Do you own your body?

[BabyBoomer50s]

Again, for the folks in the back. No other human being has that right. If you all want to say that the fetus is a person, whatever. Again, no person has that right. No person can use another person's body to provide material physical support to preserve or sustain their life without their permission.

Laws are based on precedents - not feelings.

Why do fetuses get this right - especially with this whole ridiculous push to personhood - that no person gets?

What basis of logic do these "elected representatives"/you use for this conclusion? Why do fetuses get special rights?

Abortion laws in America date back many years. Even without the pending Dobbs ruling, a myriad of state laws place all kinds of restrictions on if, who, when, where, and how abortions can be performed. Laws are based on legislation which is subject to constitutional scrutiny by our judicial branch. Precedent is a factor and there is an abundance of that in our body of law.

 

[windar]

Because elected representatives believe that at certain stages of pregnancy (varies by state), the fetus is a human being and has a right to continue living despite the wishes of host who played a role in creating that human being.

I'm a human being, but I don't get to live inside another human being. No such right exists.

In all this back and forth, no one has laid out how any abortion ban would be enforced. The devil is always in the details.

How many abortions would actually be prevented, as opposed to simply being made less safe? The majority of early abortions these days are done medically with a few pills. The authorities can't stop truckloads of fentanyl and other dangerous drugs from being sold; how will they stop tiny little pills from other states or overseas? Will a Walter White start cranking out mifepristone instead of meth? Count on it. This is actually a more meaningful real world question than who owns what. Sadly, I forsee this entire area turning into a giant social catastrophe like the War on Drugs that will reduce the number of abortions minimally, if at all, whilst producing all kinds of bad social consequences.

Passing laws is one thing. Let's hear you tell us all how the laws will work in practice. Go on, I dare you...

 

[colddiesel]

Abortion laws in America date back many years. Even without the pending Dobbs ruling, a myriad of state laws place all kinds of restrictions on if, who, when, where, and how abortions can be performed. Laws are based on legislation which is subject to constitutional scrutiny by our judicial branch. Precedent is a factor and there is an abundance of that in our body of law.

You are missing the point entirely. I think that Adrina is saying that there is no need for any abortion law of any kind whatsoever. It is solely a matter for the pregnant person, and should not fall within the purview of government, any government, at any level at any time.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

I'm a human being, but I don't get to live inside another human being. No such right exists.

Passing laws is one thing. Let's hear you tell us all how the laws will work in practice. Go on, I dare you...

Actually you did get to live inside another human being. You just don’t remember. We had abortion laws before the 1973 Roe decision, we’ve had abortion laws since Roe, and we’ll have abortion laws after the Dobbs decision comes down. They vary from state to state.

 

[JoseGarcia]

https://i.imgur.com/FDOCvuh.gif

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

You are missing the point entirely. I think that Adrina is saying that there is no need for any abortion law of any kind whatsoever. It is solely a matter for the pregnant person, and should not fall within the purview of government, any government, at any level at any time.

She’s entitled to her opinion but the US is a nation of laws, grounded in our Constitution. She’s not happy with laws that regulate abortion and will be even less happy with states that might ban it entirely. We have democratic processes for changing laws we don’t like. She can make choices about where to live, and how much she wants to engage in the political process in her state.

 

[pecksniff]

Just to clear things up: I own all your bodies.

Report to the waiting room and take a number.

 

[Biggs_Darklighter]

I did a little research. You can indeed own someone's body in some states.
Nice. Very nice.

 

[adrina]

Abortion laws in America date back many years. Even without the pending Dobbs ruling, a myriad of state laws place all kinds of restrictions on if, who, when, where, and how abortions can be performed. Laws are based on legislation which is subject to constitutional scrutiny by our judicial branch. Precedent is a factor and there is an abundance of that in our body of law.

Bull fucking shit. The anti abortion movement started as an anti woman sexist move against midwives. Then when segregation fell the religious bigots - see you - took up anti abortion as another means of control.

Again, name the fucking precedent that allows you to compel a person to provide physical material support to another against their will.

Your hysteria isn't precedent.

 

[adrina]

She’s entitled to her opinion but the US is a nation of laws, grounded in our Constitution. She’s not happy with laws that regulate abortion and will be even less happy with states that might ban it entirely. We have democratic processes for changing laws we don’t like. She can make choices about where to live, and how much she wants to engage in the political process in her state.

You don't respect the law or the constitution. You're just another fucking liar. First it was states rights, then it will be a national ban. Then birth control. Spare me. Hell you support the J6 insurrectionists and believe that pathetic piece of shit Trump won. Don't patronize us.

Women's rights, gay rights, medical rights - all on the chopping block because of religious fanaticism with roots in racism.

Fuck off liar.

 

[Biggs_Darklighter]

Someone seems upset. Must be that time of the month.

 

[adrina]

Someone seems upset. Must be that time of the month.

Yeah Boomer's on the rag.

The rest of us are just sick of his lying hypocritical woman hating bullshit.

 

[Biggs_Darklighter]

Yeah Boomer's on the rag.

The rest of us are just sick of his lying hypocritical woman hating bullshit.

Poor thing. Maybe you need to lie down. Take a midol maybe.

 

[adrina]

Poor thing. Maybe you need to lie down. Take a midol maybe.

Boomer is the hysterical one. If you want to try to turn this into your entertainment for the morning... whatever. You're just another lit idiot anyway.

 

[Biggs_Darklighter]

Boomer is the hysterical one. If you want to try to turn this into your entertainment for the morning... whatever. You're just another lit idiot anyway.

Take 2. Sounds like its a heavy day.

 

[adrina]

Take 2. Sounds like its a heavy day.

Take your own advice. You seem overly concerned about this.

 

[Biggs_Darklighter]

Take your own advice. You seem overly concerned about this.

I post here maybe twice a week. I'm not overly concerned about anything that's said here.
I do worry bitches are getting out of control but that ain't being solved on a porn board. Need some Handmaid shit to happen to solve that problem.

 

[LittleDixie]

Adriana, you agree that a fetus is alive. You believe that it is a human being. You believe that it is a distinct and separate thing. Yet, you see no problem with killing it because it is dependent on the mother to survive.

Reproduction is a biological process, not a legal one. It doesn't operate on the premise of rights, or fairness, or of personal wants. Talking about what right a fetus inside you has to be there is about as sensical as taking your cancer to court for trespassing. I mean, what right does cancer have to even be in your body in the first place?

You had sex, and you got pregnant. A new life was created. Even if if is inconvenient to you, that new life is stuck with you and you are stuck with it. You don't get to kill it.

And come to think of it, how do you get the right to murder someone? I get that you have a gripe over it's right to be in you, but how do you jump from that being justification to murder a human being?

 

[Rotadom]

Adriana, you agree that a fetus is alive. You believe that it is a human being. You believe that it is a distinct and separate thing. Yet, you see no problem with killing it because it is dependent on the mother to survive.

When did she say all of this about herself?

 

[TJX]

When did she say all of this about herself?

Post 181

 

[adrina]

I post here maybe twice a week. I'm not overly concerned about anything that's said here.
I do worry bitches are getting out of control but that ain't being solved on a porn board. Need some Handmaid shit to happen to solve that problem.

At some point you're going to have to learn to not extrapolate your two plus decades of butthurt against all women.

 

[adrina]

Adriana, you agree that a fetus is alive. You believe that it is a human being. You believe that it is a distinct and separate thing. Yet, you see no problem with killing it because it is dependent on the mother to survive.

Reproduction is a biological process, not a legal one. It doesn't operate on the premise of rights, or fairness, or of personal wants. Talking about what right a fetus inside you has to be there is about as sensical as taking your cancer to court for trespassing. I mean, what right does cancer have to even be in your body in the first place?

You had sex, and you got pregnant. A new life was created. Even if if is inconvenient to you, that new life is stuck with you and you are stuck with it. You don't get to kill it.

And come to think of it, how do you get the right to murder someone? I get that you have a gripe over it's right to be in you, but how do you jump from that being justification to murder a human being?

Not a one. I have no issue with it whatsoever because I don't confuse an acorn with a tree and I don't elevate a fetus above a woman - or above all of humanity for that matter. You and the ant-abortion fanatics do.

All of society operates on the legal process. Especially now that women's bodies are open going to be open for regulation. You're the one being illogical about fetus "rights". You and the anti abortion hysterics want to give rights to a fetus that no other human being has. And you can only justify it by saying 'well they had sex'.

Which makes this more about moral judgement than logic or even legalities. There are very few - insanely few - voices in the anti abortion movement (pro life is bullshit) that speak about the embryos disposed of at the IVF clinics. It is only the fetus in the uterus that is worthy of this attention.

I wonder why.

You get the right to defend yourself. Abortion is an act of self defense. It's just that damn simple.

Now for the umpteenth time, why should a fetus get rights that no person has?

 

[Vetteman]

Condoms, birth control pills, vasectomies, vaginal rings, patches, and other popular forms of birth control are in no danger of being outlawed. Plan B pills and IUDs could be outlawed in certain states, but even that recently failed in Louisiana.

Birth control needs to be removed because women don’t need it. If a woman is having sex and doesn’t want to get pregnant she can mentally shut down all the reproductive stuff. If a woman is pregnant she 100% made that choice on her own.

 

[adrina]

I never said there wasn't a life. It's even human. That's also irrelevant. I don't romanticize a fetus.

Mother nature has plants that are natural abortifacients. My problem isn't with nature. It's the fucked up interpretation you guys have that makes you believe women are slaves to a fetus.

A newborn baby can process its own oxygen and circulate its own blood. It is not reliant on the woman's physical body for support. Surely you know the difference. Don't be an idiot extremist.

Again, it's an issue with your fucked up interpretations. Nature isn't the problem. You are. (Knee surgeries aren't known in nature so we should just do away with them, right?)

I'm saying for the umpteenth time that no person has a right to compel anyone to provide physical material support to sustain their lives. Why do you think a fetus should have a right that no person has?

Yes duh. But I'm not some hysterical moron that gets the vapors because it's a buh-haaabeee. If you want to prove that human life is special, then you'll have to do a better job of actually caring about ALL humans. Not just the fetus. It's not like you'd let a woman compel someone to donate their blood to save her life.

If you want to remove that right from women then there is nothing to stop us as a society from compelling blood donation, organ donation etc. You will no longer own your body. That's the argument you are supporting in giving a fetus rights that no person has.

It's not a matter of biological reality as abortions have been around for literally thousands upon thousands of years. Again, that knee surgery goes more "against" nature then abortion. Hell, even eyeglasses if you want to pull that nature line.

Again, why do you think a fetus has rights that no person has?

When did she say all of this about herself?

I think you'll find that she has applied her own hysterical interpration to my words. It's a common thing with them.

 

[Rotadom]

Post 181

I see. It's a comprehension issue.