Abortion and the election
Comments
-
I'll be your scape goat.creepycoug said:Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
But to be fair, I thought about it - a lot.
I determined the government has no place whatsoever in the room with me and my doctor.
Covid proved me right.
If you like your moral superiority complex, you can have it.
-
Get rid of the first bolded part and you're spot on. Both don't work.Sledog said:Dims are dumb as are their voters. Sending it back to the states was the correct decision. This bullshit that it was a right to murder the unborn was fabricated by the left but many grew up being told that lie. The baby is a seperate whole person and the murder of children shouldn't be fucking legal!
-
Think a little harder, because you're still standing on dead wrong. Privacy has nothing to do with it. Unless you think I can kill you in private just because I want to. Lunacy.pawz said:
I'll be your scape goat.creepycoug said:Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
But to be fair, I thought about it - a lot.
I determined the government has no place whatsoever in the room with me and my doctor.
Covid proved me right.
If you like your moral superiority complex, you can have it. -
You're going to get to your goal of zero abortion a lot faster picking off state by state than trying to get 50 of them to agree all at the same time.creepycoug said:
Get rid of the first bolded part and you're spot on. Both don't work.Sledog said:Dims are dumb as are their voters. Sending it back to the states was the correct decision. This bullshit that it was a right to murder the unborn was fabricated by the left but many grew up being told that lie. The baby is a seperate whole person and the murder of children shouldn't be fucking legal!
And isn't getting, say, 10 right out of the chute saving babies?
-
Good pointPurpleThrobber said:
You're going to get to your goal of zero abortion a lot faster picking off state by state than trying to get 50 of them to agree all at the same time.creepycoug said:
Get rid of the first bolded part and you're spot on. Both don't work.Sledog said:Dims are dumb as are their voters. Sending it back to the states was the correct decision. This bullshit that it was a right to murder the unborn was fabricated by the left but many grew up being told that lie. The baby is a seperate whole person and the murder of children shouldn't be fucking legal!
And isn't getting, say, 10 right out of the chute saving babies? -
I agree completely but that isn't what we got.creepycoug said:
Get rid of the first bolded part and you're spot on. Both don't work.Sledog said:Dims are dumb as are their voters. Sending it back to the states was the correct decision. This bullshit that it was a right to murder the unborn was fabricated by the left but many grew up being told that lie. The baby is a seperate whole person and the murder of children shouldn't be fucking legal!
-
I don’t think I’m right or wrong. It’s called an opinion. You feel differently. That’s cool.creepycoug said:
JFC. Elective surgery. Like a tit job. Nice.greenblood said:
I'm pro choice, but I'm not pro tax payer dollars being spent on it. In cases of rape, incest, or where medical complications show that there's a high chance of the mother dying from labor (Can't make somebody sacrifice their own life for another) then I'm cool with my money going to that. But outside of that, I consider it elective surgery, and in that case, either get insurance that will pay for it, or strong supporters should put their money where their mouths are, and give additional funds to Planned Parenthood or create a separate privately funded foundation.creepycoug said:Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
Well, like the pussy hats, at least you think you're right. You have that in common. -
While opinion are like assholes, in that everybody has one, some opinions are like dirty assholes. That's where I'd put "elective surgery". Christ, you may as well buy and hat and go march. That's worse than privacy and is devoid entirely of any intellectual rigor of thought.greenblood said:
I don’t think I’m right or wrong. It’s called an opinion. You feel differently. That’s cool.creepycoug said:
JFC. Elective surgery. Like a tit job. Nice.greenblood said:
I'm pro choice, but I'm not pro tax payer dollars being spent on it. In cases of rape, incest, or where medical complications show that there's a high chance of the mother dying from labor (Can't make somebody sacrifice their own life for another) then I'm cool with my money going to that. But outside of that, I consider it elective surgery, and in that case, either get insurance that will pay for it, or strong supporters should put their money where their mouths are, and give additional funds to Planned Parenthood or create a separate privately funded foundation.creepycoug said:Look, if you don't really understand the issue, like most people, then fucking of course it's a huge issue. It would be like the SC ruling that the states can decide whether a woman can have a hysterectomy or a tit job. People here would go fucking nuts with that as an invasion of privacy.
But the point is that abortion is not like a hysterectomy or a tit job. It involves the rights of another person. That should by any sane measure of logic take it out of the state's hands and make it a constitutional matter at the federal level. Again, the SC didn't go far enough.
The problem is all of the people who went out and voted on abortion think of it as a privacy issue, like @pawz does. It has absolutely nothing to do with privacy, but you can't make everybody smart and thoughtful. The discussions on the matter on this board prove that conclusively.
So, in a way, those of you who champion this as a state's rights issue more or less are complicit in the voter turnout, because you are, by implication, supporting the notion that abortion can be viewed differently by different people. It can't. One group (mine) is right; everybody else is wrong. It's not a regional cultural thing. It's basic morality. Like it or not.
Well, like the pussy hats, at least you think you're right. You have that in common.
Hey look, I have an opinion that I should be able to kill you at my election for any reason if done so in private. It's my opinion! -
Losing but claiming moral superiority? Sure you aren't a Dem?
-
That’s a Republican election virtue.Pitchfork51 said:Losing but claiming moral superiority? Sure you aren't a Dem?
