Jump to content

M12BH

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    229
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by M12BH

  1. Yeah I think he's done. When he advocates for Georgia, Missouri, Alabama, or any other jurisdiction to commandeer his fluids to save an INNOCENT PERSON I'll listen to what he has to say about what can be done with my fluids. Until then, I guess he can just mumble into his beer about his apparently unresolved issues with how women treat men. I'll continue to open my own doors (not that I don't appreciate a little chivalry now & then, I am after all a Texas girl), buy my own shoes and purses and have autonomy over my own insides. Beats the hell out of the alternative. Y'all have a nice holiday and thank you to all who served to preserve ALL our freedoms.
  2. If you think your child inside your locked house is in danger and needs to be protected with lethal force from a kid outside with a paintball gun then you are even a more fearful person than I imagined. “Script” indeed. When you’ve got something other than “It’s MURDER!!”, while not even being able to provide a cogent definition of what you consider this word to mean, get back to us.
  3. LOL. He has no say over what happens within a woman’s body ever. Before conception, after conception, before birth, after birth. That’s the whole fucking point. There is nothing inconsistent with this position. Once there is an actual, you know, person that exists outside the woman, to whom he is biologically linked, is when he is on the hook. It’s not that difficult to comprehend for anyone with a modicum of intelligence and understanding of biology.
  4. Hey I guess we should be grateful that he took time out from justifying the use of lethal force against a teenager threatening a dude with a paintball gun from said dude’s front yard. It takes a special kind of manly man to be afraid of a kid with a paintball gun while you’re inside your locked house to the point that you can rationalizing killing him. If that same “person” was inside another person literally sucking the life out of the latter, then the former must be protected. Cult of the fetus.
  5. Who's going to pay for it? Not the men undergoing the procedure, of course. Undue burden.
  6. They aren't. I feel really sad for him, honestly. But that which is contained within his girlfriend's body at her discretion is not legislated by his fee-fees.
  7. Yeah, I've never been into the whole brevity thing.
  8. So are you saying he should not be on the hook at all, or that he should be on the hook from conception? Because anything else is illogical as hell if you care for the life and wellbeing of the unborn. Well, illogical or callous, take your pick. Someone other than the pregnant woman having responsibilities to a child after birth, but not before, is completely consistent with the position that a woman controls what happens inside her body during pregnancy. If she does indeed have this control, and the father does not, then it stands to reason he should have no responsibilities either. During pregnancy. On edit - for someone who claims to abhor political gymnastics you sure play a lot of them. With the lives of the fetuses you claim to care for so much. Unless you really believe that child support for born children should not be mandatory. Which I don't believe you do, because if you did, that would make you a dick. And though you might be, it's probably not for that reason.
  9. They don't want to pay for fetuses either. I bet that if prenatal care was subsidized, the number of abortions would decrease. If that's actually the goal, I mean. Really the notion of legal child support only after a child is born is completely consistent with the pro-choice position, it's just that those arguing otherwise are too dumb to see it. Here's a handy cheat sheet for the logic-impaired: Before conception: Male has rights to and and responsibility for his penis and semen, female has rights to and responsibility for her uterus and whatever is in it During pregnancy: Male has rights to and responsibility for his penis and semen, female has rights to and responsibility for her uterus and whatever is in it If a child is born: Male has rights to and and responsibility for his penis and semen, female has rights to and responsibility for her uterus and whatever is in it. AND both male and female have rights and responsibilities concerning the child which is now a separate being. Anyone arguing that either parent should not have responsibility for the product of a pregnancy is certainly not going to be advocating a position that will reduce the number of abortions. If that's actually the goal, I mean. BTW it's my 14th wedding anniversary today. Not bad for a chick who has no notion of responsibility of accountability, amirite?
  10. This makes about as much sense as "people don't automatically have abortions". Anyway I think this thread has been about as Slorch'd up as any, so.....yeah. Anyone who can seamlessly leap from "Children don't always hold the same values as their parents and don't always tell their parents about everything they do", to "Most any kid will have an abortion"....well, ain't nobody got time for that bullshit. Some people are constitutionally incapable of understanding nuance, I think. It's as much of a waste of time to ask them to see gray areas as it is trying to make them see infrared. And buddy you can whine in the mirror and stamp your feet all you like about how no one respects your opinions and that we all JUDGE you for your beliefs, waahhh. So the fuck what? No one wants to criminalize your convictions. Is anyone here who is pro-choice as sensitive to your beliefs about them as you are to theirs? No, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU WANT YOUR VALUES TO BECOME THE LAW OF THE LAND AND FORCE THE REST OF US TO LIVE ACCORDING TO THEM. It's just not personal, no matter how much you get your fee-fees damaged. Unless you really do oppose the Alabama and Georgia laws. In that case, my apologies and never mind. Anyway....I think my least favorite word in the English language is "should". Women "should" be more responsible. Yep. Men "should" be accountable if they knock up a woman. Check. Everyone "should" have other options than abortion. Righto. Government officials "should" face consequences when they drag us into lethal wars over fictional RMDs. Wait what? People died because of that. But they weren't fetuses so never mind. Everyone dying from want of an organ transplant "should" be able to arbitrarily take an organ from someone else. Why not? Umm, let me guess - they aren't fetuses. Only fetuses can commandeer the body parts of others. As soon as they are born they are not worthy of the same life-saving rules. Until we live in a world where everything that should happen does, or in a world in which resources are not scarce, there will be situations in which the decision of one adversely affects another, up to and including the death of the latter. No one has yet been able to explain why a pregnant woman should be held to a different standard than every other human being on the planet who makes decisions on a daily basis that cause harm to others. Unless you think fetus lives are more important than born lives, or pregnant women's decisions are less valid that everyone else's it's not possible.
  11. What does being gay have to do with anything here? If you want to talk about lame analogies, look no further. People don't "turn gay". They are or they aren't. Has nothing to do with the ability to regulate the inside of one's body. And yeah oh shit you caught me. I don't believe in accountability. Never have. Never will. Never have experienced it. Because not wanting to shove MY notion of accountability down someone else's throat means all that. Now I really am leaving, I have things to do and I bet you have fetuses to go worship.
  12. You know, I give you shit when you post shit so I have to give you props when you post something thoughtful and meaningful. I think we all want to live in a world where abortion clinics go out of business because of lack of business. I'd be happy to live in that world. Sadly, we don't. And even if every pregnancy was wanted and cherished, there would still be times they would need to be ended. You say that there are those who are flip and blase about elective abortions of healthy embryos by healthy women. Yes there are. There are also people who are flip and blase about the fact that abortion is sometimes a horrible and tragic necessity arising from a sometimes desperately wanted pregnancy. I think that's what sets me off the most - the utter, callous disregard for the women who find themselves in this situation. They end up being the flotsam and jetsam of politicians looking to score cheap political points with their conservative bases. These women's tragic personal circumstances are made infinitely harder by the insane laws that are passed in the name of cherishing life. It just....sucks. And with that I'm done for the night.
  13. Posted earlier in this thread about raising kids who wouldn't tell me if they got an abortion. FIFY You do know, don't you, that all kids do things their parents would freak about if they knew, right? And that kids grow up and develop their own value systems that rarely mimic those of their parents, right? Do you think you'd ever know if one of your kids got or paid for an abortion? I'd bet every cent I have that they would not share that information with you. And unless you are clairvoyant you never will find out either way. And LOL at the notion that "raising kids who (as far as you know) won't get abortions" equals support of social policy to discourage same. Tell us again about how you are allowed to use potentially lethal force to remove uninvited guests from your home if they are taking things that belong to you, but not for a woman to use force to remove an uninvited guest residing in her uterus taking things that belong to her. Tell us why the Castle Doctrine extends to a person's domicile but not her person. And be sure to disregard the fact that, according to your math, more than 12,000 women per year are impregnated via rape or incest because that number is too minuscule to matter. Anyway you sure spend a lot of time whining about what people on this thread think of you. Why do you even care if people think you are an intolerant pig? Why are you so sensitive about it? Why is your skin so thin? Do you think anyone who is pro choice cares if you think they are BABY MURDERERS? I stand by my convictions and the fact that in your warped mind I "SUPPORT BABY MURDER" matters not one bit to me. You are welcome to think what you want about me, just keep your opinions away from my uterus.
  14. The bill didn't pass you ijit. Why would anyone boycott a bill that didn't get enacted?
  15. Sex is a deliberate act. Pregnancy may or may not be. Those women did not invite anything into anywhere except a penis into a vagina. I can just envision the tribunals - "PROVE to us that you did not invite that baby into your uterus, otherwise Slorch sez it can get pretty dicey...but you may still be exonerated in the end." If you invite someone into your house and they start taking your stuff and they don't leave for nine months, I guarandamntee you're going to find a way to get rid of them. Anyway You just spent 11 pages telling me why babies conceived from rape should be treated JUST THE SAME as babies conceived by consensual intercourse. So why all of the sudden does it matter now? And fewer abortions are carried out third trimester than from rape, so why all the time and energy spent on laws preventing the latter, while brushing off the former? And why are you letting babies die that could be saved with your money and body parts? You say society would be better off if everyone treated women the way you do. I'll go a step further. More babies would be saved if you cared as much about born babies as unborn babies. You extend privileges to the former that you don't extend to the latter as long as YOU don't have to make any sacrifices. Rank, utter, vile, disgusting hypocrisy. Save that baby inside you because I say so. I'll let this one here next to me die because I don't care enough to make a personal sacrifice.
  16. Oh good, another "it's a life!" bleater. Let's say for sake of this argument that "it is a life". Fuck yeah they are costs. Are they not? Are "babies killed" due to financial inconvenience? Damn straight. There are babies dying because of "financial inconvenience" as we speak. Born babies who need medical care that YOU can provide. Babies dying of liver failure, and bone cancer. You have a liver and bone marrow. You can give it to those babies and they will live. I mean, give it pursuant to your own expense and bodily harm. Withhold it and those innocent babies will die. Why should you not be required to save these innocent born lives, but women be forced to save the lives the babies they are gestating? I mean....if they are of the same value? Why should a woman who did not ask for a growing life to be placed inside her, perhaps even took precautions against it or perhaps not, but now not want it there, be forced to support it with her time, money and body, at potential harm to herself, and you not be forced to support a growing life that will surely otherwise die without your action? Why can you use lethal force against an innocent human being who is appropriating your property and resources and causing you to fear bodily harm, but a pregnant woman can't? WHY NOT DONE?
  17. Probably more than there are 3rd trimester abortions. Which legislators salivate over and crow about passing laws about. Because those lives are SO IMPORTANT!!! But when those lives are raped women, there aren't enough of them to matter.
  18. Yeah but she still supports your legal right to have your appalling and outrageous opinion. See how that works? No, I didn't think so.
  19. That's my whole fucking point. When "life begins" is irrelevant to whether a woman should be forced to carry it inside her. Which has yet to be addressed by anyone who insists that "it's an innocent life so we can't kill it". If there's no difference between a life inside a uterus and outside, then forcing some people to provide support and not others is absurd.
  20. But they don't. Because they have a fetus fetish. Cult of the fetus. All they can do is bleat "It's an innocent life, it's an innocent life" ad nauseam. But they don't have an answer as to why innocent fetuses are more deserving of the resources of others than innocent babies.
  21. For argument's sake let's say you're right, and "life" begins at conception. You still have not explained why a woman should be forced to contain and support that life inside her body if she did not want it put there and/or does not want it to remain there, when neither you nor anyone else are forced to support an equally innocent life that would otherwise terminate if you withhold the same resources. Tell me what would happen if you suddenly found a trespasser in your home and you felt threatened. Costing you money. Eating your food. Living in your spare bedroom. Making you throw up for three months and affecting your health, possibly permanently. Tell me why you hold dominion over a perfectly good liver that will regenerate if part of it is removed when innocent people are dying because they don't have one. Why should you not be forced to save innocent lives with your money, resources and body parts? Now I'll hang up and listen. But I won't hold my breath. Because you have a fetus fetish. Innocent fetuses must be saved at all costs, as long as those costs fall on others. Born people, especially if the costs fall on you, not so much.
  22. I'd love to see this law challenged via the "Castle Doctrine". You know, the one that says you can shoot and kill someone trespassing on your property if you fear bodily harm. Unless you are going to say women's bodies are not their own property, what's the diff?
  23. I'm sure everyone in the legal system, not to mention anyone who has ever had to sit on a capital murder jury, will be glad to hear that the notion of defining "murder" is just political semantics. But seriously - if you think the State should have a vested interest in forcing a woman to donate her time, money and bodily functions & fluids to preserve the life of an innocent unborn baby, but you don't think the State should have a vested interest in forcing anyone else to donate their time, money and bodily functions & fluids to preserve the life of an innocent born baby, then you are the worst, most virulent sort of hypocrite and you should not be able to decide anything for anyone else, ever. What are y'all waiting for? Go donate parts of your livers. People are dying for want of them. And yours will grow back. 41 minutes ago, slorch said: B
  24. Well good for you, and next time you're pregnant and facing a high likelihood of death, you can decide whether to get an abortion. No it's not clear cut and easy, and that's the whole point of why these absolute laws are so disgusting. Anyway why is innocence, or lack thereof, a barometer of whether a woman should be forced to gestate? And who is to say that an embryo is more or less innocent than the girl or woman gestating it, and how should that determination have any effect on whether a girl or woman is forced to gestate something she didn't want or ask for? But OK let's assume for a moment that an embryo is innocent and that gives it some special status. We ALL make decisions every day that result in the death of innocent others. One example - organ transplants. Do you know how many innocent people die because they are waiting for organ transplants? Should we force others to provide those organs (at the donors' expense) to those whose deaths are imminent? And yeah I have some personal experience with this type situation and it's not very pretty. It's the most horrible, frustrating feeling to watch someone die in front of your eyes knowing that perfectly good livers, hearts and lungs are being shoved into the ground on a daily basis in the meantime. Why can't someone needing a lung to live just take yours? Let me ask you, why shouldn't an innocent man, woman or child be able to walk into your house and stay there for, oh let's say nine months, if to do otherwise will result in the death of that innocent person? Tell me, what would happen if you discovered someone in your house helping themselves to your food, clothing and money? I don't even think I have to guess. Oh wait, let me guess...that person isn't innocent. They are trespassing. So is the "innocent unborn baby" placed by force or otherwise in the womb of a girl or woman who doesn't want it there. Yeah, maybe she didn't use birth control. Yeah, maybe you accidentally left your door unlocked. Private property is private property, and nothing is so private as the inside and other end of a vagina. We don't force anyone in this country to harbor others, innocent or otherwise, in their personal space against their will. Or at least we didn't used to.
×
×
  • Create New...