NationStates

Katganistan wrote:

Islamic Essarn wrote:
yes, it is all those things that’s just the term for it

It's not benevolent at all.

San Lumen wrote:https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/3506986-city-of-austin-prepares-to-decriminalize-abortion-if-roe-v-wade-is-struck-down/

City of Austin prepares to decriminalize abortion if Roe v. Wade is struck down
“It does not directly halt enforcement, but it severely limits the ability of the city or any staff to collect or provide evidence for prosecutions.”

Islamic Essarn wrote:

Katganistan wrote:It's not benevolent at all.

Please look up benevolent sexism before you comment because I’m so tired of explaining what it is too people

San Lumen wrote:https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/3506986-city-of-austin-prepares-to-decriminalize-abortion-if-roe-v-wade-is-struck-down/

City of Austin prepares to decriminalize abortion if Roe v. Wade is struck down
“It does not directly halt enforcement, but it severely limits the ability of the city or any staff to collect or provide evidence for prosecutions.”

Free Algerstonia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/3506986-city-of-austin-prepares-to-decriminalize-abortion-if-roe-v-wade-is-struck-down/

City of Austin prepares to decriminalize abortion if Roe v. Wade is struck down
“It does not directly halt enforcement, but it severely limits the ability of the city or any staff to collect or provide evidence for prosecutions.”

first the south wants state rights, now the south wants city rights

Free Algerstonia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/3506986-city-of-austin-prepares-to-decriminalize-abortion-if-roe-v-wade-is-struck-down/

City of Austin prepares to decriminalize abortion if Roe v. Wade is struck down
“It does not directly halt enforcement, but it severely limits the ability of the city or any staff to collect or provide evidence for prosecutions.”

first the south wants state rights, now the south wants city rights

The Alma Mater wrote:

Free Algerstonia wrote:first the south wants state rights, now the south wants city rights

Before you know it, we will be down to personal rights.

New haven america wrote:

Islamic Essarn wrote:
Please look up benevolent sexism before you comment because I’m so tired of explaining what it is too people

*Incorrectly explaining is the proper term you're looking for.

Free Algerstonia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/3506986-city-of-austin-prepares-to-decriminalize-abortion-if-roe-v-wade-is-struck-down/

City of Austin prepares to decriminalize abortion if Roe v. Wade is struck down
“It does not directly halt enforcement, but it severely limits the ability of the city or any staff to collect or provide evidence for prosecutions.”

first the south wants state rights, now the south wants city rights

Islamic Essarn wrote:

Katganistan wrote:It's not benevolent at all.

Please look up benevolent sexism before you comment because I’m so tired of explaining what it is too people

'And only one for birthday presents, you know. There's glory for you!'

'I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't — till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'

'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected.

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
Lewis Carroll -- Through the Looking Glass

Bonggongland wrote:I'm personally opposed to abortion. Not for moral reasons but because I find it funny that women will have to be responsible for their own choices and they act like it's the end of the world. Not having sex isn't life or death.

Bonggongland wrote:I'm personally opposed to abortion. Not for moral reasons but because I find it funny that women will have to be responsible for their own choices and they act like it's the end of the world. Not having sex isn't life or death.

Bonggongland wrote:I'm personally opposed to abortion. Not for moral reasons but because I find it funny that women will have to be responsible for their own choices and they act like it's the end of the world. Not having sex isn't life or death.

Vassenor wrote:

Bonggongland wrote:I'm personally opposed to abortion. Not for moral reasons but because I find it funny that women will have to be responsible for their own choices and they act like it's the end of the world. Not having sex isn't life or death.

So what gives you the right to dictate how women can use their bodies?

Bonggongland wrote:I'm personally opposed to abortion. Not for moral reasons but because I find it funny that women will have to be responsible for their own choices and they act like it's the end of the world. Not having sex isn't life or death.

Bonggongland wrote:I'm personally opposed to abortion. Not for moral reasons but because I find it funny that women will have to be responsible for their own choices and they act like it's the end of the world. Not having sex isn't life or death.

Vassenor wrote:

Bonggongland wrote:I'm personally opposed to abortion. Not for moral reasons but because I find it funny that women will have to be responsible for their own choices and they act like it's the end of the world. Not having sex isn't life or death.

So what gives you the right to dictate how women can use their bodies?

Bonggongland wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
So what gives you the right to dictate how women can use their bodies?

What gives women the right to dictate if a child lives?

Bonggongland wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
So what gives you the right to dictate how women can use their bodies?

What gives women the right to dictate if a child lives?

Equai wrote:

Bonggongland wrote:I'm personally opposed to abortion. Not for moral reasons but because I find it funny that women will have to be responsible for their own choices and they act like it's the end of the world. Not having sex isn't life or death.

In most if not all events (only counting consentual sexual activities here) it's not the woman's fault that she became unwantdly pregnant but man's for not wanting to wear protection when having sex.

Bonggongland wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
So what gives you the right to dictate how women can use their bodies?

What gives women the right to dictate if a child lives?

Vassenor wrote:

Bonggongland wrote:
What gives women the right to dictate if a child lives?

>not for moral reasons

>resorts to moralising when challenged

Equai wrote:

Bonggongland wrote:
What gives women the right to dictate if a child lives?

Child is not a child until it leaves the womb. As long the thing is inside her it's not a child and she has right to abort it because it's just a bunch of cells.

Bonggongland wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
>not for moral reasons

>resorts to moralising when challenged

No, it's a tit for tat response. My response is in the same vein as yours. Easy to understand if you don't spend your whole life hating men