Raped 10-Year-Old Shouldn't Have Had Abortion, Says Anti-Choice Group - Rolling Stone
By: Nikki McCann Ramirez (Rolling Stone)
A 10 year old is like "many women who have had babies as a result of rape"?
SICKENING!
Trolling, taunting, spamming, and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that vote up their own comments, repeat comments, or continue to disrupt the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. Please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve continuity of this seed. Any use of the phrase "Trump Derangement Syndrome" or the TDS acronym in a comment will be deleted.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A prominent Indiana lawyer stated that the 10-year-old Ohio girl who traveled to his state to seek an abortion should have been forced to give birth to the child. Jim Bopp, general counsel for the National Right to Life, told Politico that if it were up to him "she would have had the baby, and as many women who have had babies as a result of rape, we would hope that she would understand the reason and ultimately the benefit of having the child."
Bopp, who authored model legislation in anticipation of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, has encouraged states to ban all abortions, without exemption, unless necessary to save the life of the pregnant person. The model legislation indeed would have prohibited the 10-year-old from receiving an abortion in Indiana.
The child's age is of no concern to Bopp and the National Right to Life. He characterizes the pregnant child as among the "many women" who have birthed children conceived through rape. But a 10-year-old girl is not a woman — she is a child. Any attempt to portray her as belonging to a cohort of fully developed adults is a self-serving ploy to mask the abject horror she has endured.
The Ohio rape case drew international attention in the aftermath of the Supreme Court axing Roe, which rendered abortion in Ohio illegal past the point of fetal heartbeat detection, around six weeks. On Wednesday, the man accused of abusing and impregnating the girl, 27-year-old Gershon Fuentes, was arrested and charged. According to the Columbus Dispatch, law enforcement was made aware of the pregnancy on June 22 through a referral from Franklin County Children Services. Detective Jeffrey Huhn testified at Fuentes's arraignment that DNA samples confirmed that Fuentes was the contributing party to the pregnancy.
Anti-abortion activist are struggling to find a consensus in their treatment of the case. As new developments come to light, the House Judiciary Committee is holding hearings on the effects the overturning Roe will have throughout the country. In her testimony before the committee Catherine Glenn Foster, president and CEO of Americans United for Life, told Senator Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) that the abortion the girl received was actually "not an abortion" and "would not fall under any abortion restriction in our nation" as she had been raped and is only 10 years old.
Swalwell: It would not be an abortion if a 10 year old with her parents made the decision not to have a baby that was the result of rape?
Republican Witness: That's not an abortion
Swalwell: Are you familiar with disinformation? pic.twitter.com/6zyO3Bq2Uv
— Acyn (@Acyn) July 14, 2022
Fellow committee witness Sarah Warbelow, legal director for the Human Rights Campaign, responded to Foster, clarifying that "an abortion is a procedure, it's a medical procedure, that individuals undergo for a wide range of circumstances, including because they have been sexually assaulted, raped in the case of the 10-year-old."
"It doesn't matter whether or not there is a statutory exemption," Webster continued. "It is still a medical procedure that is understood to be an abortion. "Conservative pundits and politicians initially cast doubt on the veracity of the story, some going so far as to label it a complete fabrication by abortion advocates. Now that an arrest has been made, many of the detractors have pivoted to attacking health care providers who assisted the child. On Wednesday night, Todd Rokita, Indiana's Republican attorney general, announced on Fox News that his office is investigating Dr. Caitlin Bernard, the Indiana doctor who provided abortion services to the child.
Tags
Who is online
682 visitors
It doesn't get any more perverted than that.
This is the same attorney who recently represented Marjorie Taylor Greene in the case brought to disqualify her from running for office because of her support for the insurrection.
maybe a bit more...
As of 2017, seven states still have no laws that would stop a rapist from asserting parental rights over their victim's child. Those states include Alabama, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, New Mexico and Wyoming.
Yep, even worse.
Ooops!
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/miacathell/2022/07/21/gerson-fuentes-lourdes-gomez-n2610457?utm_campaign=rightrailsticky1
It's telling that so many people tried to dismiss this story as fake. It demonstrates that they knew this was a strong justification for abortion. Since they have committed to being against abortion 100%, they didn't want this story to be true. Now that it can no longer be denied, they want to deflect attention elsewhere - like to the doctor.
Incredibly, it's not the rape of a 10 year-old that upsets them the most. You won't see conservative speeches or demonstrations about that. They're more upset about the abortion.
Your comment is a totally accurate assessment.
Then it was shifted to Biden and immigration...
Good point. I saw that, too. That’s even more absurd.
Sometimes you do come down on the right side of things. Like now...
Tacos is one of the few people I would actually call an Independent.
Odd as it may seem, I am an independent, who votes for democratic liberal ideas consistently. That is, I will give a republican his or her due when they deserve it. It is just that they do nothing (but combat) to deserve it. I come down, or try to come down, on the side of what makes rational sense in an emergency, and in the longterm.
Yup. He got it all in a nutshell. I hate to say it, but when he's right, he's right. On this, he's spot on
Tacos, I am so glad to see that over the years you have finally come round to seeing how insane conservatism in America has gotten. I do recall years back when you and I were always at odds with one another, on damn near everything, and it is nice to see that in reality neither of us were extremists (or if we were we were smart enough to see our errors) but we are actually the moderates.
Honestly, when was the last time we actually disagreed?
As to your comment, agreed 100%. The "pro-life" crowd, AKA shittiest and biggest hypocrites of all time crowd, KNEW this kinda shit was real, they just don't care. They decided that abortion is bad no matter what and fuck anyone who might suffer because of that, because they have the divine on their side and therefore every thing they do is right.
It really isn't that incredible. This minority movement is driven by religious folks where the status of women and children has always been second class at best. They are upset that it is being considered to be a big deal and getting media attention. They don't give a fuck about the 10 year old or the rape as evidenced, as you pointed out, by their attacks on the story.
This obviously doesn’t apply to everybody, but in recent years, conservatism - in both politics and religion - has ceased to be a prudent brake on runaway progressivism and has instead become a race to see who can be the meanest to other human beings. They cause suffering with every breath they take and every action they make. They tell themselves and each other that it’s “tough love.” Then, as more people suffer, they pat themselves on the back for having “principles.” Yeah, “insane” is not a bad word for it.
It is almost as if the cruelty is the point with a lot of their policies and actions, much of what the GOP does these days is just wanton. There is no reason for it other than to create harm.
They're advocating for child abuse. This girl was already abused once, and as punishment for having been abused, they want to inflict on her the dangers of pregnancy and pain of childbirth, not to mention the lasting effects of any injuries such a pregnancy and delivery might cause to her undeveloped body.
Truly sickening. That's the best I can think of to describe it.
Not to mention then then the girls parents would have to raise the child of her abuser.
You think it's bad for her to have a baby and I do not necessarily disagree but if she wanted to remove all her female sexual organs and become a pseudo boy you all would be all for that.
Not at her age, I wouldn't. Putting words in other's mouths leads one perilously close to lying.
It was an editorial you which is why I added the "all" in my comment
Putting words in the mouths of multiple people leads one perilously close to lying multiple times.
You don't seem to have a problem when the left does that. Are you going to tell me you don't think that there aren't liberals out there that wouldn't be extremely happy to see here change her gender at this moment in time?
In case you haven't heard, Katlin Jenner, a transexual, is a conservative. Why do you think that sexuality is a political thing?
Everyone sees what you're doing here, arkpdx. You are dishonestly assigning an opinion to me and all liberals, intending it as an insult. You are also having trouble with words.
Really, you've polled all liberals? You're sure they're monolithic in their beliefs? You do know that's what you're saying when you use the phrase "you all", yes?
You're sure you know my political beliefs? You know, the person with whom you're debating? Even though I've told you I do not support transitioning at such a young age?
Oh, well, no, you don't. And after being called out on your dishonest tactics, you've moved the goalposts.
Yes, I actually am going to tell you that. Unless this girl showed an interest in changing her gender, I don't imagine there's a single liberal who would imagine forcing such a change upon her. And since, to my knowledge, the only person who has imagined that she would wish to is you, well, there you go, speaking incorrectly for others again, with the intent to insult. Basically, you have posed a rhetorical question, answered it yourself in a manner which allows you to criticize liberals, and have done so dishonestly repeatedly.
You're manufacturing bogeymen in order to justify partisan hatred. But you're doing it in an open discussion, so all can see how you arrive at your misbegotten opinions. The only one who believes in your straw men is you, arkie. The rest of us see them as the pathetic lies they are.
Consider this to be a double vote up.
Much appreciated.
Actually Sandy I disagree and believe the comment was a simple deflection to get the conversation away from the indefensible to something (anything) else, and it worked.
On topic Bopp's position is obviously complete idiocy
So? Does that mean I have to agree to everything he does?
Way to go yet again finding a way to skew a crystal clear point into nonsense.
Note:
Hint. Perrie made her point crystal clear here ⇡ in that one can be a conservative and not hold true to a single position on sexuality. In no way does this suggest that you are supposed to agree with Jenner on this or anything else.
By the way, it is also possible to be a conservative and an atheist ... as Jeremy could explain to you.
highly doubtful you'll ever get answers to your questions from any of the cult members.
What questions?
Why are you attempting to equate a child rape victim impregnated with some child given counseling and voluntarily VOCALIZING its intentions to be trans? The two situations are on parallel tracks that do not intersect.
You have a category mistake. Do rein in your judgemental nature, please.
Emphatically. It is a mistake to discuss forcible rape or even statutory rape as anything voluntary.
I might just do that as soon as you and those like you do the same
[deleted]
Every time you post it's a deflection from the topic. If you want to talk about trans children, start your own article.
What do you propose? Outlawing thinking you do not like?
Forcing a ten year old to give birth isn't in the same ballpark with tolerance for a child self identifying as a transexual...
Liberals are perfectly okay with conservatives living private, reserved lives. Why can't you let liberals live without your doomsday scenarios, your "everbody" must surrender to gun culture and go get one or die, your MAGA aggressions that seek out liberals to "anti" against?
We are not doing the same and you know it if you would just stop long enough to properly reflect on it!
Tell that to the owners if "Sweet Cakes By Melissa" or to Dan Cathy or to the others that do not subscribe to liberal views
Then you will have to ask "the Left" what the logic and arguments are involving the trans-person child's thinking is. I don't concern myself with it and will not pretend to be versed or immersed in it. I will say this, from 'dipping' in lightly to some televised interviews and documentaries on the subject, it would seem some children know their 'way' in life better than others. For instance, a little boy who wears and favors his mother's purse and high heels as a toddler clogging around the house - has been known to be 'queer' and a cross-dresser for the duration.
In case you are wondering, I am not one of those toddlers or youths. I learned my sexuality and 'manner' at puberty (junior high school) level. I do have a relative I can distinctly tell you is 'queer' in his life and old age, but was a purse 'toter' as a young boy!
You have to listen to those on the 'front-lines' of this new frontier in psychology and medicine and not lean on political or even religious understanding about what is right and proper for others who have just as much right to express themselves through liberties as you do to express yourself through liberties.
I know what a woman is and I know what a man is. I learned it from biology class (that's science) no a man can not get pregnant (men do not have the correct parts) and cutting off ones testicles and penis does not make someone a woman. How come there are so many seemingly well educated liberals can not define what a man or woman is?
You're old-fashioned. You're falling behind the times. There is an information gap in your world. Keep up; or the times will make you (and your remarks) irrelevant. Don't worry, we all have to shed the old stuff for the new stuff all the time in and ever-changing, evolving, advancing world.
And no. The world is done trying to shape itself to you (or me for that matter) and our way of thinking. We're aging out. Let the young people decide what tomorrow shall be now so they can have a better handle on it.
Do you think that Biden, Sanders, Warren and Clinton shouldn't have run then?
Would you allow a 10 year old single girl to adopt a baby? Never in a million years but force a raped 10 year old to have a baby???? And you're all for it? Do you have any idea how perverted that is?
What part of I don't have a damn thing to share with you this month don't you understand? Talk to others about me I don't give a shit. But, I insist you stop addressing me directly!
WTF does that have to do with the article?
Are you going to tell me that XX chromosome does not make one female and XY make one make?
That is our job as adults to shape the world and to get the children to understand the real world. That does not include letting them think that men can be women and women can be men. It does not include that actions such as having unprotected sex does not come with consequences.
There are things that you call old that have done the human race well for hundreds of thousands of years and are still good and relavent today
This is what cons think, that they know what everyone else is thinking.
Putting me on ignore is your option, telling me what to do isn't.
[deleted]
[deleted]
So I assume you would have been good if the girl said she wanted to keep the baby and not have the abortion
Meaning what exactly? That said chromosomes stipulate how your brain will process masculinity or femininity over the duration of life? Well, come now, even your bible tells you that homosexuality was a known behavior and activity in antiquity. And sexuality is what you are driving home here anyway, right? BTW, what is it to MAGA what somebody else sleeps with as a man or as a woman?
Please expand on how the brain processes and the hormonal effects.
anybody that thinks a 10 year old is capable of making an adult decision should stay away from them.
At what age should the parents not be notified?
He wouldn't want her to be able to decide to have an abortion without parental consent but he sure as hell seems to think she should be able to keep the baby without it.
Yes, I would be fine with it. If you are asking me if I would wonder how the heck she would tend to it, . . . let's just say where there is a will there is a way. As for society's will to make her ordeal to suffer raising a rapist's baby. . . that's wrong on many levels. My understanding is she exercised an option to remove the offense. Now then will it affect her throughout life? Of course, a 'scar' has been been inflicted upon her which has been dealt with by its removal. It's mark will manifest itself as often as the rape incident/s, nevertheless.
As you might imagine, as a man, it is pretty hard for me to imagine what it feels like to be in the shoes of a rape victim who is ten years old knowing little about the ways and order of the ways she will inhabit for many, many more years.
Now a question in the same vein as your question: Would you be okay if this 10 old girl gave birth to a trans-kid manifesting a desire to be trans in his/her youth?
HA! I get how you mean it. Although, had she decided to express that she wanted to try (in spite of it all) it would have opened up a new set of circumstances involving how to make that happen/so.
[deleted]
Any thought of being "trans" should only be made after one becomes an adult. No child is capable of making that decision.
Actually, they are expressing their GENDER, not their sex.
Secondly, NO treatment occurs without the consent of the parent, who are the ones making the decision.
They are not old enough to know what gender. I agree with those that believe that it is child abuse to try and transition a minir
There are years of therapy and psychological consultations between a young child having their first initial "thoughts" and "feelings" about sexual dysmorphia, which are under no person's control, and an adult finally getting their sex change operation. Nobody is saying that children should be given sex change operations willy-nilly. But you, on the other hand, seem A-Okay with forcing a mere child to give birth against theirs and their parent's will!
Monstrous behavior. Should be put in prison.
If you learn of any paedophiles grooming children for nefarious purposes then immediately report them to the authorities because that is highly illegal everywhere. If, on the other hand, you are talking about having compassion and tolerance for transgender children then you really should mind your own damn business!
So, tell me arkpdx, did you wait until you were 18 or 21 to conclude you were male?
What age were you when you concluded what gender you are?
Luckily, you don't have a say so for other people's kids.
Read consider what you wrote at 3.3.44 above. Be consistent, where feasible. Moreover, you probably are a conservative who does not think homosexual are born to be so, either. Eh? So what do you know about anybody who is not heterosexually-inclined?
Nope. I have always been male. There was no decision to be made. I was born with an X and a Y chromosome. I have a scrotum, I have testicles, I have a penis and I have a prostate gland. That is what makes me male. Just like Bruce Jenner is male and will Thomas is male and Jared Jennings is male. And just as I assume if you were born with all those parts are male.
I have always been male. That is not something one chooses you are born one or the other. Male or female. There is no choosing
So you are male. And that is a good thing. What does that have to do with trans-youth and people trying to be happy, free, and prosperous alongside of you? Why do you envy or deny them their time and place in the 'sun'? It's a very judgemental position you find yourself, eh?
[deleted]
Transpeople are in my opinion mentally ill. The need treatment until they come back to reality thinkin you are something you are not and can never be is almost a definition of mental illness
Your opinion is shit as to both legal and medical definitions!
If you don't like my opinion all I can say is to quote some of your brethren.
PISS OFF!
Your rebuttal is shit.
No, but you are now on record agreeing with comment #3.3.58...
That's not what I asked you. Try again.
[deleted]
Who the fuck made any of those claims Sean.
Sheesh, talk about a strawman.
Do? Fuck Off!
Your comment is shit.
What does that really mean?
Why do you say that?
Why do you ask?
Where does that come from?
No, I prefer to fuck on.
Oh my.
You've said this about lesbians too on this forum. You have a prejudiced opinion that will never change. Carry on.
There never was a decisions to be made. I was born male no I was not assigned male. I came out the chute with a penis and ball sack , I am male now, I always will be male until the day I die. The has never been and never will be a time to conclude I am male. What part of that don't you understand?
Yes I did and I said it about gay men too. Why should I change my opinion. It is correct in every way.
If you don't like my opinion you can piss off too
You're such a sweetie, sleep tight now.
What do you thinks dicks are?
[deleted]
Sean, that's an interesting idea you questioned there. But, there is a flaw in it: A person who switches genders and sexuality are becoming what they are physically. That is they are synching their mind and body to better work in concert.
It is not that they a becoming something they are not-their physical 'shell' is not who/what they are inside.
Therefore, a homosexual is a homosexual inside where it counts. And a heterosexual is heterosexual inside where it counts. With that understood, then naturally a transperson is "trans" inside. . .where it counts.
See how it works?
As for race-switching, you lost me.
[deleted]
You ought to be ashamed of yourself for saying that. It is narrow-minded. The fact is trans-people can be happy and 'harmless' to you and themselves. But, do you know what messing around in their lives and calling them names says about the one doing it? Bully.
And we tell our kids not to be bullies. Wonder do we tell ourselves?
What a stupid comment.
Your opinion is not correct in any way, scientifically or medically. Overweening arrogance and ignorance does not substitute for fact and reason.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion no matter how misguided it might be.
MAGA explained. I won't suffer your ignorance any further. Homosexuals have ordealed with fools like this for centuries and it is over and done with now. Your attitude is not worth the time wasted going further.
Apparently, MAGA has special privilege to be designated "site-abuser"? Oh well, it's a 'Calling.'
So what's your thoughts on Halloween? I mean, people dressing up as things they aren't. Going to object to that too? How about we let people have the FREEDOM to be who they want to be is this supposed FREE country since the cons INSIST that we have more personal FREEDOMS and NOT take them away?
Sound like a plan?
Opinions and facts, not really the same thing. Neighbor.
[deleted]
They pretty much all are.
"You've said this about lesbians too on this forum. You have a prejudiced opinion that will never change. Carry on."
Those who think LGBTQ folks are mentally ill are the ones who are mentally ill.
No jury is necessary. I know who and what I am. I can, unlike liberals, define what a man and woman are.
Yes, we all know how you reactionaries define "woman": obedient servant.
Better than a nominee for the highest court in the land expressly stating that she can not define what a woman is. From what I hear Penn State doesn't know what a woman is either
[deleted]
Your response tells us a lot.
1. You confirm that you believe that "woman" is defined as "obedient servant". That is a definition you approve of, and if that had been Justice Brown Jackson's response, you would have thought it was appropriate and correct.
2. You fail to recognize that Justice Brown Jackson smartly and rightly refused to honor a completely specious, non-serious question posed by a reactionary ideologue while otherwise engaged in her nomination hearing.
Thus, we learn more about the workings of the reactionary mind.
Thank you for stating the case as it is as often as needed.
Straight, no chaser.
What you think of me. Your opinion is rated in negative numbers. I didn't give a response then because I really didn't want to get into a pissing contest with you. I should have known better.
You are wrong. I do not believe that "woman" is defined as "obedient servant. Women are to be loved and cherished and treated with honor and respect. I will defend to my own death the life of a women and protect her from harm from an abuser or rapist. I respect all innocent defenseless humans and that includes the defenseless unborn.
Human life will always have a higher priority than anything else especially convenience
Yawn...
but not from a zygote that will fuck up her life mentally and or physically or even kill her.
Nope, that is when the woman (who lives in your country) has no rights whatsoever to defending her own well-being.
In your view, she has to sacrifice her well-being to make you happy.
But you won't defend a girl's or woman's right to have privacy! It is remarkable that you have the audacity to tell me that privacy is not enumerated in the constitution, to which I say to you neither is a mention of abusers or rapists and any call for you to defend anybody! So. . . what drives you to defend women in one area of life, but deny them autonomy in another. Do not say the constitution. That would be untrue.
And the unborn you don't know are different from the born in largely one significant way. What is it?
No woman has ever been harmed in any way by a zygote. It is the earliest stage of human development and the woman would not even know she is pregnant. There has never been an abortion if a zygote. Make no mistake, however, a zygote is alive and gas what it needs to become ap fully formed human being. It is human.
where does it's nutrition come from?
It is my duty as a man to defend women an others that can not defend themselves. I can think of nothing less able to defend itself than a baby in the womb. The human baby in the womb has the right to life as endowed by it's Creater (GOD). That life is a top priority to be protected. What makes you think a woman's bikini line or her career has a higher priority than a human life ?
Where does a week old babies nutrition come from? Would it be ok if a mother who breast feeds her baby would kill it if it became an inconvenience?
That's pretty much the best definition of religious species specific chauvinism
ever written.
How about the other hundreds of billions of sentient creatures that preceded
humans? Did your god not create them too? Why should we late comers
(locusts) to the planet be treated differently because of a book?
Go fish. My piece of paper, the Constitution, guarantees equality and the
pursuit of happiness to all, not at first, but eventually to all regardless of ethnicity
age or gender.
It is out and a real person now, before just potential. After birth things are different.
People should not have children they don't want, don't have the resources, ability, and everything they need to raise a child properly and some are just not suitable to have kids.
Quality over quanity
Let's look at the travesty of the history of the world and even this country; human life is wasted on a daily basis. These grown 'babies' are littering our streets and filling up our morques, and being murdered, mangled, and 'cannon fodder-ed' . . . and you want to criticize a girl or woman for not considering the how and why of making more "supplies" for the same activities to repeat over and over again? Can you invent a 'baby-generating' bot instead?
Okay, prolife talking point aside. Here is a thinking man's question:
The unborn you don't know are different from the born in largely one significant way. What is it?
Then they should take the proper precautions not to have children murdering their children however is not an option
About the only real difference is it's environment
Accidents do happen with the best precautions; abortion is just another back up and safety tool. Fire extinguishers, first aid kits, spare tires, reserve parachutes and abortions are all backup solutions to prevent problems from getting worse.
Covert misogyny. I am a woman. I can defend myself just fine. Don't do me any favors. When I still had the plumbing to have children, the people I was most likely to need defending from were God botherers who thought my plumbing was their business.
Good then you can send me a photo so if I ever see you getting raped or beaten I will know not to assist you because you won't need it
BTW I will step in and assist a man if he is getting beat up too. You see I will get involved if someone is being hurt even if I don't know them
it's my duty as an american to aggressively resist those that would defile the 1st amendment by imposing their unwanted and warped religious values on others.
Did I mention I was a fairly good plumber...
So you think that you can restrict my freedom of speech and my freedom of expression and my freedom of religion because you don't like it? That is about the most unamerican comment I ever seen. Your comment defiles the First Amendment more than anything else ever said
Let's clear this up. There is absolutely nothing wrong with helping a fellow traveler along the way. Indeed, it is normal to do so, because our bodies are not designed to take 'all the stresses and strains' that this world can one day present to us. So do be kind. A girl or woman, man or boy, can defend themselves for the most part and where someone needs to come alongside we let them do so and thank them for extending grace.
Now then, what I hear Sandy really saying regarding abortion and the birthing of a child is it falls within her, a girl's or woman's purview and prerogative to determine the course of a pregnancy or life-long adjustments when she is standing at its 'threshold.' She can either invite the child in or with regret close the door in its face. It is not an easy decision for any girl or woman.
Nobody is trying to restrict your freedom of speech or expression! You're throwing words around like they are facts and that's simply not true. I see most here using logic and reason and you're running around tearing your hair out because you've fallen victim to emotion instead of reason
Not true according to who you? Those that "think" like you? Are you going to try and tell me that a baby in the womb is not a human being in a developmental stage or are you going to try to tell me it is nothing more than a parasite like a tapeworm or liver fluke?
IMO there is nothing logical or reasonable in someone wanting to destroy a healthy human life just because it is in an early stage of development and is just not convenient to allow to live. It is not logical or reasonable to think a man who does not have the required parts can be pregnant. It is not logical or reasonable to think that a person born as one sex or gender can become the opposite. It is not logical or reasonable to think that sex between two people of the same sex is normal and what nature intended.
So desperate for attention.
[ deleted ]
Many years ago, my brother-in-law bought me a knick-knack of a cowgirl figurine that said, "I have a pistol, a shotgun, and a shovel. I don't think you'll be missed."
This discussion is getting costly for me.
I just found another sign that I must have on my desk in the near future. I wished I would have had it when I worked in corporate world at Wally World.
Horse Poster, Horse Riding, Beware, I Ride Horses, I Use Pitchforks, I Haul H... | eBay
Now who's trying to suppress freedom of expression?
That opinion of yours is based strictly on emotion because of a belief you have. Not facts. Beliefs. Beliefs require an act of faith. Facts stand on their own. It's not a human but it is a parasite until it reaches full development and then is passed through a birth canal. And for the 18+ years it sits on your couch, hides your remotes and eats all your groceries. Still a parasite. But those of us who chose to give birth to these darling little parasites we don't have regrets, well most of us. We're glad we had children because we can appreciate them more once they've developed beyond the parasite stage.
I, however, don't insist that all women try it. It's not for everybody. It's definitely not for the weak minded
And yet, oh man that you are, none of these 'situationals' did you ever find yourself in in your youth, mid-life, or dare I say old age. You can only speak academically about people who are telling you more or less about real-world, "this is what happens when—" circumstances.
Do remember this: You SAY you want to protect the vulnerable. Then do it! For how can you protect fetuses you can not see; but ignore, disregard, and abuse-yes abuse persons which you every bit see 'daily.'?
[deleted]
You really are dense, aren't you? Ever have teenagers taking up your oxygen and eating your groceries while contributing nothing? That's the definition of a parasite. A lovable parasite, but still a parasite.
Of course I wouldn't kill a 17 year old kid because I jokingly call him a parasite. I think you need to take your sense of humor outside and feed it some sunshine
I could say the same to you but I know you wony
The previously settle law and supreme court precedent for nearly half a century essentially granted 'personhood' as viability, when the fetus (parasite) could survive outside the womb without need for the woman's body.
Clearly a 17 year old would be eligible for all the other rights to privacy and bodily autonomy that the constitution guarantees American citizens even if they are sleeping on your couch and eating all your food. However, the parent of that kid who is 18+ as Trout pointed out, who is still living like a parasite, can be kicked out by that parent. The parents no longer have any legal responsibility to care for that human.
Legally, what happens to them from then on is their choice and their problem, if they want to live on the street, that's their choice.
And from the moment of egg fertilization to viability should only be the woman's choice to continue or terminate the pregnancy, the woman's decision that she makes between her and her doctor, not some rabid dipshit religious conservative trying to force their religious morality on the woman.
Taking away a woman's choice, privacy and rights simply because some religious dipshits believe their God has given them the right to force themselves and their religious morality on others is unacceptable and unconstitutional no matter how many contortions of the establishment clause some deluded and deranged believers twist themselves into.
It's clear that most religious believers disregard the establishment clause and don't actually give a fuck about the constitution, their religious beliefs have always come first which is why they are such an extreme danger to the constitutional Republic our founders created. They selectively read it picking out the laws they like (freedom of religion) and abandon the ones that limit their power (establishment clause) or that don't recognize their chosen deity as Lord and Master of the Universe.
She still has a choice. If she doesn't want to become a mother she has the same choice a man has if he doesn't want to be a father. Either take the chance and have sex anyway, make sure all precautions for not becoming pregnant are taken or refrain from havi no g sex at all.
There is no such thing as a right to privacy.. if you think there is prove it.
What rights are taken away from her.
You mean how you like to ignore the free expression clause
you want people to live like monks and nuns?
I hear that monks and nuns know how to party
Nope but everytime I mention that men don't have the option to not be a father the answer I always get is that he can just not have sex
Most of the best wineries and breweries in Europe were run by monks
Is a bowl of pancake batter a pancake?
Is a pile of lumber a four star hotel?
Without the belief that some invisible 'soul' has been created when the egg is fertilized (which clearly has never been proven, there is more evidence of Sasquatch than there is of a 'soul'), and no evidence anything during the cell growth period up until viability is remembered as conscious thought of existence, then is a fertilized egg, zygote or fetus really a human being capable of self awareness?
And you are welcome to your religiously informed opinion. But just because you don't see the logic in a woman deciding this isn't the time in her life to have and raise a child shouldn't mean your opinion is more important than hers. Of course when you proclaim that it's not your opinion but some supposed God's opinion that you're just humbly relaying to other humans, and logical humans can only respond by telling your brand of unproven God to fuck off. We are not a theocracy, your Gods opinion is worth less than a wet used piece of toilet paper. You can worship 'it' all you want, but you do not have the right to force your beliefs on others, at least not in America.
Ha! I used to ride a bit, but it's been forever. But yeah, stepped on, kicked, thrown, and one barn sour horse tried to buck every damned time we had him out. I will say, no horse ever tried to bite me. I was about 13 at the time. If I could handle a horse then, I can handle a jackass now.
I also played baseball, softball, and golf. If I have either a baseball bat or a golf club handy, I'm not scared of much besides a gun.
a lob wedge or a louisville slugger to any skull would definitely do the trick. personally I prefer an aluminum bat because I find the ping sound it makes very amusing.
I prefer my cast iron skillet.
"Nope but everytime I mention that men don't have the option to not be a father the answer I always get is that he can just not have sex"
I would not say that. Not a good argument by whoever said that
There are things that just don't work
I was taught that the 'soul' was given to the newborn only when it takes it first breath of life. Not before.
The Creator is not as big a fool as some of His children childishly believe Him to be.
What size?
Are you kidding me? A horse good with a sword? STELLAR?!
I've been thrown and knocked unconscious. I've been thrown and had the horse land beside me (within inches). Luckily, he twisted away from me to regain his feet.
Other than the time I was knocked unconscious, I gathered my reins and put my foot in the stirrup, settled in the saddle, and rode on.
Definitely.
I have a 10 and 13 inch. Love my skillets.
I love my skillets, too. All of my cast iron is Lodge. I have two 10" Buffalo Nickel, one 10" chef skillet, two 12" skillets, one 8" baking skillet, the 8" duck skillet and the 10" griddle.
It didn't seem like that much until I listed them. It seems I have acquired a well-stocked armory over the last two decades.
I am lucky to have a few iron skillets that are very old. My largest iron skillets are 10 inches. They are literally smooth as glass. They are mostly Griswolds. But when I don't feel like worrying about doing the dishes until the next morning I rely on a stainless steel.
I have a 13 in. cast iron skillet that once belonged to my Paternal Great-Grandmother. I love cooking special items with it, and it is the best for cooking Fry Bread. It holds the heat well and evenly, so all the Fry Bread browns the same. I also use it to back my pineapple upside down cake as well. Corn fritters cook up great too.
I actually forgot about this huge 14" skillet I bought at a flea market. It weighs so much I rarely use it. But once you get it warmed up enough it does a great job with batches of pancakes or to give steaks plenty of room. It's a pain to clean because it barely fits in the sink and has so much mass to it. But it's worth it.
They certainly don't make them like they used to.
Unfortunately, that is true. I bought a small cast iron skillet just for small items as I live alone, so it is just me and my Yoda Girl kitty. And it does not cook near as well as the much older one.
Mine are Lodge. I also have a Lodge cast iron Dutch Oven. The lid for that could take someone out. With your list I am thinking I need MORE.
In my 10 inch skillet I made the PERFECT pineapple upside down cake. First time I have ever gotten a perfect one.
I agree. I don't believe there is ever too much cast iron cookware. Well, unless your cabinets are full. I usually store the 12" skillets in the oven. It's extremely handy, and I don't have to get on my knees to dig them out of my lower cabinets.
Congrats on the PERFECT pineapple upside down cake. I have only baked cornbread in my cast iron. Cast iron and bacon grease = perfect cornbread for me.
I have a pull out drawer in my cupboard. I love it. Pull it out & there are the skillets.
I've seen Griswolds in flea markets. I am sure Griswolds are wonderful skillets, but out of my price range.
My splurge item is Fiestaware. I've bought most of it on very good sale prices. I've got far more than I need, but it is so difficult to part with. The only time I consider it is when I do a yearly cleaning of the cabinets where I store kitchen items that are rarely used. The only purpose most of it serves is to remind me that I have far more than I use and should not be buying more stuff even if it is 90% off with a rebate offer!
Wow. I bet everything cooked in it is special. It has a history of being used by your family to cook for their loved ones.
My mystic side believes that the treasures we have in our lives are our loved ones. The priceless possessions are those that remind us of our loved ones after they have walked on.
I hit Flea Markets, household sales and antique shops for Miss Priss stuff.
I have the teapot from my grandmother, creamer my sister found and cookie jar my sister found.
Very true. to me, it is priceless. I barely knew her, and why she left that skillet to me I don't know. But, whatever her reason, I treasure it very much.
When have I ever brought God into this discussion? The opinions I have expressed are mine.
If a woman is adult enough to have sex she should be responsible enough to accept the consequences of her actions. One of the consequences of having sex is the possibility of becoming pregnant and either raising a child or giving the baby up for adoption. She can either use contraceptives mostly but not completely effective or she can abstain from sex 109% effective until she feels she is ready.
IMHO His opinion it still worth infinitely mor than yours.
Yet you think you have the right to force your beliefs on others.
Answer something for me. Out of the some 63,000,000 abortions performed since the 70's how many of those babies would have become another. Albert Einstein, Steven Hawkins, Maya Angelou, Carl Sagan Gandhi, Mandela, Abraham Lincoln, Jonas Salk etc? How many positive things will not be found because they baby that would have become the adult that invented or discovered them was aborted. Could cancer have been cured , blindness or paralysis been reversed? Maybe a way to prevent hunger and disease found. I guess we will never know because some woman didn't want her bikini line ruined.
How many could have been Jim Jones, Charles Manson, Jeff Dahmer, Gary Ridgeway,
Ted Bundy, Berkowitz, Hitler, Stalin. Murders and maniacs all.
How about the mental health of a young single mom who wants to only bring a childd into the world when she and her family can afford the child and be the parents possible and protect the mental health and well being of the child.
Pro lifers tend to forget the child once they are born. That's not what a loving God would demand from us.
That's nonsense. You cannot cite an single example to support your false assertion.
Considering the abuse and neglect to which an unwanted child would be subjected, Dahmer is more likely than Salk.
@14.3.2
Yes, they needed something to keep busy.
That was in response to another's comment and my comment had nothing to do with abortion.
You asked a question. I answered it.
It was a cash cow for the Church. Big business.
3.3.105
You declared every baby is the result of the Creator (God).
You are welcome.
Again, let's point out the inconsistency in the pro-life conservative's argument. There are unabridged rights to own guns. Guns (of a stripes they describe) are tools used for defense and protection. Abortion is abridged by the same conservative mindset because they do not want to see it flourish unabridged. Therefore they will not allow it entry into the constitution through the normal steps to amend the Constitution. (It is conservatives who will not 'take abortion off the politics 'table.') Science has proven that abortion is a tool that can control the population growth-limit or maximize it-and not allow an unwieldy surplus in people intruding and stumbling and bumbling over each other and handicapping freedoms and liberties.
Then conservatives argue that there is no right to privacy, but demand a door to the front of their apartments, homes, and require a writ for the seizure of individual property. It's inconsistent. It all indulgent "smoke and mirrors." If there is no privacy for girls and women; then there is no privacy for boys and men!
Now then, how far are we planning to take consistency across the 'expanse' to get it right on all accounts?
We (anyone on Newstalkers who has family heirloom skillets and presumably their parents recipes kicking around) should get a Newstalkers group going for publishing family recipes.
I just happened to spend the week going through some of my mother's old recipe scrapbooks that had been sitting in storage for a decade. I scanned them all and intend to cook from them, but I have no place else to share them.
Why not here?
I'm not familiar with those.
The Griswold 10 inch skillets I have are from my mother. They were probably from the household she grew up in and nearly a hundred years old. There are times I would like a larger iron skillet with those retro characteristics and I peruse eBay for vintage ones or Field Skillets for a modern one but I kind of stick with what I have.
I once ended up buying a 14 inch iron skillet at a flea market in a parking lot. It is every bit as smooth as a Griswold. You just never know what you will find in a yard sale or thrift shop.
Fiesta is not cast iron although it does include bakeware.
Ask, and ye shall receive:
Most of the dish decisions are up to my wife.
But I have grandmothered in some nice ironware.
I also have about three banker boxes filled with Hummel.
I think I would prefer if it were Fiestaware.
The part where you insist such a decision should be made 'after one becomes an adult'.
Um, zygotes cause entopic pregnancies.
Except a willing host.
That is kind of tough shut on the "host" isn't it?
Wrong again. Zygotes stage of development only last three or four days. It is after that time period that the cells that become the baby are attached.
A zygote is a fertilized egg. Do the math.
Could you word that question cogently please?
When was I wrong the first time?
An entopic pregnancy occurs about 90% of the time WITHIN the fallopian tubes where the egg is still a zygote. After about 6 days the blastocyst implants into the uterine wall. If you're going to make claims, educate yourself.
Just about every time you have commented.
It is ectopic not ectopic and the zygote is normally not the cause.
I think you should take your own advice.
What is a fertilized egg called? Answer: zygote.
Block quote one. I'll wait.
You can see that there is NO DIFFERENCES in those words, right? Contrarianism seems to be your top priority on this issue.
Prove it.
My comment is sufficient evidence to prove that I already have. You haven't refuted a word of it. Please proceed.
I guess you forgot to read the last quote in my comment huh.
All your comment does is prove you can't spell and don't really know what you are talking about.
Only for about three to four days. In any case it is still a developmental stage of a human being assuming we are still talking about the same thing.
You are dodging the point. The point was that it is a zygote that implants to form an ectopic pregnancy. The zygote is the cause and that is in direct refutation of your claim:
When you are wrong, it is intellectually dishonest to play games in an attempt to make it seem otherwise.
Further: " Symptoms of an ectopic pregnancy usually develop between the 4th and 12th weeks of pregnancy. " So do you deny women the right to have an ectopic pregnancy aborted if this is discovered in the 12th week?
That is both petty and ridiculous. It was obvious what Dulay meant and, importantly, it is obvious that of the two, you are the one who needs to do better research.
Did you miss this part or did you just ignore it because it did not fit your narrative.
I have had comments that was obvious what I meant dispite a typo but have had liberals question or feign not understanding it. Does that only work one way for you?
So what? What is a zygote? It is the begining stage of development of a human being at least in the cases we are discussing.
More slimy tactics; the point was that a zygote causes an ectopic pregnancy. Without a zygote, there is no pregnancy. Put the goal posts back to where you first placed them.
[deleted]
I do not care about your lifetime experiences on social media forums. My comment was about your pettiness. Now you attempt to argue the Pee Wee Hermanesque "they did it first".
Nobody appreciates someone getting petty about an obvious spelling error or mistype.
You made a claim and Dulay showed you were wrong. No amount of cheap tactics will change that.
It is a slimy tactic to provide a quote from a major medical institution?(The quote I made is from the Mayo clinic
It is a slimy tactic to move the goalposts (and it is also a slimy tactic to engage in faux obtuseness).
Ironic coming from someone who posts from a cell phone and openly eschews spelling
and punctuation.
Actually he did not. He may have given his opinion but then that isn't really proof is it? It it cheap tactic to quote the Mayo Clinic. To tell me who he quoted?
So it is OK with you for liberals to be petty but no one else.
[deleted]
Removed for context
Just stop with the stupid games. My comments do not even slightly hint anything like that.
Making a big deal about spelling errors is a slimy tactic regardless of the ideology or partisan views of the claimer.
Good grief, why wallow in such pointless, simplistic discourse?
[deleted]
So someone that is clearly bias calling others bias....
I have never claimed that I wasn't biased but there are those here on NT that are biased while proclaiming that they are even handed.
[deleted]
And there are people that will attack someone because they just want to piss people off...
Not to mention that having a kid upends ANYTHING you may have had planned for your life.
[deleted]
Then how do you explain whole families where all their kids were unplanned accidents? We all know plenty of those...
I think most of us born before the 70's were unplanned accidents
I used to work with a woman who had around five children, ALL ON BIRTH CONTROL.
What a nightmare!
I think she had the implant in her arm. Needless to say, NO METHOD OF BIRTH CONTROL IS FOOLPROOF, 100%
and that is why we need to have backups.
none of my kids were planned, at least not by me anyway...
I think some of us were planned accidents.
I was born five days before my parents' first wedding anniversary. That was in the early 50's. I don't think there was anything unplanned or accidental about it.
My younger brother was a "pleasant surprise". He was planned, but not quite so soon. Mom's doctor told her she wouldn't conceive for a year after stopping the Pill. He was wrong.
Heehee... my oldest brother was born 9 months after my parents were married in 1955. My mother was not thrilled. Not how she expected her first year of marriage to go.
Mom and Dad wanted to have another baby 3 years after I was born. The doctor told Mom that she needed to go off the Pill a year before she planned to conceive, because it would take that long for her to start ovulating again. My brother is a year and 10 months younger than me. So she likely conceived after she was off the Pill for 1 or 2 months.
Fertile Myrtle. No wonder her own mother had 13 kids. Our eggs can't be repressed.
6 for my mother (a woman that never liked children). It was 1955, 1956, 1957, 1959, 1962, and 1965. And who knows how many miscarriage in between.
It didn't take me long to get pregnant after I went off the piill...maybe 3 months?
Me, neither. But I think the doses of hormones in the Pill were larger in the 70s, and did usually suppress ovulation for a while after they were discontinued. You and I probably used a much lower dose that allowed the ovaries to function again sooner.
Abstinence works 100% of the time
You've already said it doesn't.
Those were your words. You contradict yourself.
but that ain't no fun!
Abstinence goes against the powerful force of biology — our sexuality. That is the fatal flaw of the abstinence ‘solution’.
So? Not everything is fun or has to be.
And sobriety goes against somep people desire for feeling good yet many do it
And that power force is there to produce the next generation. It is not to destroy much if it for convenience sake.
Not a good comparison. The biological sex drive is better compared to hunger or the need to sleep. It is something that is intrinsic to our nature and is arduous if not impossible for most people to resist. In contrast, the vast majority of the population can moderate their alcohol usage.
Bottom line, abstinence fails because it takes too much effort to sustain it.
Why not have fun, enjoy and be happy?
The reproductive process is profoundly wasteful. Not every cell or sperm is sacred. Fertilized eggs fail. Fetus development fails.
The sex drive is why we reproduce, it is not a mandate that we attempt to turn every encounter into another human being.
What about overpopulation? Overpopulation is going to prove to be very inconvenient.
I never said it was but when a baby is conceived it is alive and it it human and has the right to live. If you don't want a baby either use the available protections or don't have sex until you are ready.
Don't bring up that contraception is not foolproof and fails. There were not 63million plus failures since the 70's.
what an uninformed and perpetually celibate comment.
Why is an unwanted fetus of importance? There are plenty of ones that people want and will take good care of
Underpopulation is a much, much greater risk to our wellbeing. We either have to birth more Americans, or import them.
If you ever want to laugh at experts, go read the population bomb predictions from a few decades ago and then compare it to reality.
Why is an unwanted fetus of importanc
some people value human life. Others obviously don’t. It’s a pretty simple concept.
Trump is on record saying we need more immigrants from Norway. I wonder why.
At conception you have a fertilized egg (a zygote) that is not even attached to the uterus (at which point it becomes a blastocyst). A zygote, and all further development, is a form of human life but it is not even an embryo, much less a fetus, much less a viable fetus, much less a born child (a baby).
Calling a zygote a baby is emotional, not factual.
And when a 10 year old is raped, how does that fit into your edict?
Actually, it isn't. This is derived from what you believe is human life. Not all of us share your belief.
It’s quite simple and quite logical. Because they are educated and have skills that would benefit the US and wouldn’t be a burden to US taxpayers. It’s amazing how some pretend to care so much about the poor yet support policies that hurt those same people.
Trump's comment on Norway was a dog whistle to his racist base. Get a clue.
[deleted]
By what logic are Norwegians political or economic refugees?
I agree. A fully developed, living, breathing human woman has enormous value.
The right doesn't want immigration, legal or otherwise. But the right is working on the "birth more" part (which you weren't supposed to say out loud).
When we needed immigrants, James J Hill owner of the Great Northern Railroad brought many Norwegians to settle and farm along his railroad. It was a very profitable move for him.
That is not what I asked or true of immigrant refugees today.
he right doesn't want immigration, legal or otherwis
Well that's just silly. While the "right" is not a monolith, there are very few zero immigrationists. Most want controlled legal immigration, not the unregulated, unlimited shitshow democrats prefer. .
on the "birth more" part (which you weren't supposed to say out loud).
It's not a secret. It's simple economics. Our entire economy is premised on a pyramid shaped population. Guess what happens when there are too many old people and not enough workers?
No shit. Imagine thinking that rebuts anything I wrote.
Sure, you can believe in whatever magic you want. It's really irrelevant to the point.
It's amazing how many times this has to be explained. People oppose abortion because they don't want to destroy innocent human live for convenience.
You'd think that's been explained enough, but it has to be repeated over and over again.
It wasn't a rebuttal, it was complimentary to your post. smile.
Guess what happens when there are too many people?
And there it is.
What happens is immigration. Women will not be forced to be breeders. You can be sure.
Charger, it is because the pro-life has constructed a 'world' in the womb where there is a so-called right to life.
However, to show you have selective pro-lifers can be with and in the womb. . . a right to conception does not follow up with a right to citizenship in this country. Why?
Because in keeping with the founders originalism, which conservative work to impress upon themselves and others, constitutionally, "born" traditionally means alive outside of the womb.
To allow conceived fetus citizenship would grant every documented fetus-every egg fertilized while in this country- to domestic or foreign couples, A RIGHT TO BE A CITIZEN. Now, we know conservatives will never tolerate that to occur! (Remember how when Chinese girls and women were found to be coming here to give birth for citizen rights and conservatives were highly upset and sought desperately to end the process. Those babies were not flavored for citizenship by conservatives.)
Understanding this, we can see that the conservatives are simply being sanctimonious and less than genuine in their dealing with girls and women. It is simply a winding rhetorical narrative and set of talking points to get what they want while lacking consistency and honesty about it.
Excellent point, CB!
The only immigrants the so-called "conservatives" want are "Norwegians", i.e., white Christians.
and she should be able to live her life and make her choices.
Irony. And yet, Ashli Babbitt is gone and barely a gripe or grimace in public over the guilty party who deceived her into giving up her very present life over a big funky lie. One Donald Trump is still telling today. Just how many people are still delusional and in league with Donald's lie? His staff did not believe it and they know/knew hims best!
You resent the "right" being represented as a monolith, but then represent the Democrats as a monolith.
Very few Dems or those on the left prefer an "unregulated, unlimited shitshow" when it comes to immigration.
"That is not what I asked or true of immigrant refugees today."
If we have to have immigrants, why take the worst? Pro Football teams want to get better so they draft the best players, who can help the team.
Then what is it? It has human DNA, that is the blue print for a human. deleted
Like rape and incest? If so, then I agree. Furthermore, no female should experience either.
Unfortunately, there are politicians who are campaigning on the rights of the rapists, pedophiles and other assorted scum to reproduce via sexual violence.
You mean like killing hundreds of thousands/millions of women and children via war and/or starving them to death via economic sanctions and just calling those deaths "collateral damage"?
A sperm has human DNA.
Do you object to flushing a zygote (a fertilized egg —a single cell— that is still floating unattached to the uterus) to avoid an unwanted pregnancy (e.g. the result of a rape)?
The following video does not even do justice to the trauma experienced by rape victims or being forced to give birth to an unwanted child, but does an outstanding job of showing the forced birthers complete lack of empathy for others.
There are hundreds of thousands of women who report being raped each year in the US.
It is horrendous enough to live with the memory, but to have to have a living, breathing replica of the rapist for the rest of their lives is sadistic.
Has US society lost all compassion for women, or is it just a small minority of zealots who have gained enough power to mirror our government to that of an oppressive Middle Eastern country?
and
Every cell in your body has human DNA. That does not define personhood.
Well, that was nice and personal. For the record, I never had an abortion, so sorry I have no reason to ease my conscience, nor would I, if I had to have one and it was done in a timely manner, or for my health. If I truly felt I was killing something, I would never do that. But hey, you just basically called me a murderer. I'm not cool with that. That was a pretty disgusting and personal comment.
“It has human DNA”
So every single time you whack off and wipe up your discharge…should you be charged with murder, manslaughter, or reckless indifference?
Same for every woman who has a period - that poor egg, doomed to be thrown away with a pad or tampon. The humanity!
Nope. There is no human cells there. There is only half of what is needed to make one. Do take a biology class
Never said you did but the use of the word you in the English language dies not always mean you personally.
By calling an un born baby anything but human and a baby does make it easier for people to allow it to be killed without feeling guilty about it by being an accomplice
So ejaculatory emissions meet a fertile egg and abracadabra…a human being?
Perhaps you are in need of a biology class.
But not every cell in your body can developed to a full blown human being
And in some parts of this world, cutting off a dog's head instantly transforms what is left into a new term: MEAT. All meat-eaters understand the significance of the statement. Life is taken and transformed all around us everywhere and throughout the existence of our planet. Indeed, millions of living things will be *snap* dead by the time I finish this comment!
What is your point?
MAGA conservatives talk long about denials of feelings and acceptance of reason. You are attempting to overstate and exploit the humanity of a fetus in the womb over and beyond any life after departing the womb considerations.
You can't have it both way, arkpdx! The women here (and few of us men) will not allow you to deny what happens after the womb, while you are laboring to guilt-trip and compel girls and women to emote.
On a different note, I am pretty sure you do not want girls and women to start talking about what goes on in your underwear front or back, so why are you so comfortable highlighting what should be the proper care and 'training' of uteruses to girls and women?
Is that so? They are cells, according to biology. Are they dolphin cells? Pine tree cells?
That's the first time that I have seen this argument used. Observing the animal slaughtering for human food is an argument for Pro Choice. You should win the Most Original Argument Award.
You use the word MAGA as if it is dirty. Why do you not want America to be great. Why is America being mediocre good enough for you?
MAGA is an abbreviation for Moronic Autocratic Gasbag Asshole, referring to your Dear Leader Drumpf, who wants to destroy America, not make it better.
Well arkpdx, I guess defining "great" will depend if you mean the gilded age in America (yeah "H" no!), the "camelot" years of the productive 60's, or the percussive and steady progression years of the 90's? Which or do you have something other in mind? Please be clear.
You directed your comment to me. If you didn't mean me, you could have said, "for people not to..." but you didn't.
The operative word here is can. Abortions done in the first 12 weeks are similar to when most miscarriages happen.
I'm sorry, but we're never going to see eye to eye. My upbringing and faith says that abortion is not wrong or a sin. If you don't want to do it because of your beliefs, then dictate that to your significant other. You trying to force your beliefs on others is no different than the Taliban. Do you approve of those methods?
This argument is neither unique or a stranger to this site.
Humans have been practicing animal husbandry for at least 15,000 years.
Perhaps CB's point was that selective breeding is not just reserved for domesticated
animals that ' we humans ' control for food.
Selective breeding and the choice to reproduce
when the circumstances are best for a child's success
was and should be a right of all humans,
but women most particularly because they take
the preponderance of the physical, emotional and economic risk in childbirth.
Perhaps, selective breeding or eugenics is his argument.
I can't see how anyone can espouse the modern definition of eugenics, especially a black man or a Jew.
Maybe CB will explain.
3.4.67 arkpdx is missing the point that things in nature, for which humans are a part, are given significant identifiers as indicators of placements, states, and statuses. After this manner, "babies" are not aborted. And though some one has inserted "fetus" into a dictionary to mean-unborn fetus, a baby is the unique state of being born.
For example: "A baby was born at. . . ." Not this: "A fetus was born. . . . Or, "I'm having a baby. . . . " Not this: "I'm having a fetus. . . ."
At some point and time, we approximate verbiage for effect or clarification on position, state, or statuses: For example: Some people take possession of an increase in age by 'owning' the approaching birth date. Or, celebrating a birth day for an entire month!
Finally, my point to arkpdx is this: Using criminalizing language (murder, kill, -baby) to a process that is scientifically sound and properly named, that is "abortion" is to skew the discussion of abortion onto paths for which it should not go. I point this out, by stating that consumable flesh products are called "meat" once "decapitated" because the word meat is more palatable - it better indicates the state of the animal.
Abortion is not murder. And, a fetus is not killed. Because those turns have legal meaning under the law. We can know this, because the state now is some states are actually criminalizing abortion in its entirety using this specific terminology, whereas for fifty years or more, the same was not the case. Subsequently, abortion as murder is a social construct put in place by the dictates of some men and women-not all.
Eugenics or selective breeding? Neither crossed by mind.
What did cross your mind with your slaughtered dog analogy?
I think that you live in California. Feticide is the act of killing a fetus. Under California Penal Code Section 187(a), murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a human being or fetus by another human being with malice aforethought. Are you against this law?
I'm against discussion with you. Just keep demonstrating how rules or requests don't apply to you. As to your question: It is a decent one. However, there is too much bullshit between us to even try to be decent right now. Unfortunately, I pass on this 'opportunity.'
Ok.
"some people value human life. Others obviously don’t. It’s a pretty simple concept."
If it is not valued or wanted, then why do others, who are not involved, want to force someone else to have it? Seems to be a pretty simple concept
Proof positive that he is, at best a fricking moron.
100% proof!
Where's the benefit of a 10 year old child having a baby?
It is comparable to a 10 year old boy being told he is 'bout' to be dad at ten years old. And he can start looking forward to Father's Day at 11! How any grown ass man can fix his lips to say such idiocy is beyond me!
So, girls and women, you have these buffoons who have you all and your daughters in their sights. Oh, and yes, they are coming for me and mine, and every other liberal-progressive concept on the planet! So we got to pull together now!
I don't think either the 10 year old mother or the child she is forced to carry are going to be in best position for a successful, normal, healthy and happy life if either survive this unfortunate condition.
We will never know will we.
Actually, the facts are quite clear.
Why 10-Year-Olds Shouldn't Give Birth | Pregnancy & Health | Live Science
The number of little girls needing Cesarian sections will be skyrocketing.
I can answer, neither will be better off. They will both be fucked. If the 10 year old and baby survive... have you seen 10 years olds? How in the fuck would you trust them to raise a child in any way shape or form? No, her parents get to do that, and I am sure they are soooo looking forward to doing that again. And the "father" lol, he is either a rapist and will be in prison or is so young he is as useless as the "mother".
This entire situation is a sick joke TBH. But, at the end of the day, you will have a girl who is barely older than her child, legally responsible for that child but her life has been so fucked up that her future has been reduced to working 3 part time jobs to afford a shed.
But 'we will never know will we'?
When it comes down to it, it doesn't matter if the rape victim is 10 or 40. No woman should be forced to carry the child of her rapist.
Believe it or not I don't disagree. I would put restrictions on them for adults though. The rape must have been reported to the authorities and a rape kit performed. None of this bullshit coming in months after to report a supposed rape just to get an abortion
That is narrow-minded. It is you sitting in judgement of other people not like yourself. It is you outlawing a step in a process or an entire procedure, simply because it offends you. Not for any other reason external to yourself. It's you wanting others to use their freedoms in this country in a manner more suitable to your 'taste.' What it condenses down to is this: You see evasion or some child or adult or even group trying to 'buck' your authority over them and so you judge that you have to batten down all the avenues of what you perceive as that 'one' getting away.
Why? Do you feel this country is only here to bear witness to conservative worldview? That's narrow-minded by definition.
I don't see that as necessarily so. Some folks look for a balance between the rights of a pregnant woman and a desire to protect the health of a fetus.
Assuming that all people that want some constraints on abortion feel that way is narrow-minded of you.
150 years ago, some slave owners carried a sign saying "My property, my choice”. Abolitionists weren't persuaded.
Why? Do you think it would be Ok for a woman to have sex and get pregnant and wait months to report the rape because she broke up with the babies father and no longer wants the baby?
Why do you feel this country is only here to bear witness to the liberal worldview?
The first and most important right a human has is the right to life. abortion takes that right away from the unborn developing human. Why do you think it is OK to deny the babies right to life just because it is an inconvenience?
No, they didn't.
Always the literalist.
First question: Are you a woman? Or a man? Because why would you ask a man that? Of course, I am not okay with that. And what does this 'thought' have to do with what we were discussing?
Second. I have explained to you that it is conservatives who are placing limitations and restrictions on liberties simply because they don't like what liberals do. That is not what liberals are doing to conservatives. Stop pretending to be outraged about a loss of liberties, because you lose nothing when liberals enjoy the same or more liberties than you want for yourselves. Conservatives, you placed borders around your 'joy' in this life. Stop pretending and demonizing others for not wanting to live like you do.
Exactly, all of the rules, regulations and laws the restrict people are the results of conservatives.
Where does that thought come from?
So liberals did not boycott Chic-Fil- A and try to close it down because the owner did something they did not like?
Liberals did not continually try to get Rush Limbaugh (RIP) taken off the air
Liberals never attacked people that wore MAGA hats
Liberals would not like FOX news taken off the air.
I guess "Sweet Cakes By Melissa" was never prosecuted and fined and us still in business.
Liberals never protested and rioted to keep conservatives from speaking
The needs, wants and convenience of the real is more important than that of the potential,
Without the right to life all other right or want or needs or conveniences are irrelavent. Àn unborn baby us alive and ut it is a human being. There is nothing potential about it
That is your opinion; but, it should not be law
MAGA reserves the right to exist in public pushing policies and practices directly to limit and control the actions of liberals. Liberals are absolutely correct to defend their beliefs about themselves from direct, deliberate, and blatant attack.
There are rights and wrongs in this world. That you somehow think it appropriate and agreeable that you should push back against liberal rights and privileges as some academic activity and whataboutism is nonsense. In any given situation right is on one side of the spectrum with a middle ground in-between it and what is wrong.
A liberal would have sold a conservative a damn cake as long as doing so did not violate a standing law. After all, isn't it conservatives who hard at work trying to whip laws in and out of existence as 'corrals' to liberal policy-decisions? Stop with the nonsense. Serve the damn cakes and only complain if the 'dollars and cents" don't add up.
Liberals expand liberties as a process of necessity and societal progress. Conservatives simply do not! MAGA stands on the "old guard" - as its raison de etre.
Liberals need certain enterprises in the conservative spectrum ("My Pillow Guy" comes to mind and as in the case of Shell Oil and Apartheid regime in Africa) to stop dressing themselves in sanctimonious garb and setting out on crusades to end liberal rights and privileges. To that end, yes, liberals organize to defend themselves. Protest and boycott are legitimate methods to end bad and dangerous societal attacks upon civil rights.
We will not and should not apologize for that.
Are you clear on what the terms, "unborn" mean as an opposite of "born."
Put the two terms on a spectrum: unborn >>>>>>>>>>>>>born.
Now at what point does the unborn becomes born?
Another way to look it at this (trivially): At what point in a process does dough become bread? Batter, a cake? Both become edibles?
Is everything binary to you?
Many seem to enjoy cookie dough Ice cream
PISS OFF.
[deleted]
Because harassing people who plainly ask you to refrain from purposely bothering them makes one appear pathological and cruel. You have already admitted that such pursuits pleasures you...
Piss off already!
A quick edit might spare you points. Do not satisfy him!
[deleted]
No, my point is your point is trolling CB into points!
Yes, I take amusement or pleasure where I find it. What do you do?
I do not take malignant pleasure in harassing the vulnerable...
There are too many people here that seem to consider disagreeing with them to be harassing them.
Are you fucking serious with that? You realize you are supporting slavery right?
? Me, vulnerable?
This is not harassment, this is disrespect. The difference being I have been nice, and I am not going to be so going forward. And with that I am done with Texan and Drinker of the Wry for the duration of my time here.
That’s a demeaning comment.
[deleted]
Demean This!
[deleted]
You did edited your comment. Let the trolls get the points!
They feel like they won if they taunt you into getting some...
I am sure they are both proud of your personal enforcement...
You guys complement each other. You are practically a team!
Thank you. You're right.
Huh?
About what?
And how often do you think that happens? I am certain the answer is almost never.
Some folks think they're so fucking hilarious.
This 10 year old girl was raped and 'Taliban' Bopp would have forced her and others like her to continue with this pregnancy (especially at 10 years of age)?
xtian taliban is more like it...
Would Jim Bopp be prepared to pay for all medical needs of this 10yo girl ? Would he be prepared to adopt the (obviously) unwanted baby ? Would he be prepared to nurture it through childhood, schooling, and ALL associated costs until it is an adult and able to fend for itself ?
If not, then Jim Bopp should keep his opinions to himself !!!
By the logic of Jim Bopp, general counsel for the National Right to Life, if instead of getting the 10 year old girl pregnant the attacker had caused injury requiring surgery it should be denied, that is just as mean and cold hearted
Bopp and the anti-choice crazies would argue otherwise because there is a pregnancy involved, but your point is well-taken.
There was one person testifying or something that actually said the ten year old getting rid of the pregnancy would not be an abortion...
It was utterly nonsensical and completely wrong.
Well this is the 3rd day in a row that the 'stellar' leadership of Indiana's GOP has been brought to the fore on this issue. We here in Indiana have had to deal with Boop for decades. He was the Vice-Chair of the Indiana RNC. The dude is a rabid RW extremist.
So, we have an undocumented immigrant raping a 10 year girl. And that 10 year girl became pregnant. And politicians are writing and enforcing laws as if this situation is normal?
Our politics has drifted into utter lunacy. Extreme situations are now dictating normal. Normal must now accommodate the extreme so we end up bouncing back and forth between extremes. IMO that shouldn't be surprising when lawyers are involved.
As terrible as is the rape of a 10 year old, an another alarming issue is the fact that she became pregnant. Have we dumped so much crap into our environment that puberty is happening sooner? How is a 10 year old girl becoming pregnant normal?
There's something else strange going on in this story. Did anybody else catch where the mother is defending the accused rapist and saying that everything they are saying about him is a lie? This has been so politicized that I don't know what the true story is.
I saw an article to that effect.
I frankly don't care if her egg donor is ok with this girl being raped. If egg donor wants, she can keep the rapist company in his cell.
Actually, it isn't abnormal.
Some folk mature, sexually, earlier than others.
Leave this kid alone!
Menstruation doesn't connote sexual maturity.
Clearly. Damned growth hormones.....but that's another discussion.
[deleted,] there is no definitive age that a girl/woman becomes fertile. There is a range, and yes, 10 years old is at the bottom of that range but still within it. Fucking educate yourself [deleted.]
There is going to be another left wing outrage when the illegal alien rapist is deported.
Manufacturing another straw man? You haven't learned from the last several times you've tried this bullshit tactic?
I would like to see the rapist buried under the prison. That's pretty much the only reason his deportation would bother me - he deserves far worse than deportation.
he'll be in a box if that ever happens, as will those that are so worried about it. bfd
Do you make up that shit on your own, or do you get your daily talking points from the propaganda department at the RNC?
No I don't make things up. I just observe the world and call 'em like I See 'em.
No, you call them as you want to see them.
So do other people, why is your personal opinion higher than those involved and having to live with the result?
What people here on NT have anymore interest in the goings on with the girl than I do? What makes their opinions any better than mine?
They're cogent.
Their opinions are not ignorant, Ill inform and wrongheaded...
Yes they are.
Personally I'll be fine with this rapist's corpse being deported
fuck that. save the postage. a few hours in the oven, then a short walk to the storm drain when it rains.
Damn! we liberals can be harsh at times.
Shoot him first then deport him. That is this liberals opinion.
But the domestic rapists are A OK, right?
[deleted]
You seem to know what all liberals are thinking. I would suggest you stop trying that because you are consistently wrong.
[delted]
And now that the whole world is getting clear that the United States is full of . . . 'it. . . we will be mocked as people who TRY to tell others how to live up to a high standard, while our own society is pulling itself apart at the seams. "Two Americas" - no civil rights for minorities, no freedom for girls and women, no protection from forced impregnations, objectification of girls and women, no marriage equality for LGBTQ, and -basically as far as MAGA is concerned everything in this country we talked up the world about over the past 50 years is a reverting to being a big, fat, hulking, stinking, LIE!
Ah-ha United States! You ain't "uNited" any more! The whole world sees you for what you are - no better at liberty and freedom than other country.
An illegal act, the rape of a young child, has happened and some want to make her life worse by forcing her to carry the product of a terrible criminal act done to her.
Those people are needlessly endangering and causing problems for this poor girl who has already suffer enough.
Forcing this is just mean and heartless and makes her suffer more
.
You have stated the case forcefully and correctly.
In addition to the circumstances described in this article, there are other significant detrimental effects on women's health resulting from anti-choice/anti-abortion fanaticism and the laws being passed by Republicans criminalizing abortion. I will probably post another article tomorrow regarding that topic.
Since you are seeding articles about why forced birth is wrong, I suggest you consider the following article (or one like it).
My mother was a woman that should have never had children. She hates them. She had six in ten years. The first three one year apart. I was the last. Every day I heard her say how much she hated kids... No BC at the time she had us and she could not deny her husband his rights according to the Church.
My daughter does not like children. She will never have any even though multiple people have told me time & time again she will change her mind. I have asked them if they have EVER asked a new mother if she will change her mind.
Not all women have the capacity to be mothers. It used to be they had no choice, then we gained some sense and BC was allowed and abortions were obtainable - now we move backwards and who will suffer - women and children, but I guess that is ok since men will have control again.
It is only the truly barbaric men, who lack any compassion for others, responsible for pretty much everything that is wrong in the world today.
These men's sole purpose in life is to acquire wealth and power over others. They need a steady supply of "others" to maintain their wealth, power and social status. In their world, it is up to women to supply their necessary minions.
These men are amoral (whether rich or poor, educated/uneducated). Religion is a tool they use to divide and conquer where possible. If religion won't work, then they will even go so far as to bastardize science.
As I have stated repeatedly for over a decade, this is ALL about the MONEY.
The US economy is based on an ever-increasing population to mindlessly work, to mindlessly consume and to mindlessly support/fight the endless wars (which seems to be the #1 business of the US government). The mental and physical well-being of the minions is NEVER a consideration of the MEN who are behind the crusade to expand US population via all avenues open to them at this time.
That is never more apparent than in those that wanted to deny this 10 yr old an abortion. Her life means nothing to them other than an incubator. It is appalling to me how her life is inconsequential to them so long as she pops out another serf....for in reality those children (mother & offspring) would not stand a chance of becoming anything other than the working poor.
Sounds like republicans/alleged conservatives/gop/gqp and not Democrats/Liberals/Progressives.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Fuck OFF!!!!
[deleted]
I have no idea why anyone wants open borders so you will have to ask the people who do. I believe that the solution is to make other countries' living conditions better because it is not logical to expect to move all of the impoverished people to the US. This is ridiculous. There is a legit reason that people will soon have to migrate and that is climate change - even people already in the US. We need leaders who are addressing the needs of people in this country balanced against the people in the world. People, living nearest the equator, will have to move in the coming decades. These people will have to be given priority when it comes to immigration if we are to be humane. It would be beneficial to be working on a plan on how to deal with forced world migration. Our leaders don't seem to be able to do anything but talk bullshit and wage war.
I do know it is not a left/right issue when it involves who makes money on having open borders.
I don't even see it as a left/right issue when it comes to compassion. I see open borders as a great way to divide the partisans along political lines to pretend that either major political party in the US gives a flying fuck about enforcing the existing immigration policy that has been law for decades? forever?
I on the other hand wanted children. I had six pregnancies.....4 miscarriages and 2 live births. The two children I had were my life. But, that life was short lived. Both of my children died early in life...my Son from a very rare form of cancer, and my Daughter from an brain tumor later on. But, the time I had them with me was the most wonderful time of my life.
However, I never look down on those who prefer not to have children. I am not anyone who has the right to tell anyone else what they should do when it comes to parenthood. If they don't wish to have children it is best not to have them than to have them and make their life miserable, and deny them the love and caring they need and deserve.
And certainly not under the circumstances this poor 10 y/o child was impregnated.
I'm so sorry about your children. So tragic. I'm glad you got joy from them in the short time you had with them
[deleted]
Thank you very much Giggles.
Much love my dear Raven.
I am sorry for what you have gone through. I lost one pregnancy between my daughter and son. You are a very strong person. I think I would be a puddle.
(((((Raven Wing)))))
Thank you Ender.
It is not my job or this countries job to make other countries living conditions better. As far as I am concerned, anyone that crosses the border illegally and without proper documentation is an invader and should be repelled as any invader should by using deadly force
Thank you, Veronica. I was very heartbroken at their loss, but, the Creator gave me the strength to go on. And I know they are waiting for me on the other side when the Creator decides it is my turn to move on to my own eternal journey.
Thank you mocowgirl.
I would agree if the US government didn't exploit workers and wage war in other countries to make other countries living conditions worse.
Other countries problems or conditions are not my concern. Other countries citizens are not my concern. If those people don't like the way things are in my their country then it is up to them to change things. They do not have the right to come here and fuck up my country.
Now if you could just feel the same way about pregnant women in the US, we might all get along better.
Pregnant women's problems or conditions are not your concern. If pregnant women don't like being pregnant, then it is up to them to change it. It is not your concern.
Impactful testimony, from a mom. Thank you. In my heart, I envision you experiencing all six losses and weighing it all against the 'sky' and what the odds mean against you. You did not share your two children ages or approximate ages so we could get a true sense of how much pride and joy you received during their lifetimes.
I am deeply touched by what you message. Deeply touched. Because you did not let your desire to have children for the long-term and 'long-haul' reject your sisters who opt out of the same. Where your comment touches me deepest is a place you might have read from me several accountings on NT.
In 2008, when same sex marriage was approved. As a homosexual Christian living a celibate life, I was remarkably identifying with religious conservatism. With the passage of the law I was justifiable 'startled' as I faced a choice of turning on the homosexual lifestyle of my past and speaking about them pejoratively as a conservative or continuing my journey as a Christian who would not deny his past. I chose to honor my past as my past and wish all those young men and women, boys and girls, the best that marriage could give them.
Finally this. Faced with the opening to denounce my past and deny my friends and lovers over those twenty years, I choose, present tense, not to do it but consider them foundational to my life. They made my life bearable.
Peace. And thank you for the privilege of knowing you better.
Maybe not but I feel that the life of the unborn that can not defend itself is my concern. I will defend it's life to the best of my abilities. I would also come to the defense of any woman about to be raped or beaten. I feel that as a man it is part of my job to defend the defenseless
Heaven help you if you ever are found 'needy' and standing at a borderline somewhere. Happens everyday somewhere on the planet.
So sad to hear about your difficulties and the much, much too early deaths of your son and daughter.
Your country? You nor I own a country. It is all a social construct that we abide by. BTW, you are a born 'foreigner' who came here by some means once and rather ruthlessly established another country on top of a people already inhabiting this very land you 'claim.' In truth, you and me, we're guest here who never left to go back home.
Frankly, Indians are nice not to remind you and me of our 'inhospitable' nature more often, so as MAGA people like you don't get it further twisted!
Why is it that what you feel should be anyone else's concern?
Why is it that you feel that you should come into the lives of women and fuck them up?
Not only do some men think they own a country, but they also really believe they own the women who live in said country.
Until a few years ago, I never knew how much the religious zealots in the US had in common with the religious zealots in Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia.
There is no reason to ever fight them over there until we defeat them over here.
And yet when you have the opportunity to show how big your heart is for the immigrant you can see and touch you bad mouth them as needy invaders coming to grab your stuff and take your, your, I repeat, your country and what they don't take fuck it up. The irony is you do not see how defenseless these people are standing at the border are. You see only 'zombies' and monsters, not the hapless, handicapped, and desperate souls forced to flee in droves from horrible places back home.
If you can't stand being a light sitting on a hill in the fog and darkness all around: Turn off the light for good! Stop 'broadcasting' to all the world how exceptional we are! Because as surely as we stop being kind to want others to come here and drop the pretense, the 'world' will turn and go elsewhere. Taking with it/them whatever turn of fortune comes from within them.
And we will be forgotten and UNEXCEPTIONAL and left to suffer what truly being alone means when the world no longer beats a path through this world to our door.
I didn't and I wasn't there when they got pregnant. Unless they were raped in which case that opens whole other can of worms and mixed emotions in me, the woman was an active and willing participant in the events leading to her pregnancy. She fucked herself up
Well, that is definitely a silver lining.
What a powerful statement! It is so interesting to me how I have changed in understanding (maturing) and am processing my belief system. I will confide in you that since Donald Trump and the Christian Right Alliance joining as one: I have not questioned by calling, my belief system, but I fight walking away (AKA running and hiding) from the faith because, well, all my life I have had a problem with fake, phony, plastic, shallow, abusive, and deceitful people. I have never liked them.
As a matter of principle I cut the aforementioned people out of my life.
The realization has hit me that the Christian Right is doing this on purpose. In fact, I recently read a spin on the biblical (good) King David that is revealing as it is well, revolting. It goes as such. (Christian pastor: Jeffries yes, Trump's Jeffries): 'David was a man's after God's own heart, and David killed all his enemies and took away men's scrotums as a bridal endowment, and that makes David, God's strongman.' And Jesus came through the line of David. (Paraphrased.)
And with such references to parallels in the Bible as this, Jeffries justified Trump and gave him his approval as his STRONGMAN in the United States.
Well, it goes without saying that this is true about David, but it is not where Christian emphasis should be directed. Instead we should understand that David was a creature born for war for his period, even as we are creatures of peace born for today.
This is the stinking thinking we are up against when we face MAGA head-on. They are wrapping themselves in the authentication of a God at 'war.'
Let's get something straight. Girls and women need privacy. They do not need a 'condition' that lends itself to a need for a husband (or secondary income to define success-if that is possible even).
Furthermore, a raped girl or woman in some quarters of the country are demanded to have a child placed in their body by some ugly, forceful, fat, undesirable, unsatiated, losers as defined by the act and you have mixed emotions about it. Why is that? How is it even possible to have mixed emotions about rape?
I didn't and I wasn't there when they got pregnant.
Right, you're not a voyeur are you ?
Unless they were raped in which case that opens whole other can of worms and mixed emotions in me,
It shouldn't "open up" a single thing for you. It's not your goddam business.
It is easy. I can empathize with the woman who gets pregnant because of rape and her desire not to have the baby. I also can feel for the baby who has done nothing wrong having to suffer the ultimate penalty , death, for someone else's crime. Do you think that if your father committed a murder before you were born that you should be punished for it too?
It is my business if it happens near me and I can prevent the rape. It is my business to defend my fellow human being from such violent acts. What would you do just stand there and do nothing? Make give a tsktsjtsk toward the rapist?
It seems that you have no conscience when it comes to killing an innocent. I bet you protest when some vile convicted murderer is executed
More sweet nothings from Arky !
[Deleted]
Do tell. How interesting.
Are you employed in security or law enforcement?
What neighborhood do you live in that requires you to be on high alert to protect women from acts of violence?
How often has this happened that you have had to rescue a woman from an attacker or rapist?
There is no baby if the fetus is properly aborted. You err in that you attribute this world's feelings toward a fetus that is is unborn and by definition is not born! The point of an abortion is to stop the process ahead of its completion.
Again, to be clear rape is not "a murder." We can talk properly here about what is taking place in abortions. This future human being that you want me to empathize with is not even aware of its existence! The whole episode of its creation is unfortunate, and because of the structure of a girl's or woman's body such events could occur repeatedly due to egg production. It behooves the girl or woman with the help of advisors and medical professionals to determine a course of action that will allow her to understand what it is that is about to happen to her internally (safely or catastrophically) and what burden of responsibility will surely be REQUIRED of her alone or familially for the duration of the life of that child.
And let me be even clearer: As MAGA reserves the right for gun owners to load and carry guns of their tool of choice; similarly, the 'tools' of birthing babies are in the care of girls and women who ask or demand that boys and men get out of the way of them using their 'tools' as proper stewards of them.
To date, women have gotten us to 350 plus million strong and without going into the wretched way life is sometimes managed for whole groups of people in this country; girls and women, in my opinion, have done a "heck of a job" on a scale of 10 I score 9.99! In providing positive results!
Now then, what score would you give girls and women in this country for giving us the population growth we are blessed with today? Hmmm?
No I am just a man and a good citizen who believes we need to defend one another.
Doesn't matter one needs to be vigilant wherever one is.
Once or twice. What does it matter to you.
Huh ???
But abortion is!
Actually it is a government document called the Constitution that gives us the right to load and carry guns. What Making America Great Again has to do with anything I don't know except it's adherents for defending the Constitution.
Make up shit that is not and never has been in the Torah, in the Old Testament or in the New Testament. I am an atheist, but I was a Christian for over 5 decades of my life. I figured that since my eternal life depended on knowing the rules that I should study the manual. I can't quote chapter and verse, but I am well-acquainted with the rules in the OT and the NT. I even attended many different Christian sects in order to understand why some believed differently than others. I learned more about the why from internet searches on the origin of world religions than I ever did by attending any church.
There are a bunch of laws in the Old Testament that are (thankfully) completely ignored, but never rescinded by Yeshua. Yeshua is not the Prince of Peace that some people try to make him out to be, but neither would he fit in the woman hating forced birthers.
The majority of forced birthers are old white men over 50 years of age. I have had the displeasure of knowing many of these men for years. I have allowed several of them to eat meals with my family until they informed me that they considered women nothing but a uterus without a brain (in so many words). Few, if any, of the men of this thinking, are loved or held in high esteem by any woman unfortunate enough to be in their life or family.
Maybe, in some areas of the United States, there are women who enjoy being treated as incubators. I just don't know any.
Just wondered why you are so determined to portray women as helpless damsels in distress who need you to save them from rape/murder or if you actually lived in some area of the country where women really, really should not live until law enforcement (or the national guard) cleans out the vermin.
Shit happens no matter where you are. It may be old fashioned but I do feel the need to step in and defend women. Why are you so against me feeling that way? It is the way I was raised
Thankfully, I live in an area with much less public violence, or do you go to their houses/ places of employment to defend them?
I just find it completely off the wall creepy that anyone is raised in a society that violent.
Abortion is not murder, for murder is no where sanctioned under any law. Unless you know differently? I am pretty sure you don't!
There is my whole context. Do not whittle it down to some subset of words, but instead make the comparison that girls and women have the tools for birthing babies and the adjoining steward duties. You have only to present the seed that satisfies the needs of the egg. And then the remainder of the process falls to the girl or woman. I am pretty sure you understand the proceedings.
Get yourself out of the way. For just as surely as I am writing this, I feel confident you know girls and women who have been jaded enough to birth a child or children of a boy or man who is nowhere from the conception to the failure of a marriage in the life of the offspring. The mother is 99.99 percent always in the life of her child/ren for the duration. Girls and women do not abandon what they create so easily. Therefore, let them love and have strong bonding to what they give birth!
Points taken.
Damn Mo! I almost hate myself after reading your post!
And I always considered myself one of the good guys.
Not my intent to shame you.
However, if you feel there are areas that you need improvement and you work on those areas then you are truly one of the good guys.
Hey man, should probably fuck off on this one. This really doesn't seem to be a convo we have any business injecting ourselves into. Frankly, we ain't got much to say.
You have my very deepest sympathies. Much as they piss me off, all the time, I don't know what I would do if I lost my girls. Talk about having your entire world torn down.
Thank you very much, Thrawn, I truly appreciate it.
I can't do anything about what happens in other countries.
He shot pregnant people? Link please.
Oh and BTW he was acquitted be reason of self defense so according to a court of law he was justified in shooting.
Had I been on the jury he would have hung by the neck until dead.
How does one cross a state line to shoot folk and get away with it?
He didn't cross state lines with the intention to shoot anyone. He went to protest property from assholes who were looting, damaging and burning other people's property. He also only shot when he was attacked hence the self defense acquittal.
Yes I know you had him being guilty even before the trial began. You would have convicted him evidence to the be contrary be damned.
BtTW I thought liberals didn't approve of capital punishment
It is my duty as a man to defend women an others that can not defend themselves. I can think of nothing less able to defend itself than a baby in the womb. The human baby in the womb has the right to life as endowed by it's Creater (GOD). That life is a top priority to be protected. What makes you think a woman's bikini line or her career has a higher priority than a human life ?
Nope. You do not have the right to make any decisions about a woman's health care choices.
Your comment sounds like you align with the fanatics who murder abortion doctors and blow up clinics.
Abortion for convenience is not a health care choice. A woman's bikini line is not a medical emergency
do not have the right to make any decisions about a woman's health care choices
Right. The American healthcare system is famous for its complete lack of regulation.
Maybe not but federal and state legislatures do as well as the courts do.
So, if you have a benign tumor and you want it removed because it's inconvenient, you think the government should tell you if it's ok or not?
you have a benign tumor and you want it removed because it's inconvenient,
A tumor? Shit the government dictates how you treat a stuffy nose.
I know argument by bumper sticker is sort of a religion on the left, but claiming anyone is free from governmental interference in health care is idiotic, almost as idiotic as describing abortion as healthcare to begin with.
How insulting can you be? The birthing and care of a child is lifelong and beyond cosmetics. It is a lifetime decision and though you protest, ultimately, you will fault the mother (girl or women) for her unspecified lack of preparation when she fails to 'execute' properly. Better to not have a child than to risk harm to it in the unsure and unsafe surroundings of this present world! With its neglect, apathy, people barely holding one, or an AR-15 set of rounds to its torso and head!
A baby is not a tumor benign or otherwise and will never become a fully developed human being no matter how long it is in you.
The government tells people all the time what medical procedures you can get or not get.
Denying that abortion is a vital part of health care for many women is beyond idiotic. It's ignorant and insane. Propagandizing that abortion is not health care is what would be expected from lunatic fringe reactionary extremists.
Abortion for convenience is not a medical or a health necessity.
Your shtick is getting old.
Probably in more ways than one.
Are you a doctor now in addition to being a knight in shining armor?
Reactionary propagandists know more than highly trained medical professionals, didn't you know that? They will tell you that all the time.
And you think I care or going to change?
Oh wait ! I am not! My position is right and I will never give up never give in.
Several years ago, I received an email that had some of the vilest anti-abortion propaganda that I had ever seen. It included graphic pictures of what I suspect were last trimester babies who had died in the womb who had to be aborted to save the life of the woman.
It takes a real perverted, sadistic mind, that truly despises women, to portray this as a routine abortion.
We quit doing business with the man who sent that email.
Your position is far right and your comment sounds like mindless fanaticism.
I am as much of doctor as I need to be.
Since you seem to have a problem with my defense of women children and other people please send me a picture of yourself so if I ever see you on the street getting beat or raped I will know that you don't want any assistance from me and I will just keep on walking and ignore you.
No that probably won't happen. I will still come to your aid whether you like it or not.
If I knew where to send it I would send you a can of beans so you could get a fresh idea
But you don't know that for sure do you. They could have been a late term abortion where the baby was horrible killed and the life of the mother was not in jeopardy.
as idiotic as describing abortion as healthcare to begin with.
That's about what your position on this topic is worth, a can of beans.
I really find that it amusing that you imagine yourself as being a champion of women when you are the farthest thing from it.
You have an authoritarian personality that is determined to oppress others.
Yes, I know for sure that it was nothing except propaganda that was manufactured and spread by men who hate women.
A mistake just now. It has been my experience throughout life, that 99.99 percent of people who ever say what s/he will "never" do; succeeds in doing just that at some point and time in the future. Be it near or far into the future. And then they recall the erroneous statement they made back then. I have done it many times. Like for instance saying I would never wear a mask in public because of allergies; but oh look, since a virus showed itself to be taking lives I can't stop wearing a mask in public. So guess what? I amuse myself with what I used to laugh at others doing and I am 'carrying on' for three years running now!
And I could go on like never eating diet foods, or drinking diet soda, or giving up dancing, or having good sex, or getting really old, or—. . . .
What part of abortion for CONVENIENCE don't you understand?
And yours is what you get when you eat a can of beans. I give you a clue It sounds like pffffttt!
Prove it
Are you in the 3rd grade? Does your Mommy let you stay up this late?
Seriously? Now you are giving me orders?
I don't know about his bedtime rules, but I should have been asleep hours ago.
If the raccoons don't ravish the meager corn crop tonight, I need to be up in 5 hours to pick and freeze corn.
Our low tonight is 81 degrees. We are expecting a week of high temps 100 or above.
I think you need to get to sleep.
Good luck with those pesky raccoons.
It was over 100 here for the last several days. Today's high was in the upper 90's. At least the nights are fairly cool.
Yes I am
In other words...
That is pretty much what I was envisioning.
When my daughters acted like that, I was usually amused. This tended to confuse them or made them madder.
He thinks he has the right to give women orders about their health care choices, too.
Typical authoritarian mindset.
I'd like to see any man giving me orders about my health care choices
This is what I usually tell authoritarian men - I don't take orders and I will consider requests if I am in the mood.
This is a link to the latest sign I ordered for my home office.
[ deleted at request of mocowgirl ]
While I am greatly saddened by the current outcome surrounding abortion and wish it had not gotten to this point, I have to disagree with your statements.
If you have any sort of health insurance in this country, then your options for health care choices are already constrained. Lawyers and accountants in health insurance companies develop the particulars for plans which the doctors and health providers must agree to in order to considered "in network". If the doctor or health provider does not agree to those rules and refuses to sign the contract with the insurance company, then they are considered "out of network" and the insurance company determines what they will pay for and at what rates which leaves the balance of the cost all up to the individual. The individual has not had a truly free choice in health care in this country for a great many years, your choices are already defined by what the insurance company is willing to pay for.
As far as abortion, I believe this really needs to be resolved at the federal level. But to do so would require that Congressional leadership stand up, kick the extremists to the side and craft a compromise bill that both sides can agree to. But unfortunately I do not expect to see any such movement as the partisan nature of our elected officials lead me to believe they would rather keep this issue (as well as others) as a disagreement where they can use it as a cudgel to attack the other side with.
Right on!!
I agree with everything you just said. I'm just mouthing off to the knuckle draggers here at NT
Thank you.
When I linked the sign, I found another one that needs a place on my desk. It will arrive Tuesday.
[ deleted at request of mocowgirl ]
So now you are going to force your religious beliefs on women?
The Jewish religion's GOD allows abortion. Many sects of Christianity's GOD allow abortion.
Do you worship a different GOD or is your sect at war with the Jews and other sects of Christianity in trying to gain control of the US government and therefore our citizens and our military?
How is your sect any different than the Taliban in Afghanistan or the Ayatollah in Iran?
I am not sure the world is going to be pleased to have your religious sect in charge of our government and our nukes.
A the right to life being endowed by their Creater is from a document you might have heard of, The Declaration of Independence. You know it is one of the founding documents for this country.
No just idiot liberals and atheists who think it's ok to force their beliefs on us
It's the sick theocratic dominionist Christian nationalists who are trying to force their fanatical beliefs on the majority of the population.
The Declaration of Independence has nada to do with the right to our bodies. And what you are saying is in violation of the 1st amendment. My faith allows abortions as Mocowgirl said. Don't inflict your beliefs on me.
No one is forcing their beliefs on you. It is the other way around.
Did you notice the word "their" before Creator?
The word "their" means "their" Creator may not be the same Creator that you worship.
"Their" Creator may have different rules than your Creator. "Their" Creator may even be female.
The men, who wrote the D of I, were largely deists who believed in a Creator that created and went on its merry way and did not concern itself with what happened to its creations.
Having your version of a religion in charge of the US government would have been among the very last things the Founding Fathers would have envisioned for this country.
Right wing propagandists and authoritarian demagogues routinely claim victimhood when, in fact, they are most often the oppressors.
Now you're being defensive and provocative. I get it. Everyone is talking in waves to you. Does this 'attack' mean any of this is revelatory and opening new vistas of though for you? Maybe. God only knows.
BTW, we should have a comprehensive discussion about our love of God and this nation's constitution. A real heart to heart; not simply batting sound bites back and forth.
So that must mean you are Ok with honor killings and killing for being a heretic. You are aware that there are religions that say those are allowed
And just what is my version of religion? You have no idea and there is a 99% chance you are wrong.
What is religion going to do about overpopulation?
According to just your comments on this seed, one that supports being a complete and utter asshole to women.
So coming to a women's defence to help keep her from being beaten or raped is being a
Why the hostility towards someone like me who is willing to risk life and limb to help defend the helpless or those that could use a bit of aid?
So if someone believes in the faith of the Mayans or Aztecs or Inca that requires human sacrifices to their gods you are Ok with them doing that?
“…that requires human sacrifices to their gods you are Ok with them doing that?”
No.
As an aside… you ark, obviously feel compelled to attack anyone and anything that may be contrary to your religious dogma. As is your right. It is also the same right that allows a separate world view. The never ending dialogue grows more than tedious and the redundancy is brain numbing.
Believe as you will, but take a breath, man. The issue will never go away, regardless of how many words are thrown at it.
It seems to me everyone needs to attack me for my beliefs which by the way have absolutely nothing to do with any religious dogma. Do you think I should not defend my beliefs. Or do you think I should become another drone of the left. Resistance is not futile and I will resist until my dying breath.
“…feel compelled to attack…”
Actually prefer rational, reasoned discussion with the understanding that opinions are rarely changed but the discourse allows for a degree of mutual respect to be reached…but only when disparate ideas are not summarily dismissed.
When am I going to be shown respect?
With your attitude, it's more likely you're going to be shown the door.
So since I refuse to bend to your ways and will continue to defend my opinions I should leave? Are you so afraid of differing opinions that you will not allow them to be heard?
You haven't earned any respect, just derision
[deleted]
To quite some of your liberal brethren. " FUCK OFF"
All you have is deflection and ignorance.
[deleted]
These opinions?
I don't disagree with you on many issues
[deleting]
[deleted]
... if you're delusional.
Yet you seem desperate to avoid the 'Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness' part.
Since you're hanging your hat on the DoI, you must recognize that it's all about MEN, and excludes females and POC.
Oh and BTFW, trying to pretend that your position has nothing to do with religion after citing 'Creator' and injecting (GOD), capitalized no less, is ridiculous.
Can you expect anything more from a racist homophobic misogynistic Christian pusher?
No, I learned proper English and I know that the use of men in this case is all inclusive of the human race you know mankind and it is not necessary to specifically name each group of man.
No the unborn humans have those rights too. The right to life is the most important right though because without life the other rights are moot.
Here is a clue for you. I didn't write the Declaration of Independence. I wasn't even born in 1776. It was the Founding Fathers that write that and even they knew that the right to life was the most important that is why they put it first.
And no capitalizing God is correct. Just because you are too blind to see and acknowledge His existence is not my problem.
[deleted]
If you are referring to me I am not a racist ,I think people are all created the same regardless of color.
I am not homophobic. I do not fear homosexuals. I feel sorry from the as I feel sorry for everyone with a serious physical or mental illness.
I am also not misogynistic. Quite the contrary. I think women are the best part of the human race and the have the most important job in it, the birth and raising of our young. I find it sad that some would abdicate that very important mission for physical appearance and to be a lowly worker bee
I am not necessarily a Christian either. One does not have to be Christian to believe in God.
Oh but it WAS necessary if the founders wanted to mitigate the adverse effect of failing to protect the 'inalienable rights' of the majority of the human race, living in the US. The only group recognized by the DoI and protected by the Constitution were White MEN.
Yet women of child bearing age do NOT.
Yet you posted (GOD) and now your posting "God". Which is correct?
Strawman.
Are you looking for brownie points for understanding what an oft used acronym stands for?
What's sad is your attempt to deflect from the FACT that you pretend that your positions isn't based on religion.
Oh please DO clarify what you mean by a 'lie intelligence'. I'll wait.
Prove homosexuals have a mental illness. I mean you are entitled to your opinion, but to post it willy-nilly probably means you should check your own mental situation. And homosexuals don't need pity from you-ill or not. We just need you to get the "h" out of our lives and out of our way politically! If I need to say more, just ask!
People with your mindset do have a problem and you make it worse by screwing around with others you delude yourself into thinking you can serve. And please do not just call yourself "old-fashioned" that would be insulting to old people.
I won't let this go; you won't get a pass from me. I dare you to go into the long and short of why you think homosexuals are "ill" and even more so what your prescription is to make it all better and go away.
PLEASE I ENCOURAGE YOU TO PROCEED!
For too long homosexuals have accepted and put up with patronizing men like yourself who thinks that normalcy is what you do and 'According to arkpdx.' Well, it is not! The truth is you don't have to understand what two men or two women do between themselves in public or private. Why? Because it is utterly unimportant what you do publicly or privately with your mate.
What has been a problem and a damn big one is the ruination of a group of people who for thousands of years existed on the margins, because of neglect, outrage, and social pity from heterosexuals with your mindset. Who thought it practical to shun, disrespect, disown, or even murder their own children or worse a stranger over who they sleep with at night.
You ruin lives with your attitude. There is no other way about it. You don't help so you ruin lives. You stifle growth and development in others you don't encourage to thrive and be their best self. You judge what you don't understand and worse you don't do it with wisdom!
You are the problem. Not some lonely homosexual who can't change or "cave in" to your worldview! It is not homosexuals who have to stop; it is you-the heterosexual so full of himself and herself that you think that all of this amazing world is for you and you only.
You don't help, you ruin with apathy or worse aggression and violence to hold others at bay.
I could feel sorry for you, but why? You can change an attitude a "h" of a lot easier than a 30 years running celibate homosexual can change who he loves and oh all the memories of boys and men like myself I have known through the recesses of time and space. I know, because I live with love for them in my heart and spirit each and every damn day.
You really need to talk more to homosexuals, to girls and women, and get out of your head, because arkpdx-sexuality is not an academic exercise for the head. Sexuality affects people to their deepest core.
That love you feel for your 'mate,' that deeper level you feel just being near to her and the more the longer you are in the relationship, I will assure you if people like you would get out of the political way and stop throwing up interferences, distractions, and roadblocks every few 'yards' . . . a homosexual could feel exactly as you without any taint of regret, stigma, or mental limitations.
I won't let it go either. I neither want or need a pass from you.
That is what you call people that engage in abnormal behavior ... Mentally ill.
I don't need you to feel sorry for me.
I do not need nor do I have to change my attitude. I am perfectly fine just the way I am.
I pity you also.
I'm on a roll now. . . .
It is people like you who have put physical barriers and mental chains of homosexuals. It is people with your mindset that foolishly passed laws that homosexuals had to be treated for a condition, someone like me, now can prove does not simply go away when the "act" ends. It is people like you who deluded themselves with a lie that homosexuals can't serve and if necessary die for their country because, you know, they can be blackmailed for their sexuality by foreign entities thus turning them into involuntary spies. . . when the dissolution of the problem was simply END THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCT PUT IN PLACE BY PEOPLE LIKE YOU MAKING HOMOSEXUALITY A CRIME and watch the blackmail threat evacuate and dissipate just like that.
People like you have attacked homosexuals 'forever.' And it really is disheartening and sickening to think that you want forever to continue into another generation of kids, your blood potentially, and the human family, to continue to send their children to the outskirts of towns, and street corners, and behind bushes, and regurgitations of the blackmail lie. . . because that is what will happen if your old-fashioned attitude about us is not checked and put down.
Prove it is abnormal. Don't just speak the words-back it up. Prove it. Go on get down and dirty if you have to. Otherwise, you are just reciting something in your head, because according to you can't possibly know what happens, how it 'works,' how the 'parts' fit, or the relationships get established short-term or long-term.
Again, prove homosexuality is abnormal. And if you can not relent . . then you need to just shut the "h" up and keep your piss poor opinion about what others do in your head.
Why? Because medical science has proved people who think and say what you wrote: Wrong.
No, you are not perfectly fine when you call regular people mentally ill! You are a problem; and you sicken people with your words when you express it in public. Worse you can get a 'buy in" and ignite a burst of hatred in otherwise well-adjusted people. It is not fine. You need to go seek out help from somebody about why you hold such strong opinions about people you don't know and don't care to know!
Charity begins at home.
Self-awareness can be a positive thing.
Depends on the God.
We've all been telling you that for quite a while now.
FUCK OFF
Finally, here it is in full relief: You hurt people with your attitude and opinion and potentially with your actions and definitely with your voting power. You don't know what makes a homosexual 'tick,' you don't know what causes a girl or woman to need an abortion, and you are apathetic to the plight of minorities-pretending that life is no different for the Majority. Not seeing themselves is a luxury those in the minority (homosexuals, girls and women needing an abortion, and blacks and other minorities) can not indulge. We are not all the same and neither are our experiences naturally equal in this country. It's high time you come to accept the proper DIVERSITY you see all around you and yes all your life!
No I don't. You might but I certainly do not.
Let that be on your own head then. You won't be the first person to live with a late realization of the hurt caused to others as deep regret. Happens everyday somewhere on the planet. No one can make you take this seriously.
Your next sentence says plainly that either you don't have a clue of what misogynistic means or don't care.
You may have many friends in life, but a dictionary is clearly not one of them. At least a passing acquaintance with Google might be beneficial, or not.
You think women are only good for child bearing and raising??? I hope to hell you have no daughters
And just what makes him an expert. I have a degree in Anthropology also, does that make me an expert or does that only apply to those that agree with you?
Where did I say that? I said that bearing and raising is the most important job there is. Tell me what job is more important if that is not.
With those like you around there will be fewer and fewer children to be around. Two men or two women cannot procreate
I have no idea. I don't know how experts are identified. Do you?
If you have evidence that rebuts Gilmore's evidence, have you submitted it to the appropriate organization and had it peer-reviewed and published?
What's so important about it? In case you hadn't noticed a lot of women these days don't want children and I don't blame them
Typically an expert is deemed as such based on their experience-based accomplishments and published works in their professional field.
Merely earning a degree does not make one an expert with the possible exception of a PhD claiming to be an expert on the subject matter of their thesis, but that is really stretching.
Tell me, what would happen to the human race uf there were no more children being born and raised properly? I will ask again since you ignored it the first time. What job is more important than raising the next generation?
[Deleted]
I didn't ignore your question. I asked what's so important about it? If I had never had children I would think the most important job I had was to make the world a better place. I think we should place that above children.
We already have over 7 billion people on this planet. We're using up resources that are hard to replenish or impossible to replenish. I applaud the young people today that say to hell with having children.
Whether you can accept it or not, the fact is that some people are not wired to regret anything. They have the moral compass of a grizzly bear, as well as the emotional stability of a grizzly bear. We see them as fellow humans until we see their true self. Most of the time, it is too late for their victims to escape when the true self is revealed. There are less lethal personalities, but they also lack much of a moral compass or emotional stability.
The various sciences, that deal with understanding what shapes personality in our species, have some interesting theories about the roles that nature and nurture play in how we develop as individuals.
I have spent all of my life studying people (most of the time without realizing I was doing it or why). I have spent over 2 years watching various videos and reading a few publications to broaden my understanding of what I have lived and how my viewpoints were shaped.
Understanding oneself is difficult. The only lens we have to understand others is to understand ourself first.
As our lives evolved and our society evolved, the majority of us evolved our thinking (at least, in part). Some people can't evolve their thinking in some areas, but aren't assholes when a person engages with them.
I am glad you dug deep and brought that up and out! It's time to deal with it.
1. Who says that every person with the capacity to birth a child can and do so? Please make the case. And when you do make the case detail for me how sperm hitting egg and igniting a life (alone) makes the quality of life better for the resulting offspring.
2. A homosexual person can provide services to the fathers and mothers, parents, in this world. In much the same way as you see it being done in practice all around you. It is not a sickness to be an attendant to those who carry the lifelong burden of having their 'hearts exist outside their bodies in another human being.' Moreover, it is not a shame to do so.
3. Do you worry that homosexuals will decrease the surplus population through 'takeover' of some sort? How could that work in practice? A 'tribe' of homosexuals can not survive without the 'surpluses' of heterosexuals who birth, mother, father, parent a child/ren to which we become dutiful attendants and assistants in the process.
4. Finally, homosexuals can procreate. Cases in point: Anderson Cooper. Andy Cohen. Both life-long homosexuals with the wherewithal to father children (with surrogates in a legal contract). It is not the best of situations from a mother/father scheme of the world. I get that. But, it is definitely a "Win-Win" situation. And I am pretty sure it will become(ing) foundational in many other well-to-do homosexual 'households.'
5. Lastly, none of this can happen in the future if people with your mindset keep stigmatizing, throwing up obstructions, bad-mouthing, and defaming homosexuality and same-sex marriage. The "old haunts" do not deconstruct themselves. You will have to tear down the walls and let the protective love you say you possess in you break forth. . . for those who need understanding the most!
Note: It does not bother me when we go deeper into a difficult subject for some, because we have got to end this and tipping around it or working at the surface provides only shallow answers and little in the way of solutions.
No they did not procreate. One of them did and had a child with a woman. One of them may be the father but neither is the mother.
Is it reasonable to assume you know what the 'Creater' wants for humans when you can't even spell creator?
While everyone is free to have their own religious beliefs, forcing others to adopt your religious beliefs through secular laws should be unacceptable.
When it comes to abortion, one should assume there is no God which is the default position considering no one has ever proven any God or Gods exist. Man has invented tens of thousands of Gods that most faiths, especially Christians, dismiss out of hand, so any law in a society that is supposed to keep Church and State separate should be based on facts and reality, not unproven faith and religious doctrine.
We don't go around passing laws making it illegal to step on a crack because some group believes that will break their mamma's back. We don't pass secular laws requiring all Americans kneel and pray toward Mecca three times a day.
We also don't ban anyone from trying their best not to step on a crack or ban kneeling and praying toward Mecca three times a day. If you want to practice your faith no one is stopping you. The only thing the constitution asks is to keep those religious doctrines and faith based morality out of the government, courts, public schools and public spaces since those are supposed to be for every American regardless of faith or lack thereof.
So, if for the sake of argument we assume the default that there is no God, what exactly is the problem letting women make their own choices over their own bodies up until that point when the once fertilized egg, zygote, fetus and effective parasite living off the woman's body can survive without the woman, what they call 'viability'?
Is there truly a valid argument to ban all abortion if 'God' doesn't exist? And if there isn't, then aren't virtually all attempts to ban abortion and control women clearly crossing the separation of Church and State?
Is that not forcing religious beliefs on atheists and those whose faith has no problem with women making rational informed decisions over their bodies and their futures? Or will we be forced by secular laws to submit ourselves to the religious conservatives version of morality and subject ourselves and accept total control of our lives from people who have proclaimed themselves the arbiters of some heavenly morality and demand that everyone must bow to their God?
Women get to make that choice, not you, not your 'God', not your brand of religion. Some choose to remain celibate, some choose to use birth control, some don't, and some even after having used some form of birth control may still get pregnant against their will and choose to terminate the pregnancy. They are not 'required' to have children, it is not their pre-ordained 'job' unless you're trying to force your religious beliefs on others using secular laws in contradiction to the establishment clause. You would be 'establishing' your religious belief as the law of the land.
So if you don't like abortion, don't have one. Otherwise, you and your God can get the fuck out of other peoples bodies and personal business.
Tell you what [deleted]
When I 'put my hand to the plow' or undertook this 'journey' in celibacy, I was definitely someone who was standing and holding his convictions in his hand. I had no idea what 'day One' would bring or how 'day Two' and continuing would proceed. I just knew that the time for something to change in me had come upon me for I was tired of an endless facade on life—with substantive relationships going on all around me. For me, change came wrapped in religious 'garb' and I put Christianity on and it fit me well. I succeeded in my 'endeavor' to become somebody different.
In the process of nearly thirty years, I have brought in for closer examination and pushed out as worthless many ideas about who I am as a person and a Christian. Namely, being Christian and abstaining, has not 'delivered' me or freed me up to become heterosexual as a natural course or of a necessity (to procreate). I have come to acknowledge that my greatest passions were they to be had would come from being wrapped in the bosom (and scents) of another man. Even after all this time as a self-study.
And though all I have are my past memories of relationships and friendships from thirty years ago; I treasure each of them as precious jewels. People just have to understand that, as you put it above, "understanding oneself is difficult" and telling others about yourself honestly should be easier. I will end here because I am losing my train of thought. . . .
I am distracted by the Karine Jean-Pierre, a married lesbian woman, living her 'best now' in a White House setting talking to a room full of heterosexual reporters (likely) who are hanging on her every word. Her sexuality not being the focus of the event is absolutely marvelous. . .and I daresay, normal.
If you were shamed into celibacy by a society that told you that consensual sex between adults of the same sex was wrong, then have you lived life as your true self or as the self you became to please society?
There is usually a price to pay to live outside of the norms of the society a person lives in. Sometimes that price is paid with one's life, sometimes it is to live as a social outcast, or sometimes it is to live life as an imposter to "fit in".
As an introvert, I find interaction with people to be draining. My personality finds superficial interaction to be mostly a waste of time. This is why if I expend the energy to interact with people, it is on discussions/topics that are in-depth and add to my understanding of our existence on some level.
I have to seek out this interaction on the Web because I don't know anyone offline that can have these conversations without feeling like my intent is to slaughter their sacred cow. Really, all I am wanting to do is to understand the forces that shaped their very essence. I do understand why most people who describe me as being serious and intense. I have my humorous side but it involves a lot of sarcasm and self-depreciating humor. I don't want to rule the world, I just want to understand it. Should me simple enough, right? LOL!
I am sorry. Do you know how prejudicial that comes out? Anderson Cooper has a son with his DNA in it. Andy Cohen the same. They are the only father their kids will ever have or need for that matter in general. How dare you try to connect procreation to a life-long relationship of some kind. Yours is more of a control 'issue' eh?
The need for change was coming from inside me. This is what I faced after twenty years actively involved with men. And what a twenty year run it was! But, it led nowhere. At the time, in my areas of this country, we were not being "celebrated" or normalized. So men traded sex in a more hush-hush manner. I, for my part, craved more. I wanted relationships 'forever' and in my reality there were none long-lasting to be. Exception: You may remember, my darling Michael—(my heart just 'leaped' at the mention of him in public!) taken away from me by fate. Even after him, the efforts to find a lasting relationship went on and on and on and well. . . . on to no fanfare.
The time came to just 'rest' from it all. As you said, I too was 'drained' of trying with. . . men, in general.
So religion came in naturally. If you understand what I mean. Literally, I was looking for a way out and a bible 'landed' in my hand, and reading it at work one day and a minister 'landed' in front of me, and the rest is 'today.'
Finally. mocowgirl, I positively appreciate your elaborating and sharing in the last two paragraphs something about yourself! because frankly, I was beginning to 'bristle' at the opening paragraph. All is well. It is important to 'know' something about the heart of the person we are communicating with and you did so splendidly.
I didn't get to read your personal insults, but if you want everyone to adopt your religious beliefs and religiously informed opinions, please do prove your God exists and that it/he/she has entrusted you with the arbitration of its will.
Until then, your opinions are no different than that of an American citizen atheist, Hindu, Muslim or Jew. Just as you would likely be angered at any attempt to enforce Sharia law in our country, expect that rational Americans will continue to reject right wing conservative attempts to enact or enforce Christian sharia law.
Should PETA members be immune to secular laws simply because they "believe" meat is murder? Should we cow tow to them because some might believe that animals have souls too? Should we ban the killing and eating of cows because of some Hindu Americans belief that cows are sacred?
Clearly the answer is, if you think meat is murder, then don't eat meat. If you think fur is murder, then don't wear furs. If you believe that cows are sacred, then don't kill them or eat them. But as soon as you try and force your beliefs on others through secular law you are crossing the line and should expect as much push back as any PETA faithful trying to ban all harvesting of animals for food.
Of course, if there was some all powerful deity that the PETA faithful could prove exists and prove that the killing and eating of animals was an abomination and should never be done on fear of death and or eternal torment, then perhaps we'd give them more weight. As it is, neither PETA nor any Hindus, Muslims, Jews or Christians can prove any of their deities exist so their opinions are just that, personal opinions like deciding one likes the color blue.
So like I said, if you don't like abortion, don't have one. If you see animals as equals, don't kill and eat them. If you don't like wearing furs, don't kill furry animals and wear their skins. Otherwise, you and your God can get the fuck out of other peoples bodies and personal business regardless of whether they are enjoying a medium rare steak, getting an abortion or wearing a fur jacket.
Good to know.
My favorite cousin is a lesbian. Society has been very unkind to her. In many ways, she is a closed off personality who can discuss many topics brilliantly as long as they are not personal. She is just a facade of the kid I grew up with. I fear she has rarely been able to live life as her authentic self. I feel as if I should have done more to support her even though we spent most of our adult lives hundreds of miles apart doing entirely different things with entirely different people.
You have been open about your life from the times we've interacted. Otherwise, I wouldn't have asked.
If I ever ask you a personal question that exceeds your boundaries, please just say so.
I have been on the internet for over a decade. I have shared much of what I wrote today over the years, but I don't expect that everyone was on the same articles or read all my comments which is why I explained the reasons for my intrusive inquiries. However, I try not to post the same stuff very often. My public persona is almost always analytical. I naturally bury emotional responses to just about anything. I am usually good in a crisis. It may be weeks before I even emotionally acknowledge that I probably should have a good cry or kick a fence. When it comes to problems, I'm outward focused. I'm the type person who can work in an emergency room and deal with all the trauma and deal with it philosophically most of the time.
I didn't understand any of this myself until I started researching human behavior and personalities. This is the reason I make the effort to explain my thought process because it seems my analytical approach to life is misunderstood by just about everybody who does not live life as if it was a puzzle missing a piece or two.
I missed your sharing about Michael. My sincere condolences for your loss.
Thank you. Michael was special. Somewhere in my shed there is a storage box/bin with a beautiful sweater gift he gave me back in the late 80's. My, I have an unction to go look at it-see how it is holding up. Michael, my construction lover, who actually wanted to get married to me long before it was a possibility (and make me 'legit') with a twist even. (HA!/Sigh.) The 'twist' must be kept private between me and him.
Okay, I am going to come back ↑ up 'top' for now. At least, until I go out to the shed. . . .
[deleted]
Raised Properly that is the point I have been trying to get understood. What is the point of going through all the time and effort and inconvinence of pregnancy to produce something that is unwanted and will not be raised properly. Odds are unwanted children, that were not convenient, are going to end up causing inconvenient problems or worse.
What is more important the next generation being raised properly by loving able parents that wanted children and were ready for them, prepared for sucess, well adjusted and happy or just born with because it was decided that all pregnancies must not be stopped.
Quality over quantity
Convenience over problems
Do it right or stop the process
the answer is so obvious some can't or don't want to see it
MAGA conservatives are compelling children on what they view as noncompliance liberals-mostly . Again, the lack of consistency smells to high heaven!
Compare:
Note that MAGA conservatives have never balked at the pandemic Covid deaths and fight mask mandates passionately as a halt to freedom, liberty, and dare I say it, privacy?
That’s a 33% difference between what the CDC reported and Guttmacher’s figures for 2019.
Note that stupid adults balking at wearing masks themselves isn’t the same as aborting a fetus.
Okay, I am back! You have not proven homosexuals are mentally ill. So here let me help you get started. Questions:
1. Is it 'being' homosexual that is a mental disease? (The person.)
2. Is it the acts that homosexuals 'do' that are a mental disease? (The act.)
Please proceed. Because I am here to help you get clarity. Okay, here's a hint: Heterosexuals are recognized as doing the same things sexually.
No such thing as a baby in the womb.
The word is fetus.
Your god aborts thousands of fetuses every day.
Used to be a paramedic so I have knowledge on this subject.
[delted]
[deleted]
There are way too many folk polluting this planet as it is.
Unwanted children don't do anybody any good.
Every news story about this story just rapes her again.
How can she possibly have a normal life after all of the media coverage?
The minor's identity has not been disclosed and she remains anonymous. Whether she, at age 10, pays attention to media reports is, of course, unknown.
The underlying cicumstances have likely impaired her ability to have a normal life, at least for now. Hopefully, she is receiving whatever mental health care and support as is available.
We can hope, but it is doubtful because I have read several sources that say the mother is defending the rapist instead of her daughter.
I haven't seen anything to verify whether the rapist is a family member or the boyfriend of the mother of the 10-year-old.
[deleted]
If that's the case, the mother's potential complicity in the crime needs to be carefully investigated.
That raises the question everyone is wondering about: What planet do you live on? Definitely not the same one as the rest of us.
I live on the Earth. It is the third planet from the star Sol in the Milky Way galaxy.
What planet do you live on?
Prove it.
I haven't seen you around here anywhere.
[deleted]
It was nice of you to take time out of your busy schedule to write a comment.
Your welcome, but my federal service always comes first,
But then again you haven't said what planet you live on.
I live on planet Earth, the sane one, not the Bizarro world you inhabit.
You have that backward. I live on the same Earth
14.4.6 to end of thread locked. Please refrain from petty insults and try to stay on topic, charger
Tell that to arkie who is offering basically nothing but insults.
EVERYBODY, refrain from petty insults and try to stay on topic. If it was not clear enough 14.4.15 applies to all
Does it apply to me?
Yes, But thanks for asking.
[deleted]
Why is the US taxpayer funding hospitals that only give women care based on the Catholic religion?
more info to consider.
Ever heard of the First Amendment to the Constitution?
have you?
Yes I have. I know you haven't.
sure I have, it gives me the right to express myself any way I wish, within the confines or the law, and the option to theoretically leave unamerican xtian nationalists face down in the dirt if they attempt to impose their religious beliefs on me, mine, and any other person in the US that doesn't accept their warped version of spirituality, .
First if all what is a xtian?
Second if you left anyone face down in the dirt most likely means you assaulted them and that would be illegal.
Third those xtians, whatever they are , have the right to express themselves also. You wouldn't deny them their right would you?
May I? As a Christian (not a nationalist one) I enjoy my freedom of expression without persecution. What is disturbing is Christian Nationalists dare to try and demand everybody be a Christian Nationalist or at the least be under their control (persecution). Ultimately, Christian Nationalists will reap the whirlwind for overreaching and persecuting people who simply want to live with and nearby them; not become one who is or suffers their oppression.
thumpers are free to express themselves, but imposing their dogma on the unwilling is unconstitutional.
It is shocking and appalling to me that Christian Nationalists fall back on taking God out of context to even suggest that this nation belongs to them-alone! What a radically stupid thing to state or even try to establish! Well, Christian Nationalists, emphasis on nationalists, are not a/the majority in this country and their guns as 'tools' do not get a vote per se. We will not be intimidated by them or it.
MAGA must be sufficiently and strongly pushed back against! Christians and secularists are agreed on this point!
What does the 1A have to do with denying healthcare to women?
Absolutely nothing.
It is relavent to your comment 16.
Oh BTW, abortion for convenience has nothing to do with healthcare.
Is it any wonder that a rising percentage of US citizens are planning childfree lives?
Interesting article on MSN this morning.
here's a link to with more in-depth stats on the numbers cited above.
Thanks, maybe too much work and responsibility for the younger set.
There are many varied reasons why people chose to live their lives childfree.
If a person recognizes that they don't want the responsibility of another human being for the rest of their lives, then aren't the childfree being responsible by not having any?
The provided link has a pretty good rebuttal to the argument made by the anti-choice forces, quoted in pertinent part below:
Getting an abortion for those "reasons" is practically the definition of convenience. All of them should have been known before the woman had sex. That being so she should have made sure the proper precautions were taken so she did not get pregnant in the first place or have abstained from have sex.
That's typical of the reactionary elements and theocratic dominionists. Telling everyone else how they should live their lives.
The bottom line: IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!
Actually I think those are pretty good reasons to have an abortion. If you cannot afford to take care of your self why would you add a child to the mix which will only increase costs and risk your ability to keep a roof over your head and food on the table? Perhaps the educational reason is that you are taking classes to better yourself and to be able to provide a better financial future for yourself (and then potentially children), but having a child while you are in school definitely impacts the educational part harshly. It can be done, I watched my brother raise his two boys as a single father but it was very hard on him. My brother did a great job and his two boys turned out great, but that's not true for all children. Better I think to allow an abortion than to have a child fail to grow due to piss-poor parenting.
People are not going to stop having sex, after all sex is a lot of fun. And let's be honest, there are no precautions that are 100% effective so while taking precautions will reduce the chance of becoming pregnant it does not eliminate the chance. So telling someone they should just abstain is IMO nuts, no better than telling a small child to not stick beans up his nose.
I'm not a fan of abortion, so I will never get one for myself. Of course it helps that I'm a mid 60's male, but with the crazy verbal usage coming from our Progressive members perhaps I'm just an unrealized birthing person (?). But people are just not going to stop having sex and no method of prevention is 100% sure so I believe that abortion should be codified into law at the federal level. I say this because having to travel to another state for an abortion is a harder impact on the poor.
Of course it is my business. Saving the life of all innocent human beings is my business born or preborn.
Tell me are honor killings your business? How about killing a toddler because it interferes with it's mother's dating life. How do you feel about human sacrifice? What is your opinion of mercy killing or assisted suicide?
you could save more lives helping the living, so many more that you would not have time to worry about unwanted pregnancies
And that is where the fatal mistake is in your pro-life talking point The slight of hand manipulation. Preborn is wholly separate and distinct from born!
Next you continue with the manipulation by discussing problematic and controversial dilemmas that are of this world and wholly separate from before entering this world.
The question: How long have you allowed yourself to be manipulated by the pro-life argument?
You will not take the question seriously of course, but that is the point, eh?
I will demonstrate another related area of in/consistency on the part of MAGA conservatives. Such meddlesome fools not only tell 10 years olds the 'joy' of being raped-'nated to give birth; or other females the 'appeal' of giving birth out of wedlock, but are you ready for this gem: MAGA conservatives want homosexuals to 'father' children with heterosexual women understanding that these men will never succeed in a marriage of any kind (alone) with a female!
Let's be clear: MAGA does not give a damn about anybody's freedom; it is ideology they care about and nothing but ideology. Be it secular conservative or religious conservatives.
Look Arkpdx! If a girl or woman wants to have sex and not a child it is her choice to have sex; no child. She would be smart to not accept your stigmatization or self-righteous judgement of her (legal) treatment of her eggs while they are inside her body. Being born in this country as a man does not give you carte blanche to deciding female 'issues' and demanding those opinions should be the law of states and certainly not law blanketing the country.
So if a man wants to have sex but does not want children he should be able to decline anything to do with the child if the woman decides to have and keep the baby and have no responsibility for it in anyway.
Yes.
Abortion is now the law determined by the individual states as it should be and is not a law blanketing the country as you would like it to be
No. That's a ridiculous contention.
I don't believe for a second that you don't want a federal law outlawing all abortions everywhere.
What type of a smart-alex question is that? We are talking girls/women and abortion-which as far as I know boys and men do not need to 'tackle' because of a lack of any kind of womb. Now, you switch to boys and men not participating in the rearing of a life once across the 'threshold' of pre-born to being born?
I will say to you what is signified in your 16.1.23: You are deep in pro-life 'think.' And that is okay. It's just. . . telling.
To answer your. . . 'concern' once a child is born (in this world), it should be afforded the best set of possibilities and goals that life so equips it will. How is that? —Okay?
It is MAGA conservatives who demand MAX freedoms and liberties to act as self-righteous as you want to be, while at the same time squashing leftover conventional conservatives (bad-mouthed as "RINO" republicans) into a political corner with all liberals! MAGA conservatives already had no abortions-unless conservative girls and women quietly get them while the men are 'away' and not paying attention. You, the collective version, already had permissions to reject abortions. Why? Because there has never existed a law federal or state that DEMANDED girls and women must have at least one abortion within a lifetime.
It has never been the case that such a bill has been brought up or passed into law!
And still MAGA is "downtrodden" and go in search of fetuses to 'bother' and 'taunt' into the wombs of unwilling girls and women. That is what you are about! At least own MAGA shit!
I am going to ignore the projection at the end of your comment as 'unworthy' of further interest.
Because women will be denied healthcare because of a fetus, or could face prosecution because a miscarriage could be labeled as an abortion, there are women seeking out the most reliable birth control possible or even delaying pregnancy because they are risking their lives and freedoms if there are complications.
Some anti-choicers, who are demanding that women use birth control, are trying to deny women birth control via legislation. Why? What is their true agenda?
According to many high ranking democrats and other liberals men can be pregnant. How does that happen?
You bring it up; you research it for discussion purposes. In any case, it is likely beyond the scope of this abortion discussion. Or, do you 'worry' that next boys and men will be seeking out abortion doctors?
I don't have to research it. I am not a Democrat and I know that men cannot be women women cannot be men boys cannot be girls and girls can not be boys. I also know what a woman is and I know that men cannot get pregnant. It is the liberals and the Democrats that have a problem with that.
Btw since it is those like you who seem to have trouble with those things and I am not able to find any can you tell me if one man that has ever given birth?
Clearly you are desperately seeking any distraction you can find, eh?
Only in your imagination.
It seems like you are the one who is troubled. Sad.
Yes I do feel sad that [deleted] the new supreme court justice that are unable to say what a woman is or say that men can be pregnant.
Comments removed from here on for meta.
You keep stating that someone says men can get pregnant. Who said that and when? Be specific.
To the question "What do you say a woman is" she answers "I believe everyone can identify for themselves" clearly indicating that she believes any human can identify as a man or a woman or something in-between.
When she answers the question "Do you believe that then men can become pregnant and have abortions" she answers "Yes."
Of course to close minded half wits who have trouble comprehending concepts more complex than watching race cars turn left, this was a "gotcha" moment where they laugh and point at what they believe is the stupid liberal progressive Democrat. The reality however is exactly the opposite.
Just because some right wing religious conservatives don't understand or accept transgender persons who are born with the outside of a woman but the insides of a man and consider themselves "male" but can still get pregnant doesn't mean they don't exist and shouldn't have rights.
He asked who said it and when. Period. Your response reflects your opinion and that of others which is fine. Unnecessary in the context of what was asked and answered.
I appreciate your response to my request, but I do think that Dismayed P's comment provides important clarification. So, your objection is overruled.
I am sorry. You 'caption' this "Democrats"-plural. The video shows one lone woman speaking and she is alone with no following-up commenting or questioning of what she means by men can give birth. ONLY A FOOL WOULD THINK A BOY OR MAN WITHOUT A WOMB COULD HAVE A TRADITIONAL BIRTH EXPERIENCE. Maybe the lone woman in the video clip is a fool or may be we should here her explanation that is not in the clip.
Furthermore, the host in this clip is less than genuine to spin the lone woman's, "yes" into a pedantic about democratic values versus well, nothing added about republican disingenuousness to try to smear their opposition with a single 'foolish' yes from one woman.
Gotcha!
Hi my dear friends Gsquared and DP! While I understand what the image (seen it before on "OPRAH") is in its sensationalism, I reject its purposes today as I did when it first appeared. Transpeople can do what they want, but let's be clear. The couple in the photo did it so as to lay claim to a 'first.' This imagery gives fodder to conservatives who will turn and 'spit' it back at them as simple confusion, nevertheless. To this end, next we see a 'lone' woman seated at a congressional hearing, walking a 'gauntlet' to answer a set-up question: "Can men can pregnant?" With a short answer of: "Yes."
Its nonsense.
The man in the picture is trans and has no right to squander his privacy for silly sensation-driven appearances like OPRAH claiming the "impossible" at this stage of human evolution. It is a betrayal of the trans-people cause to ask others to defend the indefensible. No, a man is not planning to give birth to a baby. A woman who is 'trans' is having a baby in the photo 16.1.44.
Finally, you can apparently still see the 'breast removal' scarring on this transperson in the photo? What was the urgency to get surgery if only to get readily pregnant immediately? Furthermore, now there will be no 'mother's milk' to express!
The context was from the previous conversation which included:
So this is the context, an admission of a commenter to not doing research or needing any education but just going with their "gut" as to gender, gender identity and sexuality.
Clearly they were asking so that they could research the context in which the comments were made. Her statement about everyone identifying for themselves who can consider themselves a 'woman' shows the conservative claim that "Democrats Think Men Can Get Pregnant" is clearly out of context, uninformed and ignorant. It would be like reading a headline that says "Parent admits responsibility for their daughters murder" which sounds pretty damning till you read the context which was a parent saying they felt guilty and responsible for their daughters murder because they had encouraged their daughter to date and marry a person who turned out later to be a murdering psychopath. Context is king, but something often ignored and obfuscated by dumb shits with partisan agendas.
[deleted]
It does, actually. Abortion is far safer than pregnancy and childbirth.
Everything in life has risks and consequences. Woman have died getting legal abortion also.
Ah, there's that care for the lives of women you've proclaimed elsewhere.
I am not the one claiming that an abortion for convenience is safe, is for the life of the mother or healthcare.
My views are fairly consistent.
It's not a claim. It's a fact. Women are more likely to die during pregnancy and childbirth than from abortion. It's not even close. Abortion saves women's lives, and is therefore healthcare.
There was approximately 32,000,000 live births in the same time frame as your report. So it would seem that giving birth is the safest thing of all.
You do understand how rates work, yes?
Plainly does not see a way clear to females having private property that he needs to respect! Life is a property of the state in which you exist. How low can so-called, "extremists" sink? The so-called party of liberty; behaving as agents of state-control!
No woman will be denied health care. Abortion for convenience is not healthcare it is murder.
You would have to ask them. I have never said that in fact I have said that women should use birth control if they don't want children. Abortion for the convenience of the woman is not birth control, it is infanticide.
That's your narrow religious view. You don't have the right to impose your cult's doctrines on the rest of society.
What is the link to the Supreme Court ruling that contains your quote? Or, at least, cite the case name, federal reporter reference and page number.
I'm generally pretty happy, but it has nothing to do with anything the Supreme Court, or you, might have said.
[deleted]
No woman will be denied health care. Abortion for convenience is not healthcare it is murder.
You would have to ask them. I have never said that in fact I have said that women should use birth control if they don't want children. Abortion for the convenience of the woman is not birth control, it is infanticide.
And your group collective decides what "infanticide" is all by themselves?! BTW, where is the "infant" in an abortion? This is what happens when a collective starts adding superfluously to word meanings-people end up politically brain-washed.
Yeah that does seem like something the liberals would do. And I am not part of any collective. That to us a liberal Democrat socialist thing. They were the model for the Borg collective and hives.
Got Cliches?
Then you must have never heard of Rural Electric Cooperatives, Farmers Co-op Cotton Gins and Grain Elevators, or Co-op Apartments!
You are clearly involved with the pro-life organization and movement. That is, a collective. More to the point, had you not involved yourself with a collective like the 'movement,' you would readily understand why allowing girls and women privacy to decide medical, legal, and individual body issues to themselves is healthy for all involved.
Instead, you are part of a 'steering collective' that tries to persuade or compel girls and women to upset the courses of their lives and career paths based on conservative talking points and opinions.
It gets even worse. . . MAGA conservatism is a collective based on the thoughts and whims of one man, Donald Trump. Even if Donald was to wash out down the drain-the collective will choose another 'North Star' that embodies the tyrannical, amoral, and toxic combative essence of that one meathead.
No it is based on a reverence for innocent human life.
It is you who are part of a collective. Like the Borg of Star Trek Next Generation you keep trying to assimilate me into your hive. Resistance is not futile and I will never be assimilated.
No one is trying to change your religious beliefs, and you should not be trying to change other people's either, but you keep on trying.
That's full of it. And you do the Borg a disservice. As there is nothing uniquely of interest going on in this discussion we're having.
You are in a collective. We all add our voices to a/many causes to promote its approval and carrying out. Denial of this truth is at least pretentious, and at worst, delusional.
This is not complicated. Don't make it weird, arkpdx.
And do not try the "innocent human life" thing. No girl or woman will take pride in destroying one of her fertilized eggs, unless she is mentally ill. Courts understand this. Abortion can be assumed done out of an abundance of compassion, contemplation, and potential remorse; not viciousness, anger, or spite for the unborn.
I don't think his comments are "trying" to change people's beliefs, I think his comments are DICATATING what people's beliefs MUST be.
I agree.
About convenience; That is what life is about, any hard thing I have done voluntarily was for future convivence, gain future advantage, to make myself better, get the hard stuff overwith and generally make my future easier and better.
Convenience trumps unnecessary difficulty or problems every time
Emphatically. Think smarter, not harder. It works! And if MAGA conservatives want to take the long, arduous, hacking at twisted and tangle 'branches' and 'overgrowths' through life. . . I say let them have at it. Just leave me and others who do not want that for ourselves the liberty and freedom to get and stay out of their sweaty, musky, affairs, endeavors, and moral trials.
But it never trumps innocent life.
the mother's life and situation is more important, if she dies the fetus will die too.
How is a fetus more innocent than it's host?