What is your stance on abortion?

beew said:

My bad. You said that you provide sex education in schools and to parents, so I assumed that it's all part of your employment.
I didn't mean to intrude in your private life, sorry.

It's your way of approaching feminist issues (not the issues themselves), that I often disagree with.

Click to expand...

I actually said "I spend far more of my time focusing on providing adequate sex education in schools and ways of getting parents to take some responsibility for preparing their kids for being an adult than I do on talking about access to abortions." I can see how that might be misread though - I probably should have said 'focusing on the provision of ...'. I don't deliver sex ed at all.

My way of approaching 'feminist issues' is my way of approaching pretty much anything. So really, you just don't like me. I'm OK with that - lots of people don't.

BotanyBoy said:

All government power and authority over access to anything is about both those things.

Click to expand...

Pretty much. But I was keeping it simple.

Que said:

Gleeful fans of abortion will do that. You have to bear in mind there are people who lack sufficient humanity to even acknowledge that a miscarriage is a heart felt, grevious loss to an expectant mother.

How do you even have a discussion with someone that committed to culling the population of poor, mostly black people that will sink to that level of insensitivity?

Click to expand...

There are no 'gleeful fans of abortion' ... sigh.

Que said:

This^^^ is what she said, pre-edit

You can see it captured here: http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=89763686&postcount=93

Click to expand...

Cheers for that - I edited it precisely because I realised it did look insensitive, but lucky me! You captured it for all eternity, so I can't address the error I made. Awesome.

I've miscarried myself, so I do understand the grief that's involved, or at least my grief. For me, that grief was not for the loss of an actual baby, but the loss of the baby I was wanting to have - a potential and as-yet hypothetical, but very wanted, baby. The same way lots of women who have terminations grieve the loss of the baby they might have had. I think if most people who have miscarried drilled down into why they felt grief, this would be the response.
Having since had an actual baby, I'm fairly confident the grief I would feel if anything happened to him would be of an entirely different order.

I can't speak to Oblimo's feeling on the matter, but I've addressed that off-thread. I do apologise to anyone else whose been through this and read my admittedly flippant (and consequently deleted) comment.

Que said:

Gleeful fans of abortion will do that. You have to bear in mind there are people who lack sufficient humanity to even acknowledge that a miscarriage is a heart felt, grevious loss to an expectant mother.

How do you even have a discussion with someone that committed to culling the population of poor, mostly black people that will sink to that level of insensitivity?

Click to expand...

Those are some wonderful strawmen you have constructed, you must feel very heroic attacking them in such a brave manner.

I find it odd that so many people who are Pro death penalty are also anti-abortion.

Saying that...condoms, birth control pills, and "day after" pills should be free!

Led_Astray said:

Those are some wonderful strawmen you have constructed, you must feel very heroic attacking them in such a brave manner.

Click to expand...

Yeah, because this is the only time this topic has come up in the last several years.

Que said:

Gleeful fans of abortion will do that. You have to bear in mind there are people who lack sufficient humanity to even acknowledge that a miscarriage is a heart felt, grevious loss to an expectant mother.

How do you even have a discussion with someone that committed to culling the population of poor, mostly black people that will sink to that level of insensitivity?

Click to expand...

Wow..you really are one extremely stupid sob..

Someone that dumb shouldn't be having those kind of discussions.. They should really just shut up for a change.

HAL_9000 said:

I find it odd that so many people who are Pro death penalty are also anti-abortion.

Saying that...condoms, birth control pills, and "day after" pills should be free!

Click to expand...

It's because they believe that every sperm has a name.

>>>Line deleted by original poster

Que said:

This^^^ is what was said, pre-edit

Click to expand...

And you claim this line is sufficient to accuse her or any other Pro-Choice proponent of “lack[ing] sufficient humanity to even acknowledge that a miscarriage is a heart felt, grevious loss to an expectant mother?”

What utter horseshit. You owe Kim an apology.

Well, maybe you are not aware of the cultural context of that comment, and that is Pence’s Indiana law HEA 1337, requiring women’s health clinics to conduct funerary measures for a miscarried or aborted fetus if the mother did not dispose of the fetus herself, the resulting #periodsforpence protests, and the eventual abortion of the law by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Try reading it in the context of her post. She God-damn well knew how insensitive it was in that context which is why the stupid cunt deleted it.

Que said:

Try reading it in the context of her post. And she God damn well knew how insensitive it was in that context which is why these stupid c*** deleted it.

Click to expand...

Quoted for misogyny.

Edit: In before the Que's edit. Know who else likes to edit their posts in such a way? beew, that's who. Hmm...

HAL_9000 said:

I find it odd that so many people who are Pro death penalty are also anti-abortion.

Saying that...condoms, birth control pills, and "day after" pills should be free!

Click to expand...

People who get the death penalty are guilty of heinous acts against the law, the unborn, except for being an inconvenience, are innocent. Though in some people's mind that enough to justify their death.

von_Bismarck said:

Quoted for misogyny.

Edit: In before the Que's edit. Know who else likes to edit their posts in such a way? beew, that's who. Hmm...

Click to expand...

Calling a woman (singular) who is being an actual cunt a cunt is not misogyny.

Know who constantly hammers the completely discredited Que=hashtag excuse for his alts? RDS, that's who. Hmm....

Rightguide said:

People who get the death penalty are guilty of heinous acts against the law, the unborn, except for being an inconvenience, are innocent. Though in some people's mind that enough to justify their death.

Click to expand...

I think the reason why certain people are consistently on the wrong side of every single issue is because they are absolutely incapable of logic.

They all draw the same false equivalencies and they always express them as if they are having an original musing that they just thought of themselves as if that hackneyed false equivalency hasn't been used thousands of times before just as ineffectively.

Que said:

I think the reason why certain people are consistently on the wrong side of every single issue is because they are absolutely incapable of logic.

Click to expand...

Admitting is the first step.. Keep on to number two! You can do it!

I agree that the issue of the foetus is ethically ambiguous.
Which is why I, too, am judgmental of the small subgroup of repeat female aborters who go on to have more accidental pregnancies after the first two. Instead of working harder on prevention.

Rightguide said:

People who get the death penalty are guilty of heinous acts against the law, the unborn, except for being an inconvenience, are innocent. Though in some people's mind that enough to justify their death.

Click to expand...

In saying that, I feel that both anti and pro-choice men focus only on women.
They conveniently forget to mention the men who can't keep it in their pocket, yet are aversive to 'the feel' of condoms or to reversible vasectomies.

I think that it's because those liberal men want a readily available pool of sex partners but without the potential responsibility, and conservative men feel that contraception is solely a woman's responsibility.
Both attitudes are equally misogynistic.

Que said:

I think the reason why certain people are consistently on the wrong side of every single issue is because they are absolutely incapable of logic.

They all draw the same false equivalencies and they always express them as if they are having an original musing that they just thought of themselves as if that hackneyed false equivalency hasn't been used thousands of times before just as ineffectively.

Click to expand...

This debate has always been a no win argument. As far as I'm concerned it's tired. There have been over 50 million abortions since 1973 in the United States. It's become sanctioned and fashionable in at least half the country. It isn't going to go away. America will disappear first.

beew said:

I agree that the issue of the foetus is ethically ambiguous.
Which is why I, too, am judgmental of the small subgroup of repeat female aborters who go on to have more accidental pregnancies after the first two. Instead of working harder on prevention.



In saying that, I feel that both anti and pro-choice men focus only on women.
They conveniently forget to mention the men who can't keep it in their pocket, yet are aversive to 'the feel' of condoms or to reversible vasectomies.

I think that it's because those liberal men want a readily available pool of sex partners but without the potential responsibility, and conservative men feel that contraception is solely a woman's responsibility.
Both attitudes are equally misogynistic.

Click to expand...

I believe all men should be made to accept responsibility for any child they father, but in the case of abortion women on the left have driven men completely out of the equation by insisting the right to terminate a life is exclusively a "woman's right." That is not my belief but it is the prevailing attitude on the left. I think a lot of women use abortion as a form of birth control in lieu of personal responsibility.

Rightguide said:

I believe all men should be made to accept responsibility for any child they father, but in the case of abortion women on the left have driven men completely out of the equation by insisting the right to terminate a life is exclusively a "woman's right." That is not my belief but it is the prevailing attitude on the left. I think a lot of women use abortion as a form of birth control in lieu of personal responsibility.

Click to expand...

How many women can you name who use abortion as birth control?

Honestly, you need to stop getting your information from Bill O'Reilly.

Oblimo said:

There. That is the standard she is arguing for. Society can only deny a mother’s choice to abort if her choice violates the Minimally Decent Samaritan standard. Remember, she does not need permission from society to abort; she can just fling herself down a flight of stairs. In Western morals and law, society can only determine the circumstances in which abortion is not moral, and sometimes, not legal.


So, the MDS standard is very lenient. It is also a moral standard, not a legal one.


Notice how she doesn’t say that MDS standards should be made law. In fact, they can’t, because you cannot narrowly tailor to the MDS standard.

Click to expand...

Thanks first of all for clarifying the thrust of Thomson's manifesto that I had previously glossed over and had expressed reservations about -- the degree to which her standard that "abortion is not always permissible" (presumably constrained ONLY by her MDS standard) is appropriately a legal standard.

Your citing of her quotes on "good" and "minimally decent" Samaritanism and her dismissive "we are not here concerned with the law" argue persuasively that she rejects a legal standard.

Which is precisely the problem. You're both getting your "MUSTS" confused with your "SHOULDS." If she categorically rejects MDS as a legal standard, then she SHOULD have said, "this is a standard we SHOULD not fall below." That allows both for her opinion as to its importance AND the license for the rest of society to leverage its leniency as it sees fit. The word MUST, however, invokes a binding requirement, wholly appropriate in a legal context and devoid of leniency absent the specific articulation of that leniency. Word. For. Word.

Meanwhile, you trip all over this yourself. YOU SAID: Society can only deny a mother’s choice to abort if her choice violates the Minimally Decent Samaritan standard.

Really?? Society can DO that? Doesn't sound very lenient to me. Make up your mind. You chastise me for my confrontational language in argumentation and debate, but when people jitterbug around with the very MEANING of language so that they can argue polar opposite concepts out of both sides of their mouths, it is extremely hard for me to be charitable.

Oblimo said:

This analogy is not made by Thomson. It also makes no sense, as it is apples to oranges: a criminal law punishing a person for taking a specific act, versus a public safety ordinance preventing an innocent person of committing an act. Or, maybe it’s your attempt to segue into arguing over the death penalty?

Click to expand...

If you think most abortion law has no more gravitas or relevance to criminal law than a "public safety ordinance," you REALLY don't understand the law. And there is absolutely no difference in a person "taking a specific act" and "committing an act." You're trying to manufacture criminal guilt or innocence by manipulating the law to your liking. It doesn't work. The laws do that as written. Example: Local ordinances regulating the sale of alcoholic beverages, or whether, in fact, a jurisdiction is "wet" or "dry" are, indeed, public safety ordinances. However, the Volstead Act, under authority of the 18th Amendment, criminalized the matter. Same activity. Vastly different laws and penalties.

And, I might add, based not altogether unreasonably on society's ever shifting values and priorities.

But one would think it would not shift as quickly as you and Thomson keep moving the goal posts. I'm just trying to find the line in the sand that you and Thomson actually believe abortion to be impermissible WITHOUT turning around and giving back a right(?) or privilege(?) which you purported to take away on legitimate moral grounds WORTHY of legal sanction.

Since I get no closer to finding it each time you post, I will go with the Supreme Court's decision in Roe that eschews motivations of the mother or Good (vs lukewarm) Samaritanism and simply relies on time within the gestation process as the determining factor as to whether a mother's interest in terminating a pregnancy OR the state's interest in preserving the life of the fetus is compelling.

beew said:

In saying that, I feel that both anti and pro-choice men focus only on women.
They conveniently forget to mention the men who can't keep it in their pocket, yet are aversive to 'the feel' of condoms or to reversible vasectomies.

Click to expand...

Why should a man be made responsible for a womans uterus?

He doesn't have any authority or control over her body, that's her authority and thus her responsibility.

phrodeau said:

How many women can you name who use abortion as birth control?

Honestly, you need to stop getting your information from Bill O'Reilly.

Click to expand...

Actually, I knew a few. Very sad.

i used to be against it.

then my sister got one because she was on heroin and the prick who knocked her up was a piece of shit who stabbed and killed a puppy because it was annoying him.

kinda changed my mind after that.

i still like don't like the idea of abortion, but it needs to be legal to get one.

pointless said:

i used to be against it.

then my sister got one because she was on heroin and the prick who knocked her up was a piece of shit who stabbed and killed a puppy because it was annoying him.

kinda changed my mind after that.

i still like don't like the idea of abortion, but it needs to be legal to get one.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, sounds like a smart choice.