- This topic has 175 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Fifty years of progress destroyed by 6 conservative right wing members of the Supreme Court, thank goodness some states will not endorse it. Puts women’s rights back to the stone age and takes no account of victims of rape, incest or women raped and beaten on a daily basis inside abusive relationships. 70% Of Americans don’t want it and the women who are left with unwanted pregnancies will get no state help. Trump made the Supreme Court a right wing majority during his Presidency and this is a result of his well documented misogyny.
4 users thanked author for this post.
The USA used to be the most forward thinking nation on earth. Now it’s one of the most backward thinking.
These people are not pro-life, they are just pro-birth. They don’t give a toss about the child’s welfare once it has left the womb, and if it turns out to be disabled or LGBTQ+ heaven help it!
3 users thanked author for this post.
Fab. My gut instincts aren’t failing in older age. Correctly predicted before I logged on that BPG would have started a pro-life thread already. Do you think those women who’ve been raped, and those who are to come, shouldn’t have the right to terminate the rapist’s child? Do you have a wife and daughter’s Bpg? If so, how do they feel about your rejoicing over a decision that will never have anything to do with you but will ruin the lives of thousands of women? Don’t you like women having choice and rights? Or should they know their place?
1 user thanked author for this post.
You can write reams defending your position JI, the crux of the matter isn’t ‘where does human life begin?’ but about the right of every woman to have choice, and it’s a simple as that. Neither you or BPG have answered the very real problem about taking away a woman’s right to abort due to rape. kestrels and badgers? Ffs, get real man. Defending the denial of a basic human right by attempting to intellectualise is like constructing sand castles in the wind. Personally, I suspect you know this. Kind of comes over in the desperation. Just my opinion. We’re never going to agree on this so I’ll bale out of this topic now.
1 user thanked author for this post.
He doesn’t believe though bill and as usual you won’t grasp another’s point of view or opinion. People won’t change just because you present the same rhetoric again and again, it’s called freedom of choice and like the women of the USA you should recognise the fact that they have a right to choose for them and their bodies over a religious backed narrative which is what the Supreme Court will use as a defense for their actions. 70% is a huge majority disagreeing with you and the Supreme Court on this subject.
1 user thanked author for this post.
No surprises that the Christians who usually moan about loss of freedom and control over others are celebrating the loss of freedoms and control over others when it suits them. :-)
This in turn with the talk of distaste at religion in another thread. Well, this is the face of religion I dislike, so there can be no wriggling here. And next it may be gay marriage, gay relationships and contraception. An authoritarian viewpoint put forward on others, who do not believe in their stance. Yet they howl with fury at anything which affects them, rightly or wrongly.
It’s all about controlling women. The unproven sentience of an embryo, which cannot survive without the womb is more important than the woman or what happens afterwards. Those who celebrate this usually don’t give a damn about helping children economically, they call it socialism out to destroy America. The Americans rail against means to prevent gun deaths. In short, their ‘pro-life’ statement doesn’t seem to bother them, except for when it means controlling the woman during pregnancy. They have all the excuses in the world for making life harder afterwards, :-)
3 users thanked author for this post.
The difference between a kestrel egg being destroyed by a human, is of course, that this is harming something else. It would, of course, be immoral to forcibly terminate someone else’s pregnancy with no consent, which is analogous to your example.
The fact is that restricting abortion does control women’s bodies. The assertion that an embryo is sentient is a belief. Society shouldn’t base laws, and control over life on belief. You can dress it up all you want, but this is controlling women’s choices on their own body. And I will take no lessons on what’s helpful from those who call or make out pro-choice people are baby murderers. ;-)
1 user thanked author for this post.
I’m guessing here of course. But I assume that the discussion group on this thread is made up of middle aged (or older) men. Put your hand up if you’re not in that demographic.
All the women I know in my own family and circle of friends are of the same opinion. How dare a man pass judgment on a woman’s body? They agree fully with the “my body, my choice” mantra.
Siderite is correct, it’s a throwback to a patriarchal society where men feel the need to control women.
Unsurprising then that most religious groups are against it.
2 users thanked author for this post.
Still one sided, NI. It’s not just about the woman if you see the unborn as a person. You clearly don’t. I do. We have different beliefs.
A second point. As a man I care about humanity. Male, female and unborn. That’s why I state my opinion.The unborn are not in any way sentient. Many women would find it grossly offensive to think that their own worth and choices over their own body is worth as much or less than an embryo.
You are, of course, welcome to these beliefs. However, a society shouldn’t have to live by the whims of anyone else’s beliefs. By outlawing abortion in many states women are now being prevented from something based on a belief, regardless of their own background. This is what is wrong about religion, the talk on whether Christian belief is a religion misses the point. Belief, with harmful side effects, is being forced upon others, be it USA or Afghanistan.
Do I think abortion is something to be taken lightly? No. Do I think there should be a limit? Yes. However, I do think a woman has the right to decisions on her own body, especially when the ‘unborn’ is not remotely sentient, capable of life without the uterus and akin to a human as we know it. When assessing morality I base it off how my actions will affect others, and I cannot see an embryo with no internal feeling or sentience as remotely equal to the woman. To do so would be hugely degrading to the woman.
I would be more believing that the Republicans have any kind of care for the woman if they did anything to help them in this. Increased birth rates would only create severe economic challenges on the family, and it’s the mother who bears the brunt. Instead, Republicans are against any kind of social care, so they have to fend for themselves. Unsafe abortions will increase, putting the mother at a health risk. Instead, Republicans are more concerned about how to criminalise women for abortions, including talk of the sodding death penalty in some states.
Looking at other countries who have strict abortion laws shows the worry. El Salvador has given life sentences to women for a miscarriage. Brazil have separated children from mothers who tried to pursue an abortion beforehand to become state orphans. The USA has poor maternal mortality, with their insurance based healthcare system being one reason. Pro-life conservatives do not bother with this, they do not help out, so I do not believe them when they claim they care about women. Pro-life for the unborn, until they are born, where they lose interest and they can both rot together.
I should state that I am speaking a lot in generalities here. I do not mean to accuse you of not caring about women.
2 users thanked author for this post.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.