has its own blood system (which can be of another blood group etc.) and its own DNA from the start.
The Feylands wrote:Not that I think it matters really - since I don't accept all of this typically male "logical" stuff about "rights" and personal autonomy anyway.
The Feylands wrote:the availability of condoms etc. is one of the reasons I can't feel on-demand abortion is justifiable. If a guy refuses to wear a rubber - throw him out ffs... -.-
by San Lumen » Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:00 pm
Liriena wrote:Soooooo... one of the organizers of the most recent rally against the legalization of abortion pulled the "what if the child consents tho" card in a discussion about a little girl who got pregnant after her grandmother's partner raped her.
These people are a political dead weight.
by Neanderthaland » Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:18 pm
by Jebslund » Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:19 pm
San Lumen wrote:Liriena wrote:Soooooo... one of the organizers of the most recent rally against the legalization of abortion pulled the "what if the child consents tho" card in a discussion about a little girl who got pregnant after her grandmother's partner raped her.
These people are a political dead weight.
A child cannot give consent.
by Crysuko » Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:55 pm
San Lumen wrote:Liriena wrote:Soooooo... one of the organizers of the most recent rally against the legalization of abortion pulled the "what if the child consents tho" card in a discussion about a little girl who got pregnant after her grandmother's partner raped her.
These people are a political dead weight.
A child cannot give consent.
by The New California Republic » Sun Mar 24, 2019 4:05 pm
by The Forlorn Redoubt » Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:36 pm
by Ifreann » Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:46 pm
Liriena wrote:Soooooo... one of the organizers of the most recent rally against the legalization of abortion pulled the "what if the child consents tho" card in a discussion about a little girl who got pregnant after her grandmother's partner raped her.
These people are a political dead weight.
by Northern Davincia » Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:51 pm
Godular wrote:Northern Davincia wrote:I have to pay taxes even though I don't want to. Am I enslaved? Are those drafted into military service enslaved? The point is that we often make justifications for force, yet we do not consider ourselves in bondage. Society is largely nonconsensual.
I take your strawmen and set fire to them. This is about things done to a person's body against their will, not whether you have to deal with some kind of inconvenience FOR WHICH YOU RECEIVE BENEFITS.
Liriena wrote:Soooooo... one of the organizers of the most recent rally against the legalization of abortion pulled the "what if the child consents tho" card in a discussion about a little girl who got pregnant after her grandmother's partner raped her.
These people are a political dead weight.
Katganistan wrote:Aellex wrote:I suppose it really is an inhuman stance not to want to kill the poors so they don't end up on welfare.
What's inhuman is preventing women from having the ability to control their own bodies, then shaming them for needing help when you've wrested that control from them.
But thanks for being obtuse.
Conserative Morality wrote:"Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Hoppe."
by Wallenburg » Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:51 pm
The Forlorn Redoubt wrote:In other news, if either of your parents are a rapist you can be put to death. Apparently.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Corrian, Israel and the Sinai, So uh lab here, Souverain Revachol, The Vooperian Union, Tungstan
Advertisement