roeVwade:Same-sex couples updating legal status after Supreme Court’s decision on abortion (Jay Reeves) [+CNN clip]

[Lacius]

So it really isn't about viability. I always knew that was lie.

I've been consistent that a pregnant person should be able to end a pregnancy whenever they want, regardless of how far along they are. However, if the fetus is viable, that's a birth, not an abortion.

Nice try at a "gotcha" though.

 

[TraderPatTX]

Coping is not an argument. Here's the question again.

If you are the only available donor for a patient who will die otherwise, and you do not want to donate an organ to this person, this person dies. Should you be charged with murder? If not, why?

Did I shoot or harm this person in any way where they would need an organ transplant? If not, I do not bear any responsibility.

Let's take this a step further. If there are two people who need a kidney, you have to choose which to give it to. One is a family member and one is a complete stranger. Who do you give it to? And is it murder of the other person who did not get your kidney?

You see why "what if" games are dumb? They do not add to a debate at all. Same with the you wearing your seatbelt will save my life when the left was forcing masks on people.

 

[LainaGabranth]

Did I shoot or harm this person in any way where they would need an organ transplant? If not, I do not bear any responsibility.

Let's take this a step further. If there are two people who need a kidney, you have to choose which to give it to. One is a family member and one is a complete stranger. Who do you give it to? And is it murder of the other person who did not get your kidney?

You see why "what if" games are dumb? They do not add to a debate at all. Same with the you wearing your seatbelt will save my life when the left was forcing masks on people.

So, the funny thing about this is your inability to answer it shows the cognitive dissonance of your position, and I think it's really funny that you think what if scenarios don't have relevance. Cope all you want, you know I'm right: you do not value bodily autonomy, only your dogma.

 

[TraderPatTX]

Hmm, so someone should be forced to carry a fetus against their will for the sake of the fetus' "life," yeeeeet...no one can be forced to get a vaccine for the sake of other people's lives, because...?

What, because they're actually alive and aren't a fetus? lmao.

There are laws against forcing people to inject experimental vaccines. That stemmed from the Nuremburg Trials because Nazi doctors did gruesome experiments on people and the left wants to do the same thing now. The kicker is you call everybody you disagree with fascist. The irony is not lost here.

 

[TraderPatTX]

Ask yourself: "If my opponents are the ones making irrational arguments based in emotion, then why am I the one calling them a pro-death cult?" You cannot have a debate until you are willing to entertain the possibility that the opposition might have at least one valid point to make. If you want people to listen to you, consider not calling them evil, as a start.

Not sure if you have noticed, but the opposition has been calling everyone they disagree with everything from racist to fascist and white supremacist for decades. They even call black people they disagree with white supremacist. How does one debate people like that?

At least they've earned the label pro-death cult. There is no other logical reasoning for celebrating 70 million murdered black babies in the last fifty years. They celebrate genocide against a particular race and call us racist. We can have a real debate when they knock it off with the projection.

 

[LainaGabranth]

The kicker is you call everybody you disagree with fascist. The irony is not lost here.

Prove it.

 

[mituzora]

There are laws against forcing people to inject experimental vaccines. That stemmed from the Nuremburg Trials because Nazi doctors did gruesome experiments on people and the left wants to do the same thing now. The kicker is you call everybody you disagree with fascist. The irony is not lost here.

Way to change the subject from Abortions to Vaccines. go figure. But I suppose it goes towards body autonomy.

AFAIK, there has been zero laws put on the books about forcing these "experimental" vaccines in any capacity. It's up to the place of business, or private entity to allow someone unvaccinated or not to go into their premises (but because there's business who refuse to serve your stupid ass, then it's the government's fault right?). and I guarantee you that there's more leftists out there who while they think you're stupid as hell that you aren't getting vaccinated, don't want to force that burden on someone.

Also, it's funny how you'll get bent out of shape if it has something to do with YOUR body, but you won't even remotely consider a person with a fetus's body. I've stated many times before, pregnancy (and many other contraceptives) can and will fuck someone's body up, but you're telling these people that they have to fuck their body up so they can either give birth to a human who would otherwise not remember a damn thing, or risk permanently damaging their body so they can enjoy a healthy sexual life. That's kinda fucked up.

EDIT: also, yes, I understand that abortion can come with complications as well, I'm not naive, but the fact of the matter is that you argued with vaccines, and how they shouldn't be forced, yet you're going to force someone to go through something that can cause major damage to their body to satiate your beliefs.

 

[SyphenFreht]

There are laws against forcing people to inject experimental vaccines. That stemmed from the Nuremburg Trials because Nazi doctors did gruesome experiments on people and the left wants to do the same thing now. The kicker is you call everybody you disagree with fascist. The irony is not lost here.

HEY BUDDY DO YOU KNOW WHY THERE ARE LAWS AGAINST THAT!? HUH!?

But seriously. *BoDiLy AuToNoMy*

That's literally why America can't push vaccines except in cases of military or public schools. But here we are, arguing whether bodily autonomy exists outside of vaccinations (it does) and if so, if the bodily autonomy of one outweighs the first (it doesn't).

"But that's hypocrisy! You just said ... And the mothers BA doesn't outweigh the baby's... MumbleWhineGrr"

Funny thing is, if your side admitted to the idea of bodily autonomy, you'd have a much stronger point of debate than the tired crap y'all have been pushing.

Even then, though, as the woman's bodily autonomy was already established before pregnancy, it basically gets first come first serve.

I see we ignored my post about controlling women. But it's ok; everyone else saw it. You get to that whenever you're comfortable, 'Kay pumpkin?

 

[LainaGabranth]

HEY BUDDY DO YOU KNOW WHY THERE ARE LAWS AGAINST THAT!? HUH!?

But seriously. *BoDiLy AuToNoMy*

That's literally why America can't push vaccines except in cases of military or public schools. But here we are, arguing whether bodily autonomy exists outside of vaccinations (it does) and if so, if the bodily autonomy of one outweighs the first (it doesn't).

"But that's hypocrisy! You just said ... And the mothers BA doesn't outweigh the baby's... MumbleWhineGrr"

Funny thing is, if your side admitted to the idea of bodily autonomy, you'd have a much stronger point of debate than the tired crap y'all have been pushing.

Even then, though, as the woman's bodily autonomy was already established before pregnancy, it basically gets first come first serve.

I see we ignored my post about controlling women. But it's ok; everyone else saw it. You get to that whenever you're comfortable, 'Kay pumpkin?

I love watching this coward get angrier and selectively ignore your posts when he squirms too much. God righties are fucking embarrassing.

 

[mituzora]

I love watching this coward get angrier and selectively ignore your posts when he squirms too much. God righties are fucking embarrassing.

I love how when anybody calls this person out, they have such a weak rebuttal that I can't even remotely take them seriously. Pretty much anything beyond one or two posts have been essentially attacking the person instead of the argument.

it's entertaining.

 

[tabzer]

Per this logic, all parents must be required by law to donate kidneys to their children if/when the need arises.

A parent who is capable of donating a kidney probably would. It would probably happen so much more often than not, that nobody would think to make it a law. However, how likely will a parent who has a genetic kidney disease survive a transplant, make a kid, and have something left over to give them?

Only when your television or SNS advertises a controversy, with some sort of political agenda in mind, would a law be necessary.

Also, whether or not something is immoral doesn't necessarily mean it should be illegal.

Why should things be legal or illegal?

If a person doesn't want to be pregnant, but the state is forcing them to remain pregnant under penalty of jail time, then yeah, that's comparatively what's happening.

The state making laws on abortion =/= a fetus running the show.

First, I said earlier that I wouldn't even give an embryo rights that normal people get depending on how far along the pregnancy is.

Second, my point this entire time in this and the other thread has been that even IF we recognize a fetus as a person with all the same rights as a normal human being, that wouldn't magically give it the right to violate another person's bodily autonomy. That would be a special right that transcends any other real person's rights. Whether or not the fetus is conscious, and whether or not it depends on the womb for survival, are irrelevant. I am a conscious person, but if I depend on your body for survival, that doesn't give me a legal right to it. If you decide to deny me access to your body, that's just too bad for me.

You act like you haven't heard me explain this a thousand times already.

There are many classes of organisms that have rights designed specifically to the nature of their condition, for the purpose of preserving their lives. What you suggest is that because an embryo needs to live inside a womb, that you should be able to do so too, because otherwise, it is not fair.

A person should have the right to do whatever they want with their body.

Except a baby.

Yeah it is. I did it with the "kidneys for biological offspring" variation (not that it was needed), lol.

Where does organ transplant create a life?

Be sure to tag me if/when you decide to justify this comment with actual reasoning.

I tell you the analogy is broken, because it doesn't account for the interests of those you pose it as an argument for. You say it's not, because the analogy says so.

No it doesn't. You just don't seem to care that some people don't want to be pregnant, and you don't seem to care about bodily autonomy rights.

That's whataboutism.

If you don't think a person should have a right to bodily autonomy, then that means you're okay with the state compelling you to donate a kidney.

Bodily autonomy is unobtainable because it defies reality (ie men as gods). It's an ideal with unlimited space to shift goalposts. If the state feels the need to compel me to do something I would do anyway, I'd scoff at the idea that there is a need for such a law.

 

[TraderPatTX]

Way to change the subject from Abortions to Vaccines. go figure. But I suppose it goes towards body autonomy.

AFAIK, there has been zero laws put on the books about forcing these "experimental" vaccines in any capacity. It's up to the place of business, or private entity to allow someone unvaccinated or not to go into their premises (but because there's business who refuse to serve your stupid ass, then it's the government's fault right?). and I guarantee you that there's more leftists out there who while they think you're stupid as hell that you aren't getting vaccinated, don't want to force that burden on someone.

Also, it's funny how you'll get bent out of shape if it has something to do with YOUR body, but you won't even remotely consider a person with a fetus's body. I've stated many times before, pregnancy (and many other contraceptives) can and will fuck someone's body up, but you're telling these people that they have to fuck their body up so they can either give birth to a human who would otherwise not remember a damn thing, or risk permanently damaging their body so they can enjoy a healthy sexual life. That's kinda fucked up.

EDIT: also, yes, I understand that abortion can come with complications as well, I'm not naive, but the fact of the matter is that you argued with vaccines, and how they shouldn't be forced, yet you're going to force someone to go through something that can cause major damage to their body to satiate your beliefs.

It's not changing the subject when I'm showing the left's multiple examples of authoritarianism.

You are worried about major damage to people's bodies but advocate for body mutilation of "trans" kids which leads to higher suicide rates. Is there no limit to the left's irony?

 

[Lacius]

A parent who is capable of donating a kidney probably would.

And a person who gets pregnant would probably keep it. Who cares? We are talking about what should or shouldn't be legal.

Only when your television or SNS advertises a controversy, with some sort of political agenda in mind, would a law be necessary.

The state laws making abortion illegal are, uh, laws. I guess you think those should be repealed then. I am glad we are on the same page.

The state making laws on abortion =/= a fetus running the show.

Correct. If you, uh, read my analogy, you will note that the person "running the show" in both examples is the government. The government stops a pregnant person from exercising their bodily autonomy rights and getting an abortion, and the government forces one to donate a kidney. Keep up.

There are many classes of organisms that have rights designed specifically to the nature of their condition, for the purpose of preserving their lives.

Only if someone else's bodily autonomy isn't violated.

What you suggest is that because an embryo needs to live inside a womb, that you should be able to do so too, because otherwise, it is not fair.

Lol, what is this nonsense? Nobody said anything about having a right to a womb. I've only said the opposite.

Except a baby.

Pretending for a second that babies are given all the rights of a person, then yes, including babies. However, personhood doesn't grant someone the right to another person's body. That would be a special right that, until now, didn't exist.

Where does organ transplant create a life?

The organ transplant keeps someone alive, just like the womb keeps a fetus alive.

That's whataboutism.

No, it isn't. Are you even trying anymore?

Bodily autonomy is unobtainable because it defies reality (ie men as gods). It's an ideal with unlimited space to shift goalposts. If the state feels the need to compel me to do something I would do anyway, I'd scoff at the idea that there is a need for such a law.

If you don't believe people should have a right to bodily autonomy, then you believe you can be compelled by law to donate a kidney. It's as simple as that.

 

[LainaGabranth]

It's not changing the subject when I'm showing the left's multiple examples of authoritarianism.

You are worried about major damage to people's bodies but advocate for body mutilation of "trans" kids which leads to higher suicide rates. Is there no limit to the left's irony?

Actually, SRS isn't available to minors or anyone who isn't determined of sound mind. Also, the suicide rates are explicitly just because of harassment and bigotry, SRS in adults actually heavily lowers rates of suicide, as well as mental states that lead to it such as depression, bodily dysphoria, and so on. The data is concluded on this, you lose.

 

[MartyDreamy]

Men can get pregnant too. Don't be a bigot.

I don't know why you continue to say "don't be a bigot, men can get pregnant too."
No shit sherlock, that's not the point of this discussion.
The point is that you continue to say that a mass of cells needs to have more rights than a fucking human.
I think you missed some biology classes. Since I believe you're a man (or amab, or a person without a fucking uterus) why the hell should you have a hurtful opinion about something that doesn't matter to you?
What will you do if in the future, a person that you love, a wife, or a friend, is in a bad situation and wants to abort for their safety?
The only opinion that matters is the opinion of the person who wants to abort. And since you guys scream every day "my body, my choice" about vaccines, we could say the same thing about abortion. My body, my choice to abort.

 

[AncientBoi]

I'm only commenting on the "Same Sex" part from the start of this thread.

Leave us the FUQ alone!

 

[TraderPatTX]

Prove it.

Prove what? That the left calls anybody they disagree with alt right fascists? Do you honestly believe that average people have never heard this before? Go through the responses to my comments here for proof.

 

[TraderPatTX]

Actually, SRS isn't available to minors or anyone who isn't determined of sound mind. Also, the suicide rates are explicitly just because of harassment and bigotry, SRS in adults actually heavily lowers rates of suicide, as well as mental states that lead to it such as depression, bodily dysphoria, and so on. The data is concluded on this, you lose.

Prove it.

 

[TraderPatTX]

I don't know why you continue to say "don't be a bigot, men can get pregnant too."
No shit sherlock, that's not the point of this discussion.
The point is that you continue to say that a mass of cells needs to have more rights than a fucking human.
I think you missed some biology classes. Since I believe you're a man (or amab, or a person without a fucking uterus) why the hell should you have a hurtful opinion about something that doesn't matter to you?
What will you do if in the future, a person that you love, a wife, or a friend, is in a bad situation and wants to abort for their safety?
The only opinion that matters is the opinion of the person who wants to abort. And since you guys scream every day "my body, my choice" about vaccines, we could say the same thing about abortion. My body, my choice to abort.

Not more rights. Just equal rights. Why don't you want equality for all?

Actually, you screamed "my body, my choice" for decades until Covid hit and you threw it all out the window. The hypocrisy lands squarely on the left.

Most states have exceptions to their abortion laws, but you must be too lazy to look it up.

 

[TraderPatTX]

It's fun to see you call lefties "obsessed" when you people will fall over yourselves voting for him again.

Or defend his incitation of the J6 debacle (I can't even call it an insurrection in good faith. It was a bunch of morons crying at the Capitol)

Or constantly have Biden's name in your mouth when it comes to things that don't have anything to do with him. Like, inflation. Like, gas prices in general. For someone who accuses everyone of having a hard on for the government, you sure like to blame the government for everything when it isn't Republican ran. And for someone who talks down to others about their "corporate megalords" or whatever you called them earlier, you sure do defend them a lot in an effort to blame another shitty presidential figurehead.

Lucy, you got an awful lot of 'splainin' to do.

Trump isn't president anymore and you seem to really miss him. Also, he didn't incite anything. There was a second stage setup at the Supreme Court that people were expected to go to. So that blows up the left's talking points that this was all planned.

I can't blame Republicans for current gas prices when they were $1.87 when a Republican was president. If a Republican president shut down pipelines and oil and gas leases, I would blame him. That didn't happen.

Hope that was enough 'splainin' and that you were able to follow along and understand.