Roe V. Wade Gets Nuked

Row your boat. Wade into the waters. Sink or swim.
-----
Join the community discord! ► / discord
Watch Us LIVE (And Click Dat Sub Button!) ► / gameboomers
GB Archive Channel ► / gameboomer
Dev Kit Channel ► / @thedevkit
SFO Backups Channel ► / channel
-----
SUPPORT THE SHOW:
BTC:bc1q6udqgvfm9uaj59l24ut7f73wvsfu707kk6pn3m
SubscribeStar! ► www.subscribes...
Streamlabs! ► streamlabs.com...
Patreon! ► / shortfatotaku
Paypal! ► paypal.me/short...
Humble Bundle Affiliate Link! ► www.humblebund...
Amazon CAN Affiliate Link! ► amzn.to/322aFAa
Amazon USA Affiliate Link! ► amzn.to/30PLxgN
Amazon CAN Wishlist! ► www.amazon.ca/...
Amazon USA Wishlist! ► www.amazon.com...
-----
SFO-CIAL MEDIA! HYUK HYUK
DA TWEETS ► / sfosecretary
DA FACES ► / sfotaku
DA GABS ► www.gab.com/sh...
DA MINDS ► www.minds.com/...
DA PARLERS ► parler.com/pro...
DA STEAMS ► steamcommunity....
-----
Credits:
Thumbnail ► a twitter bro who helped me out
Background ► / cryomancerlex
Music ► • Parasite Eve OST - Out...
#RoeVWade #Abortion #SCOTUS

[@Monsuco]

I oppose abortion because, as a gamer, I have a very principled opposition to spawn killing.

[@TheJeremyKentBGross]

😄

[@hildegardvonbingen9092]

Especially with Level 1 stats and permadeath.

[@christophermonteith2774]

ok that's pretty good. in a serious note, this is more a spawn prevention, which in gaming terms is arguably worse

[@kmech3rd]

Well played.

[@Good_Emperor]

It's unsportsmanlike conduct!

[@jmclaughlin2009]

"Republicans are trying to impose their moral values on me, invade my privacy and tell me what I can or cannot do with my own property! The Supreme Court said I could do it! It's not like this thing is even human!" --plantation owner in South Carolina, 1861

[@cmohr6998]

Damn this is spot on... probably going to use this when debating the issue.

[@GhostOfSnuffles]

Moral stance on abortion is irrelevant to the discussion of Roe V. Wade. The SCOTUS doesn't have the authority to decide on it. People tend to forget that their only purpose is to preserve the constitution and nothing more. Abortion is *not* a constitutional right.

[@christophermonteith2774]

exactly

[@voskresenie-]

well, if there's a constitutional right to not be murdered, it's reasonable for the Supreme Court to interpret all laws allowing abortion to be unconstitutional. But any 'right' guaranteeing access to abortion is definitely overplaying their hand.

[@voskresenie-]

@@TheCappucinochannel-os4ne fair, I was incorrect; however, _given_ that states have laws against murder, the equal protection clause could be argued to make it unconstitutional for murder to be a crime when the victim has been born but not a crime if the victim has not been born. (A law banning murder of men but not women would be inarguably unconstitutional, for instance, so it's still potentially a constitutional question of whether unborn babies are covered under the equal protection clause.)

[@voskresenie-]

@@TheCappucinochannel-os4ne that's what I was saying - it's 'a question of whether unborn babies are covered by the equal protection clause'. The constitution not saying that they are also doesn't mean that they're not. How do you determine whether someone is a person or not? The answer probably seems obvious to you, but it also seems obvious to others who have a very different view than you. One of the core functions of courts in a common law system is filling in gaps in law (at least until statutes are written to elucidate those gaps). FWIW abortion has existed for thousands of years, and there is some precedent (though not constitutionally based) in early America about how to treat an unborn child, using the standard of 'quickening' (when the baby begins kicking), ie 'becoming alive' ('quick' means 'alive', like in the phrase 'the quick and the dead')

[@sdfabctr]

the reactions to this leak have made me feel like the diablo devs "Do you guys not have coat hangars?" I just love how we have really really effective condoms, we have birth control, we have surgeries to sterilize both sexes, and so much more but for some reason people act like abortions are the only way to stop pregnancies and also seem to act like getting pregnant is like getting diagnosed with late stage cancer. Shits wild.

[@SymmetricalDocking]

Roes Law: The less likely someone is to ever need an abortion, the more likely they are to be outraged if they can't.

[@CountArtha]

@@SymmetricalDocking Bioleninism

[@debordeleur2005]

Contraception sometimes fails.

[@dean_l33]

@@debordeleur2005 How often?

[@Xplora213]

@@debordeleur2005 the pill, AND a condom, AND Billing’s Method???!!!! We don’t let children drive cars because they are unable to handle the consequences of their actions and those around them. Sex is really the same kind of severe risk. It can completely change your life forever. So people need to weigh their risks. 💡

[@kirbymaster5]

Honestly, I'm okay with the concept of abortion, but the Left's treatment of it as some kind of virtue is some sick, twisted Warhammer 40k chaos god type shit.

[@thehaloofthesun7174]

What you are seeing is the creation of a new religion. They seem like that because it is their religion. Religion is simply a codified way of life in human society; to them, abortion has been associated with good in their brain, among other lefty religious values. They will only get more extreme as the power structure eventually settles into the government like the Vatican did with Christianity. Eventually, it will turn from celebrating abortions, to attacking others for NOT getting an abortion because "there's too many people on Earth already!" or whatever religious justification they will make. This can only get worse, before it gets better. The question is how much worse will it get before then?

[@hektorlitch4993]

Same. Not to mention, seeing lefties seethe is extremely satisfying.

[@WhiterThanAginger]

Low key slaneshi cultists

[@MrQuantumInc]

I've never seen anyone treat it as a virtue. Though some conservatives parody left like that. It is such a widespread and emotional issue I'm sure if you look hard enough you can see all sorts of weird things.

[@able34bravo37]

It's okay, it's only a little unnecessary murder.

[@AncestorEmpire1]

The phrase “my body, my choice” died during Covid from 2020-2022.

[@sdfabctr]

Honestly I've thought about it and I don't think it was ever really applicable to this topic. The moment the embryo gets fertilized it is definitionally a new organism with it's own genetics. Just because it's inside your body doesn't make it a part of your body.

[@MidlifeRenaissanceMan]

@@sdfabctr it’s not really a problem. They just need to take another _booster_ Problem solved

[@sdfabctr]

@@MidlifeRenaissanceMan I don't really get what you're trying to say here unfortunately.

[@ImInForAWuppin]

The phrase was dead long before that. As I've heard some on the right put it, you don't have two hearts. It's illogical to consider something with entirely different dna a part of oneself. The most reasonable description I've seen from the left is a parasite as it takes food from the parent, which is pretty ironic if you contrast it with how much of the left is fighting for taxpayer funded abortion. It's a good thing that the right is consistent on their stance about not killing human parasites lol

[@MidlifeRenaissanceMan]

@@sdfabctr i was referring to the recent experimental mRNA emergency use authorised _therapeutic_ that has been _encouraged_ and one of its side effects on pregnant birthing persons.....

[@kurosan0079]

I was pro-abortion, until these psychos started celebrating it. Like if you've had 15 abortions and say it's "morally good", you've completely lost me. You've killed 15 babies. You have no moral ground to stand on at that point. Now, I'm only pro-choice. Pro-choice in a sense that abortion should be an option in certain circumstances only (rape, incest, mortal danger due to labor). Even then, it should only be an option. Not treated as a "moral good" or something to be celebrated, but a necessary evil that no one should be proud of. At the end of the day, you're still killing a baby.

[@rushthezeppelin]

I was never full on pro-choice but I've really gotten to the point of outright banning it. Even in cases of incest and rape, yes it was an evil act that resulted in conception but why the hell do we punish the baby for that. It's just wrong, especially when there are so many charities out there who will take care of EVERY need of the woman in questions and help adopt the baby if that is what she wishes. Also the cases of truly dangerous to the mother pregnancies are pretty much only ectopic pregnancies. In that case if your intention is to remove the fetus and do everything you can to try and save it (which rarely does end well but sometimes does), then I don't consider that an abortion but an early c section. Every other pregnancy issue is usually just a risk to the baby and medical science is progressing rapidly on making outcomes better and the ones that don't, often have risk that is vastly overblown. To be fair I've gone 100% towards the pure pro-life position at least partially because of my recent conversion to Catholicism and I think apologists like Trent Horn make really good arguments for that position.

[@rushthezeppelin]

@@bandit6272 It's amazing that they created the idea basically wholecloth that it's not even a life until it exits the magical birth canal to justify their want for infanticide and assuage any guilt.

[@rushthezeppelin]

First it was the magical stages of the zygote where it's a frog and a fish and a chicken which was also created completely out of thin air but somehow is still in textbooks to this day despite high def ultrasounds blowing that crap out of the water.

[@able34bravo37]

The danger to mother thing almost never happens. It's not never, but it's as close as we're likely to get anytime soon, and it's a pretty small number to begin with. And the doctors usually know LONG before the mother goes into labor. I'm curious why you think the children created by rape and incest should be killed, though. Care to fill us in?

[@janek8195]

if u think it's killing a baby, then how is allowing it in cases of rape or incest not eugenics? if it's a baby it shouldn't be sentenced to death because of how it came to be, that's not the baby's fault.

[@terradraca]

This is such a classic case of "The devil always overplays his hand."

[@TheJeremyKentBGross]

Just it time to distract everyone from food shortages and massive inflation before the mid terms.

[@josedorsaith5261]

Right as the second drop of Pfizer docs happens. Whoops, turns out they knew about the myocarditis risk!

[@SupLuiKir]

'The devil always overplays his hand' is true so long as you are self-aware enough to not fall into the 'Everything I do is Just' mindset. Maybe people are opposing you because you're being a moron and they're keeping you from hurting people. Justicetards are the mirror image of devils, distinguishable only by what side they're on.

[@miffedcuttlefish6139]

Ah. It didn't though. Tgis was in the making from the 70's

[@casualgoats]

4 shadowed comments.. Can Elon buy KZbin next?

[@cosmicm8]

Dev is right here. The right’s anger about Roe v Wade wasn’t that it was a democratic vote the right lost, it was the fact the case was a federal government overreach. More people I know as conservatives and myself personally are more pissed at it not being left to voters in their own states.

[@tripleoo0]

And worse yet, it’s an overreach whose repeal will create precedent to legislate from the bench even more. The judicial branch is hurtling towards becoming unelected despots and has been for a long time, and whether you see this as a victory or a setback, the long-term ramifications this will have on how government operates in America will eventually Balkanize the country.

[@thisismyyoutubecommentacco6302]

This. It’s an egregious overreach of judicial authority.

[@OldieWan]

Reasonable thought process here.

[@DarkCrusader27]

Furthermore, the abuse of Roe v Wade has made women's birthing responsibility diminish.

[@GANTZ100pts]

@@DarkCrusader27 Exactly. And there's actually women out there that are using it as a form of contraceptive. Which is disgusting.

[@plastikloser]

If you use condoms, or a myriad of birth control its not even an issue. Unless they were in some extreme criminal situation, it all goes down to ignoring consequences and personal responsibility

[@GhostOfSnuffles]

It proves some people would rather commit murder then take personal responsibility.

[@NeoDragonCount]

America has one of the shittiest educational systems in the world where the squeamish Christian fundamentalists refuse to teach anything about contraception.

[@slydoorkeeper4783]

Yeah, its strange how much we have to talk about abortion, rather than taking about why people aren't using birth control. Many of them aren't that expensive, and it only gets pricey if you are constantly having sex. Which at that point, really goes to show where your interests are.

[@Josh-hh2cu]

people that “put off their problems” for months shouldn’t be opting out at the last second 🤔 they should’ve just used protection

[@randomnerd9088]

The best part is that feminists lobby against Indian birth control measures that regulate the hormones of men to stop production of sperm.

[@chadindolad3913]

Not wrong Dev, I used to believe in the idea of abortion as a necessary evil throughout my younger days. But the fact in the discussion has seemed to go so far left and abortion stops from being a final desperate solution to the only solution honestly shifted my ability to tolerate it in any way. Although I'm still open to discussion and understand the predicament, I can't return to the safe, legal, RARE abortionist, especially in this political climate and knowing full well that there are no possibilities for mediation or negotiation against the tides of "progress".

[@ng38477]

Glad YOU have decided to rob ME of MY rights because some people said some stuff YOU don't like.

[@chadindolad3913]

@@ng38477 calling abortion a right in itself is the issue. The term makes it an inherited condition that you can have on a whim. To make it rare means it should be a privilege that one can be bestowed due to critical circumstances. The left's reaction shows how they have taken this act for granted and replaced its position from a desperate solution to a common contraceptive, which is far from rare usage.

[@TheJeremyKentBGross]

@@ng38477 Again, when I get rights over MY body, we can talk.

[@decwow]

@@ng38477 you aren't being robbed of anything. That was never yours. You wanted to steal the right to life from your own children

[@WolfieboyMachi]

So you let the stupidity of other people determine your beliefs in what will logical ly be the most effective approach to the issue? How does some people having stupid ideas about it suddenly make it not a necessary evil?

[@veiddimaddur8354]

Probably the most level headed argument for this I've seen so far Don't always see eye to eye with you, Dev, but you've got your head screwed on straight.

[@TheLazyEconomist]

No legislature wants to put it into law due to the political backlash. It allowed politicians to escape the wrath of the electorate who wouldn't support abortion. Same way with gay marriage. This kind of stuff needs to go through the legislature.

[@able34bravo37]

But if they put it to a vote, it would never get passed! We need the courts to force the country in the direction we want!

[@barneystinson2781]

They would rather keep the wedge issue than doing anything. Republicans did the same with Obama care.

[@fredmercury1314]

@@able34bravo37 That's not how democracy works.

[@memnarch129]

The "Gay Marriage" one as far as I can tell has been misread. The courts didnt legalize it straight on, thats not their perview. What happened is it became illegal to deny a marriage on the grounds of who was marrying. The ruling as far as I understand was "Is it constitutionally legal for a state to declare that marriage is between a man and a woman". The court found that no where does the constituion back up said laws so they are illegal. The ruling then sets precedence that you cant deny a marriage liscnece on the grounds of who the two applicants are, ala marrying two men or women isnt grounds for denial. So making it legal, but in the right way imo. I find the court overreaches A LOT. But from what I understand of the "Gay Marriage" case that was a correctly ruled one. If Im shown evidence Im wrong then I will change my mind.

[@Tyler_W]

It actually is on the state level on pretty much every conceivable side of the argument.

[@crazycoffee]

Dude the meltdowns have been gold this month

[@wojak-sensei6424]

"You Christians are genociding!' Who's demanding the loss of a life here? Particularly, in a massive and unrestricted scale.

[@mikecampos1193]

It's like the Democrats know they're not going to win until it says fucking what's the point anymore and they're going to piss off everyone they're not going to protect pro-choice they want a bad economy it's like they want to lose.

[@ng38477]

@@wojak-sensei6424 Right-Wingers as usual. Has the GOP stopped funding murder overseas? No. Have "Christians" come together to stop ignoring people being gunned down by maniacs and support gun control? No. Have "Christians" come around to Universal Healthcare? No. So where is this defense of "life" when it doesn't involve ordering women around?

[@spencerkindra8822]

@@wojak-sensei6424 That's what I said. Leftists just want to say these buzz words to sound extra dramatic. They have to always be stopping another holocaust. In reality they're a joke and they're horribly misusing these words.

[@TheJeremyKentBGross]

All in time to distract folks from how bad the economy is before the mid terms.

[@MidlifeRenaissanceMan]

Why should the worry about getting an abortion when they can simply get another booster

[@januarysson5633]

Well there is Depo-Provera.

[@christophermonteith2774]

the fuck you on about? one has fuck all to do with the other. do you think the booster can abort the kid or something, or if it could, that they would be permitted it? or are you just being dumb for a joke?

[@max8m1]

One thing I've never understood is the body autonomy argument. You had your autonomy and chose risking to get pregnant. Killing your child afterwards and claiming bodily autonomy is like abducting someone into your basement, then killing them for invading your property. That's not how it works, it's your fault the situation is how it is, take some responsibility

[@opinionatortv6457]

Hm, very interesting

[@Fenris86]

That's something I have an issue with, too. The pro-abortion argument puts the mother's bodily autonomy above the child's, despite the mother having a lot of methods of contraception available.

[@max8m1]

@@Fenris86 It just fundamentally reeks of not wanting to take responsibility for their actions, to the point of sacrificing innocent human life for it. Imagine if men brought forth the same kinds of arguments and wanted to be free to abandon their kids in the name of "economic autonomy" or something. I doubt women would be happy with that. So either both sexes are allowed to simply shirk responsibility (I'm not in favour of this, but at least it would be fair) or both sexes need to realize actions have consequences, and when their actions produce human life dependant on them, the point of no return has been crossed. Lefties always go on about how smart and academic they are, surely they're able to not procreate like rabbits and keep their base instincts at bay

[@memnarch129]

I believe the biggest monkey wrench issue is, and its somthing no one can control really, is the randomness of getting pregnant. Some can fuck nonstop during ovulation and never get pregnant, others can fuck the furthest from their time of the month and use every method under the sun to prevent it and end up with Quadruplets. There is ZERO rhyme or reason to the end result and it makes handling the situation confusing.

[@max8m1]

@@memnarch129 while that does kind of suck, it's part of being human. Look at how different staying thin or building muscle is for people. Bodies are different, sone stuff is harder for some than for others, but there are general rules that pretty much always work. I don't get the assumption that seems underlying in this discussion, that somehow having sex should be independent of having children. That's not the way nature or the human body work. Have sex, accept the risk of pregnancy, simple as. Don't want that risk, don't have sex, simple as. This rationalistic project of severing our ties to nature is really weird and can't end well

[@jhoughjr1]

I know someone who had an abortion 20 years ago. They didnt feel great about it. At planned parenthood at that time they did good counseling and gave her other options but she was concerned about passing on birth defects. They strongly encouraged her to select a method of contraception. When she was there, there was a woman who was on her 20th abortion. Everyone there was horrified as she refused ANY contraception. Lefties will just say cool story bro, but noone had any reason to lie to me so I believe what I was told. That was 20 years ago. I can only imagine how common it is now it todays culture. Im not deaf to all the justifications but for me it comes down to facts and principles. You are killing a human life when it is most vulnerable. That should certainly by rare circumstances to me.

[@feliperisseto9113]

Let's not fool ourselves: These people are infanticides. They are the kind of people who would not have any problem in killing actual children. In the best cases, abortion is a necessary evil, for them, it's Just like a comdom.

[@fersuremaybek756]

i do not see the people making the important decisions as all knowing gods as those that follow them do. these people want a simple fix to overpopulation and popularizing abortion is a great way to have that come true. what they do not want is something more complicated such as people actually being responsible for their actions such as sx ed and all of the contraceptives out there. i also think well it sounds crazy but for me it is a life if someone is rpd then the victim has claim to the child and payments from the man and family if not it's pushed onto them for payments and adopted by someone . i am sure you those rpists would think twice before destroying their lives.

[@hazyorange]

What happened to those other 2 replies? Why are they disappearing so quickly??

[@debordeleur2005]

But really how common do you think it is? Apparently everyone was horrified by that woman meaning it’s probably rare enough to no punish everyone for it.

[@bennygairns2235]

Two comments missing

[@okaoka2094]

"I dont want it abolished, I don't want it normalized"

[@_mokaleek_]

Or celebrated

[@catoticneutral]

So tired of people trying to "normalize" things. Being normal is overrated. Forcing something to become normal usually just makes people hate that thing.

[@mikkohernborg5291]

I am against abortion. I lived through my girlfriend getting pregnant (because she was sloppy with her pills), and then getting an abortion as a contraceptive measure. Then I found out it was something she had done before, a number of times. Seems it was part of her pattern to getting rid of boyfriends she was getting tired of when she wanted to move along. Guess who she placed all the blame on? Not herself, and for me, it was a psyche-destroying process that led to suicide attempt. I survived a woman killing my child, but only barely. And it gave me an understanding of why men in medieval times might have been inclined to burn ‘innocent' herbalist women (who often supplied women with abortifacient herbs) at the stake. To this day I am haunted by the spectre of that child, whenever I see other people's kids I wonder to myself if mine could have been like that, what their personality would have been like, how they would have looked like growing up, what kind of father I could have been and what I could have taught them… All of it taken away from me without anything I could do about it. Where I live, only the mother has a say in what happens to the unborn child. Caveat: I could tolerate it if done for medical emergency purposes, and possibly rape victims - only the rarest of cases where no other options remain. But then documentation would be required (doctor's statements, police report, etc). And there still would be misuse of the system; but hopefully less of it by orders of magnitude.

[@tannerbarnes7392]

This is a big issue with abortion that not many people address; Why doesn't the man get a say? Any child a man makes with a woman is half of him, but only the mother ever gets a say in whether or not the child is born. It's cruel and overlooked. Edit: I also nearly forgot to say. My condolences, man. That's rough, and I hope life is getting better since then.

[@josiahfugal5407]

I sincerely hope that many people will be able to see your side without having to go through the same ordeal. It's unreal to me how millions of former fetuses can so easily dismiss their fellows' right to live, and yet condemn any other form of violence.

[@spicywings4614]

you're against abortion because one person wronged you?

[@SuperLumianaire]

God bless your poor soul sir. You've moved me to tears.

[@SuperLumianaire]

@@spicywings4614 you're for murder for the sake of convenience?

[@ViddyOJames]

it's funny, because they say the right is imposing things on people with this, but it's the exact opposite. it's NOT imposing things on states and letting them decide according to how the people in those states would rather have it.

[@ng38477]

Who was ever making any of you have an abortion? Oh right, no one. The "states rights" argument doesn't work. Because you should mind your business and leave people alone to decide what's best for them. YOU shouldn't be deciding that on any level. Why does my neighbor get a say in what I do with MY body? Have you thought about that?

[@smallmediumatlarge]

Government should not be involved in personal affairs of civilians

[@joshwenn989]

@@ng38477 Why should you get a say in what you do with your baby's body? It's not your body. It's your baby's.

[@singed54]

@@ng38477 Yea i did, lets take the drug argument, if society was based on these rules, society would be a place thats much worse off that it is now, i dont want to live in a society plagues by drugs like china was during the opiod crisis

[@TheJeremyKentBGross]

@@ng38477 I have a couple questions: 1) How come if I impregnate a birthing person I will be forcibly enslaved by the state? Why don't I get a choice over my body? 2) How come I have to pay for what you do with your body? I might be more sympathetic if I had the same rights as you do over my body, and I wasn't forced to pay for your decisions even if we never met and I never even had s with you.

[@Generik97]

There are plenty of methods to avoid/reduce the risk of pregnancy. Abortion should absolutely be an absolute last result and worst case scenario.

[@randomprotag9329]

if its not going to be rare it should be illegal, rare is better but some poeple ruin stuff

[@berniesmittens6370]

Agree, what ever happened to the usual mantra of " safe legal & rare.

[@wojak-sensei6424]

Humanity has invented the greatest anti-pregnancy plan. It's called abstinence. "Sexually liberated" my ass, this generation acts like hyperactive children with no sense of self-control and commitment.

[@ng38477]

No, you all should mind your business. The same Conservatives whine about giving people birth control for free. So what are you even talking about?

[@Generik97]

@@ng38477 If your gonna have unprotected sex it's not the states job to mitigate the risk of pregnancy, that's your responsibility as an individual. 🤷🏻‍♂️ When did taking responsibility for yourself and your own actions stop being the norm?

[@randomprotag9329]

breaking the rare part was the biggest issue. most poeple can agree to abortion in exetreme circumstances which made a really functional comprise. by breaking it its more likely to be banned since a ban on abortion is better than it being used as birth control due to lazyiness

[@16m49x3]

extreme circumstances was never the actual argument though, just the good ol motte and bailey

[@randomprotag9329]

@@16m49x3 it was a decent point they were making even if it was just used to allow them to use it as birth control

[@erraticuk]

We abort more kids each year than the whole pandemic killed people.

[@ng38477]

Where do you all get these talking points from? Who is "using abortion as birth control"? Do you have numbers or a study?

[@MotorHorse]

@@randomprotag9329 Guttmacher Institute and the CDC. Try reading them sometime, they are morbidly enlightening. For example, Florida records the reason for each abortion, and 75% put "No Reason (elective)" and 20% put "Social or Economic Reasons" all other reasons (such as health, rape and incest) were less than 1% - 2% each.

[@derram0k]

I'm pro-choice in so much as to the original agreement: Up to 20 weeks. And that's still a bit extreme, I'd prefer 15. Since the left decided to go balls to the wall and start pushing "up to birth" abortion, I'm all for banning it altogether now. Abortion is women's most drastic option, they still have a multitude of choices aside. Also loving the "if men could get pregnant..." comments, because these people really think the segment of society who have no choice but to bear their own responsibilities are just like the segment who are allowed to kill innocents just to escape theirs.

[@SymmetricalDocking]

A spouse getting an abortion literally tears a man up inside and out. They have no empathy, that's why they only have the programmed "if men could get pregnant."

[@mango_raider4116]

Woah woah buddy, you can't point out the fact that women in western society enjoy a life mostly free of any actual responsibility given that they can just NOT WORK and be taken care of unlike their counterpart, or allowed to kill their offspring that is inconvenient, also unlike their counterpart, or the simple fact that society as a whole has almost zero expectations of women and when they fail or refuse to act and be responsible, the insane excuses and reasonings start spawning out of thin air. No, women and men are totally equally yoked by law and society. Definitely.

[@christianp5486]

Downs syndrome and many other genetic conditions can't be detected until 20 weeks.

[@hektorlitch4993]

Well said derram, but I'd say 8 weeks is more than enough.

[@oldluke7653]

I am ready to Deus Vult Infedels ✊️😶

[@HontounoShiramizu]

The problem with "fetal defects" part is that after it was passed in my country cases of children born with dwarfism dropped by 90%. Dwarfism isn't a pleasent condition, but not something that comes to mind from the phrase "fetal defect". Cases of diagnosed fetal defects also increased more the threefold likely as a result of misdiagnosis (with or without a bribe) to allow abortion.

[@moose6869]

That's the problem with allowing things that are relative/subjective metrics to be used to draw lines. Let alone; the line of 'fetal defects' is itself doublespeak that obfuscates what's really being claimed as the metric that makes it ok to kill an innocent human being. > Genetic Defects A genetic defect could be seen, hypothetically speaking(though I'm sure this totally hasn't ever been actually applied in this manner to justify people as genetically defective and thus they must be "weeded" out of the population 🙃), as not having a certain skin tone and a certain color of eyes and hair, certain ancestry, and more. Let's say lighter skin, blonde hair and blue eyes, and of scandanavian(Germanic) descent. Just to place it at a totally random and definitely not allegorical choice. Oops, now if you don't have those physical/genealogical characteristics you are genetically defective and it's ok to kill you. In fact it's a person's moral/ethical duty to do so. After all, we wouldn't want to consign such people to a future existence of defectiveness and the lesser quality of life that necessarily entails. Whether or not they are already born is an irrelevant/arbitrary metric to that equation at that point.

[@oliviastratton2169]

Yeah, I remember a few years ago a Scandinavian country (Finland?) was bragging that their rates of Downs Syndrome had dropped exponentially. But Downs Syndrome hadn't declined due to improved health care, it had declined because over 90% of babies with that condition were being aborted (in the US it's closer to half). Downs Syndrome is tough, but it's not fatal. And the way Europeans have used abortions to effectively genocide DS babies has had consequences for the few DS people still alive. There was a case where France banned a commercial that featured DS adults smiling, because it said the commercial could cause women who had aborted DS babies to feel bad.

[@josephmoya5098]

@@oliviastratton2169 Not too mention that studies show higher rates of happiness and life satisfaction amongst people with DS than the general population. The only person who is hurt by DS is a person who doesn't want to care for another human being.

[@oliviastratton2169]

@@josephmoya5098 Good point.

[@wilmagregg3131]

yep planned parenthood and all its spawn doing what they always planned for it to be in the first place a UGENICS PROGRAM. this is exactly why the OG creator of planed parentgood wanted she wished to have the system be used to remove those with defects low inteligence and MINORATIES to craft a "better american people"

[@wulfricofwessex147]

Liberals and libertarians seem to go on a lot about "rights", but they never seem to care about responsibilities, especially those towards your government/state/nation. It's always one way, "I have a right to abort a fetus", but never "I must provide the next generation of citizens to continue the nation and lifestyle that was handed down to me by my parents and grandparents." Liberals and libertarians seem to care only about the present, whereas the right, specifically the more authoritarian right, seems to care more about future generations.

[@CountArtha]

Paleolibertarians are extremely trad, even by conservative standards. But I gather you're talking about libertarians who are pro-choice.

[@mango_raider4116]

Eh, libertarians are really only defined by no steppy imo. I consider myself libertarian, I'm anti abortion on the grounds that killing your offspring is immoral and bad for society's collective conscience.

[@phobos2068]

I wish for as less government intervention in my personal life as possible. This is how the founders envisioned america and this is how I wish future generations live as well. "Responsabilities toward state/government/nation" my ass. That's how you get tyrants who disguise illegal wars as patriotism and vaccine mandates/lockdowns as necessary "public health" measures

[@Dragnuav]

I owe my government nothing

[@TheOutlawMan]

If this is your retarded way of getting people to praise right-wing authoritarianism, or authoritarianism of any kind, you can suffer alongside the collectivist mongrels your ideology caters to.

[@swiftersunite]

Thank you for pointing out how men and women tend to agree more often than not, and that we’re not in the middle of an elementary school gender war like Twitter pretends we are

[@nottodisushttoagen1309]

The irony is being anti abortion and anti mandate is not hypocrisy (since the fetus is NOT her body) while being pro mandate and "pro choice" IS hypocrisy. I believe in bodily autonomy, but I reject the idea that the fetus is her body, and therefore she doesn't have the right to end that body.

[@WhiterThanAginger]

Agreed. Pro choice isn’t pro choice because the baby isn’t given a choice.

[@niropaxum958]

@@WhiterThanAginger There are good arguments for abortion, the my body my choice is not one of them.

[@frankmerker630]

When they want the right to shirk responsibility with wild abandon

[@samgilley3160]

@@WhiterThanAginger I never used the bodily autonomy argument anyways. I think its a misnomer. You don't always have the right to make whatever choice you want with your body. You can't take your body on somebody else's property, you can't use your body to do others harm, etc etc. Its more an issue about compelled action. And coming from the abortionist side of the argument, they don't have a leg to stand on with compelled action. Nothing about abortion being restricted even resembles compelled action.

[@SomeDumbSpider]

And I'll disagree and tell you that being a living life isn't just having beating heart, that it's first when the brain begins to develop and function. Why? Because I also think that a person who is brain dead in the literal sense of the word isn't worth being kept alive if the relatives don't want them to. You can be alive, but that doesn't mean you're living. I do understand the arguments against abortion, but nah, I aint gonna pretend that a beating mass of body with no brain developed yet is the same as a fetus where the brain at least has developed. We might as well start arguing that sperm and eggcells are alive and shouldn't be killed, as they are functioning organisms as well. So for the first two weeks minimum, I personally think the "Life begins at conception" is a weakass argument against abortion.

[@Zantetsudex]

The whole abortion argument to me personally goes beyond the right of bodily autonomy, but an extremely entitled attitude where you're absolved of any and all individual responsibilities and a complete dismissal of consequences to your actions. We see this with the morbidly obese and the substance abusers as well.

[@CoryTheRaven]

"Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences! There's no such thing as cancel culture, it's just consequences culture!" - people who believe that killing a baby is a perfectly acceptable response to unintended pregnancy

[@Zantetsudex]

@@CoryTheRaven So it's perfectly fine to tell these people that you're more than willing to become pro-choice, if they accept that hate speech isn't real.

[@CoryTheRaven]

@@Zantetsudex only if you let me know so I can come with popcorn.

[@ng38477]

@@CoryTheRaven The same people whinging about life couldn't be bothered to wear a mask during a pandemic. Please spare us all. You're a bunch of authoritarians that want to tell women what to do. Just admit that.

[@ng38477]

The only people "entitled" are the one who feel it's their right to get involved in other people's choices that don't affect them. You want to punish people you see as immoral. That's what this is about.

[@mantasr]

I'm pro choice as well but abortion should have a guilt associated with it. And leftists despise that and wanted that guilt to dissappear. It backfired.

[@hektorlitch4993]

Personally, I think the limit should be eight weeks and nothing beyond that. I'm not outright anti-abortion, but it's getting out of hand...kind of like the left in general.

[@winterfire1097]

Well, and according to the Chris Pratt hate, I guess Fetal Deformity is good now. Idk, I am Pro-choice too but Abortion shouldn't be advertised like it has been, it should be the same as any other medical procedure. Just a thing you happen to need to do. I mean we don't advertise getting rid of kidney stones like the whole Shout your Kidney Stone removal.

[@erichzannbusoumuzan]

Agreed. Abortion should be an emergency measure not a fucking bad decision rollback.

[@surprisedchar2458]

@@winterfire1097 every time I wander back into this argument the pro-abortion stance sounds more and more like some thinly veiled excuse for Eugenics.

[@Polyeurythane]

I agree with this. I’m pro choice but it does feel like there should be an element of guilt to it. I don’t personally understand how you can really celebrate having multiple abortions like it’s nothing, because I feel like at that point you should be using contraception such as an IUD. Definitely agree with Winter Fire in that I think it should be normalized as a medical procedure too, but they have got to stop advertising it like they currently do. To me, repealing Roe v. Wade and giving power back to the states to decide feels like another sneaky way for Republicans to continue to make things the way they were in the 50s and earlier. Take away women’s autonomy and legalize what is essentially child marriage and you can see what I mean. I can understand that no one can completely see eye to eye on things, and I know that both parties have become radicalized to the point that Civil War 2: Electric Boogaloo is a very real possibility in my eyes, but I wish we could actually have some compassion to sit down and civilly talk with each other without condescending comments again so that everyone can come away with an understanding of each other even if we don’t agree. Which is the actual point of debate. Edit: I also don’t fully agree with SFO’s vaccines bodily autonomy hypocrisy argument. I was mad at antivaxxers because ultimately their choice to not get vaccinated affected people that did not consent to get sick and die. Abortion does not affect anyone except the woman getting the abortion. I concede that there are times women will get abortions without the consent of their partner, but I feel that it is very rare compared to how it is consented upon by both partners (or the father not being in the picture, a one night stand for example). Should protection and birth control be considered top priority? Yes. But given how the outdated and harmful “abstinence before marriage” ideal is pushed instead of educating about safe sex, I’m not surprised that there are “too many abortions”. Plus, while I see celebrating having an abortion (or multiple) as mega cringe, I can see it’s usefulness in lifting up women that had to get an abortion and feel bad about it (even if it was necessary and/or a mercy for the child).

[@wert1234576]

The rage and bile from the government removing an ounce of over reach is disturbing but the silence and pleading for more over reach is worse.

[@drmattbarnes1371]

A fetus is not a "potential life" it is a a wholly unique genetic code that is alive. It is life.

[@ShermanistDruid]

So is a tumor/cancer.

[@dycedargselderbrother5353]

It's funny to hear this same group smugly make fun of creationists' Pokemon-like view of evolution. Say what you will about their religious views, at least they know how babies work.

[@BeanOfBean]

@@dycedargselderbrother5353 Yessir brother

[@Xplora213]

@@dycedargselderbrother5353 as well as how xx and xy chromosomes work 🤣

[@Clown_the_Clown]

Agreed 100%

[@rando5673]

Ignoring the rest of the mess around it, abortion can't be a "right" the same way housing can't be -- it requires another person's labor

[@azrael7283]

Eh. Depends on how you conceptualize it. The right to bear arms doesn't mean someone is obligated to provide you with a gun. Just means the government can't prevent you from getting one. In theory, anyway. From the summary in the video that's how Roe V. Wade worked, more or less.

[@RorytheRomulan]

@@azrael7283 No, but you can build your own gun. And we have a right to private property, don't we? We can build our own houses. Older generations actually did.

[@azrael7283]

@@RorytheRomulan Yeah, all of these things seem to have an equivalent way of conceptualizing them. It seems like you're agreeing with me but I get the feeling you're not intending to.

[@ExPwner]

Also objectively the fetus is not “your body” but another human being’s body.

[@gladonos3384]

​@@ExPwner Lol Pro life AnCap.

[@sykomcawesomeness]

Point of reference: The study you mentioned from Chicago is flawed in the same way many have been. Look at the source data.The participants surveyed are from mainly urban areas in large cities, Chicago, LA, NY, etc. This skews the hell out of the data. As everyone here knows, metropolitan areas skew survey data hard to the left, as those areas are predominantly progressive. The support for abortion nationwide isn't even close to as high as that report tries to imply. From the many different studies I've seen over the last 20 years, the majority seem opposed, and are only comfortable with it for "extenuating circumstances", or 'rare', as the old tagline advertised.

[@DreadPirateRoberts121]

Honestly reading about Peterson’s theory on “crime of being” it only makes sense that many people support abortion, it’s become a full appeal to emotions rather than looking through an objective lense

[@MeanBeanComedy]

Very true. I feel bad for them, a bit.

[@freedomandguns3231]

Pro-Lifers are never objective about this either. The only objective fact about abortion is that it sits in a moral and ethical grey area. Full stop.

[@MeanBeanComedy]

@@freedomandguns3231 Ha! No, the only objective fact is that it ends an innocent human life. If you think that's "gray," that's on you.

[@Good_Emperor]

Have any of you seen the antinatalist subreddit?

[@MeanBeanComedy]

@@Good_Emperor I like to peruse it when I need to induce vomiting. It's the official subreddit of the Bulimic Society.

[@bjcantrell1990]

There is just something so primordially evil about abortion for me. Outside of the rare instance of the mother's life being at risk, I just can't help but feel sick about it.

[@itssofunny8611]

Why are u only ok with killing babies when the mother is at risk? Still killing babies...

[@randomprotag9329]

@@itssofunny8611 very likely because killing life cause its an incovielence and killing life to save other life are different situations

[@itssofunny8611]

@@randomprotag9329 maybe

[@isuckatusernames4297]

honestly I don't really feel much for babies, especially for the unborn, they can't pay taxes plus, humanity isn't really at risk of dying in terms of raw numbers. so it's not like not allowing someone to be born rn is especially damaging for humanity's place. especially when it comes to birth defects, from a personal point of view, I see allowing a defective baby as evil, especially when you can just re-roll the lotteries a few times more with a relatively safe outcome.

[@FiveFootFall]

That's the deal: if abortion is legal, child support has to be illegal. If the choice is one's alone, it is one's alone to bear. Abortion itself makes the claim that men have no responsibility or power over the pregnancy of others. Child support reinforces the idea that men are the responsible party. It can't be both.

[@balazsvarga1823]

If only there was a way to not get pregnant... something, like a medicine or rubber instrument or other hole.

[@north_warwolf1183]

Or closing your goddamn legs

[@Good_Emperor]

Or just not engaging in sex period until your ready for kids is a possibility (I know pro-choice people love to make the counter "what if grape?" As if almost everyone grapes. I'd like to think most people aren't grapists even potentially.)

[@sandorclegane8164]

They do use rubber instruments, they are 99% effective. The other 1% get pregnant. You tell them they are responsible and to use protection anyways. Then you and your ilk follow it up with "then don't have sex, abstinence is 100% risk free". So why suggest condoms in the first place?

[@exhumedlegume8870]

@@Good_Emperor Kinda implies things about their social circles, huh?

[@sandorclegane8164]

@@Good_Emperor Well, they do happen, and they shouldn't be disregarded just because it happens only sometimes.

[@gottesurteil3201]

The pro life argument allows for the termination of a pregnancy when the mother's life is endangered, its always been that way. Our position is that you shouldn't just be able to elect to kill your child. Sure there will be people that cannot afford to raise their children, maybe some sick freak will associate their innocent child with its rapist father, maybe more people will have to raise children with mental/physical handicaps, but in the nicest way I can say it does not excuse one to kill an innocent.

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

Yep.

[@sebastianbass2219]

I had a conversation with a French Algerian friend of mine about abortion. He said, “Abortion in America is so bizarre. You have people who believe a zygote is a full human being and an 8 month pregnancy is just a blob of flesh. Here in France the debate is simple. What risk is there to the mother?”

[@heavywestern5943]

"ITS MY BODY!" The baby is separate to your body. "ITS JUST A CLUMP OF CELLS!" We're all just clumps of cells. "IT CAN'T SUSTAIN ITSELF!" Babies and toddlers can't sustain themselves either.

[@blugaledoh2669]

The baby is not separate to the mother’s body. It is part of her body.

[@Lobsterwithinternet]

@@blugaledoh2669By that notion, do you support infanticide?

[@lukezeiolf6977]

@@blugaledoh2669please pick up a book

[@antirevomag834]

I think the reason it was leaked now is because it was a staffer connected to ketanji brown. We already know she's an activist, there's no way to remove her from the court, and she would have incentive to do this, Not to mention it's never happened before (at least, that i can find) which to me sounds supiciously like someone fresh to the office would have had to be involved.

[@Joker22593]

Actually, Justices can be impeached. It's happened a few times in history. I'm not sure how people would react to the parties aggressively impeaching people for political reasons, but the leak could be a reason to impeach a Justice. I'm guessing it was a rogue staffer, that was not being directed by a Justice.

[@antirevomag834]

@@Joker22593 it takes a whole hell of alot of votes to impeach a court justice though. Even if they get a red wave it'd still most likely not hit them high enough to impeach her. As such, there's no way to remove her from the court, as the way to do so is so astronomically unlikely, the republicans would need to have Dream luck to succeed at it. As in. They'd have to cheat so fervently, they'd obviously get caught.

[@Snakedude4life]

More like getting kicked back down to the state level, rather than being a federal thing. Want to abort? Move to a blue state. Easy. 🎩 🐍no step on Snek! 🇺🇸🇭🇰

[@drsamuelhaydensecretgaming6749]

Living in a blue state is the worst fate you could ever be condemned to though

[@DissyFanart]

the no steppy position would be continuing to not allow states to ban it, aka not letting them steppy

[@fersuremaybek756]

those lunatics can't do 2+2 so i doubt they can think of that lol

[@Alex_Fahey]

@@DissyFanart Only if you believe a fetus is not a human life. Otherwise the "no steppy" position is preventing mothers from murdering babies.

[@sam7559]

Okay and what about people who don't have the capital to move safely? Moving isn't exactly a free action and it's not like people choose what state they're born in.

[@dragons_advocate]

What is entirely missing in the abortion debate is the word CONTRACEPTIVE. Some people treat abortion like it is no different from the pill or a condom, and this in turn makes so many other people so outright disgusted by the topic.

[@thanatosdriver1938]

The majority of abortions happen in spite of the use of contraceptives because they aren't always effective

[@TheGuyWhoIsSitting]

It should be a state decision. Granted I still think it’s wrong if you’re using it purely as birth control.

[@ng38477]

No, it should be a PERSONAL decision. You didn't like it was because you want to tell women what to do.

[@DarkGrif]

@@ng38477 The problem is that it isn't a personal decision because an abortion affects way more people than just the woman having it. At that point an arbiter is needed to ensure a fair outcome. My advice is to advocate for legality of it in your state if you feel so strongly about it instead of spamming people's messages in the comments.

[@josedorsaith5261]

@@ng38477 I could care less about women. They don't get to force their choices on unborn children

[@moose6869]

@@ng38477 and yet, you who are clearly not following the actual science on this; have clearly performed all kinds of mental gymnastics to twist yourself into rationalizing that it's not just the mother's body involved in the medical procedure of an abortion. "My body, my choice." A choice that those whom are aborted never get. "My life". A life that those whom are aborted never get the chance to experience. "My happiness" Happiness that those whom are aborted will never get to experience. Me, me, me, me, me. Here's a novel concept: it's not just about "me, me me" any more from the moment a child is biologically conceived.

[@deraybell9140]

NG That’s rich coming from the ones who didn’t fight this stuff tooth and nail when they were forcing people to get the messiah vaccine.

[@Bopperann]

Ms Cartman: I'd like to get an abortion. Dr: How old is the pregnancy? Ms Cartman: 8 years.

[@bug5654]

Wait a minute, that sounds like you don't...RESPECT MY AUTHORITAH!

[@KingFlameHawk]

On the whole I am more abortion skeptical. I think they can be allowed with considerations. I think the main problem is the culture around it.

[@debordeleur2005]

Sure, but I don’t think you’re going to make the culture less extreme by banning it or restraining it too much. Most excesses come from a culture of people abusing it as a way to assert it’s a normal thing.

[@hektorlitch4993]

Similar. I wouldn't call myself outright anti-abortion, I just really, really like seeing the left rage when they don't get their way.

[@rwberger6]

The problem is that they want tax payer funded unlimited acess to abortions which has led to irresponsible people using them as contriceptives instead of the serious medical procedure they are. I don't think there should be a blanket ban either but there clearly needs to be more restrictions on when its performed. Hell, my state recently passed a law that says you don't even need to be a licensed doctor to perform them.

[@achair7265]

You mean only when necessary, life threatening cenareos only. No innocent life deserves to die because of how their born.

[@Alberich_Prince_of_Dwarves]

Hard agree. The celebration of "WOOOH You got your fifteenth abortion!" is sick. Abortion shouldn't be normalised to the point of celebration. Abortion is a difficult decision a woman who may or may not want to be a mother at the time of the decision. It disturbs me something fierce that actively killing a potential life could be anything but a serious, deeply personal choice and a matter of circumstances.

[@spnked9516]

The "my body, my choice" argument always struck me as a cop out or a rejection of responsibility. Yes, there will always be cases with extreme circumstances, but for the most part, an individual's choice regarding their body is made when they decide whether or not to have sex. If a person choose to have sex they are consenting to the possibility of pregnancy as a consequence of that action. Basically, if you don't want to get pregnant, don't have sex - or at the very least, mitigate it's potential by using protection. It's a bit like being able to demand a Mulligan after every swing you take in a golf game, regardless of circumstances. Sooner or later you just have to ask whether or not you should even be swing the club in the first place.

[@ipunchedu8884]

i never understood the my body my choice until a certain time frame, like the baby eventually also has rights, it's like they act they can do whatever they want to their babies it's so weird

[@blugaledoh2669]

@@ipunchedu8884I suppose because the right of the mother supersedes the fetus.

[@reedlaverty3489]

Dev's one of the few I trust to give a good take on this.

[@UnfortunateWatcher]

Living where I am, most people I know want it to be extremely rare to outright illegal, with exceptions. But since RvW was made on a federal level, the voters here didn’t get a say in it.

[@CountArtha]

Which is why this is a big L for the pro-choice side. Roe v. Wade gave them more power in the Red States than this decision gives pro-lifers in the Blue States.

[@CollectedG]

Roe vs. Wade was decided on during a time when women were usually stay at home moms and didn't try to inseminate themselves from a used condom that was thrown out by a celebrity. It's about time for an update.

[@Xplora213]

I’d suggest the culture went to shit precisely because the respect for human life was undermined. Pregnancy is not a private matter. Everyone can see it after 25 weeks. We aren’t stupid. But the Far Left position was accepted, and bad people decided it wasn’t about human life anymore, but merely government regulation.

[@JohnDoe-vw4zf]

Not really and this is incredibly confusing. It should be eaiser for women to keep babies they wanted anyway for money????

[@CollectedG]

@@JohnDoe-vw4zf The only thing I'm saying is that women were treated differently in society back in the 70s compared to what a lot of women can get away with now and the current laws need to reflect that. The example I used was based on a story from an Instagram model not too long ago who had a one night stand with Drake and tried to take the used condom that he threw away to inseminate herself with. Go look it up, it's wild.

[@erraticuk]

Abortion Robbery ie Pay her $100k to abort it or pay her $500k in child support.

[@Xplora213]

@@erraticuk they have to be careful. There are people who will sort out the issue for far less.

[@claycastle3731]

I had a random thought: if abortion is only legal for cases of rape and incest, will the number of reports go up? False or otherwise?

[@CountArtha]

Rape for sure. And Planned Parenthood will go along with it.

[@OniGanon]

Of course they would.

[@randomprotag9329]

of course if someone is willing to kill a baby because it inconvieced them with the ability for raw sex, they ave no quams being a false accuser

[@wilmagregg3131]

theyd go up sure but that would also mean more lawsuits that will set prescedent that false accusations need legal punishment.

[@YourLocalRussianNegro]

My view on it. "If she can k!ll it, I can at least abandon it. If I'm wrong maybe we're both wrong." - Dave Chappelle In this situation we're both wrong. Promoting sexual responsibility is a good thing imo. (R#pe and inc3st aside). When there are consequences to actions, those actions don't happen.

[@mango_raider4116]

Nonono, you can't tell men and especially women that they can't/shouldn't whore around as much as possible, unsafely as possible. Filthy degenerates burn when you speak truth.

[@sam7559]

Okay so that means abortions totally didn't happen before abortion was legalized. Making abortion illegal does not stop abortions, it just makes it more likely people who are pregnant and desperate are going to die

[@mango_raider4116]

@@sam7559 Ok and? Guess they should die then. Why do you think I would feel bad that someone trying to kill their own offspring suffers?

[@YourLocalRussianNegro]

@@sam7559 They happened of course but it was way more risky. The government has been a constant bail out program which allowed people to make bad decisions with their life and not suffer the consequences. Sure there are outliers who need help, but most people are capable of being responsible. Like I said, when there are consequences to actions, those actions don't happen.

[@TWRehab]

I used to be 'pro choice' but the more I thought and read about abortion the more my mind changed. For times when theres a danger to the life of the mother, where the child is the result of rape or incest or the child will die or have a serious life ending condition Im just there. But I no longer believe in abortion as contraception.

[@16m49x3]

You Americans and your obsession with incest is so bizarre. Why should a child die because of incest?

[@garrettgutierrez2677]

Roe v. Wade was always bad legal precedent. Period. You can tell those who have no concern with judicial principles from those that do very easily by how they talk about this news, and very few do. Thanks for focusing on that point. Too few people seem to care if the courts legislate from the bench, it seems, they only care what direction they legislate in.

[@Good_Emperor]

Bad legal precedent like technically permitting conspiracy to commit very serious crimes?

[@Evarakeus]

@@Good_Emperor Bad legal precedent in that the decision was based on "implied rights" in the constitution, specifically a "right to privacy," which doesn't exist. The idea behind the RvW decision was that the government, per these imagined rights, had no jurisdiction to enact punitive regulatory measures for abortion. By ruling the way they did they set a legal precedent for these "implied rights" existing, which is exactly contrary to the idea of 'letter of the law.' As the leaked draft said, the decision was completely and utterly incorrect from the get go.

[@johnnyboy2537]

You know it's bad when Ruth Bader Ginsburg who was as far left as they come was against Roe v Wade.

[@117johnpar]

The progressives justified the evangelicals fanatic opposition to abortion. Just by having it legalized. I support legalizing weed but something tells me the Christians are going to wind up being right about that too. Liberal politics and big government policy in general has always been to push goalposts.

[@septimusseverus333]

The issue was never about bodily autonomy for the screechers, but state subsidy of sexuality. Responsibility is poisonous kryptonite to the screechers.

[@lainiwakura1776]

Some states refuse to teach sex ed beyond abstinence, that's why those states have high rates of teen pregnancy. And you can give up the responsibility by killing it or abandoning it.

[@septimusseverus333]

@@lainiwakura1776 How about one taking responsibility for keeping their own legs closed? That works to keep teen pregnancies down too.

[@ray495903314]

​@@septimusseverus333taking responsibility is also being informed of all your options, and taking the best one for you.

[@ParadoxEngineer]

I'm glad to see a decent middle ground here, but "safe, legal, and rare" could never stand, it isn't self-consistant. If abortion as contraceptive isn't morally wrong then there is no reason for it to be rare. So of course, when it became legal it was no longer rare. Which to us conservatives proved that the conversation around cases of rape and incest were clearly just a cudgel to guilt trip us into backing down.

[@tiagofranco6029]

The only thing I disagree is the fact that the baby is in fact part of the mother's body. It has different genetic material, different needs, and a different metabolism. It does indeed need the mother to live, however the baby is not her. Besides...If the baby WAS her, the mental health of anyone that mutilates part of oneself due to convenience reasons should be put into question (I know that's a bit of a stretch, still true nonetheless). However I do agree that abortion should be permitted under circumstances. Them being: rape, danger for the mother; grave disfigurement. In all honesty, nowadays there really is no good excuse to not use contraception.

[@lainiwakura1776]

No one is obligated to donate an organ even if it results in the death of the person in need (McFall v Shimp). Some states refuse to teach sex ed beyond abstinence only, those states have high rates of teen pregnancy.

[@gagekellstrom3978]

It genuinely horrifies me that we give precedent to the women who failed to do their due diligence and use contraceptives rather than the actual human life in the mother, at some point they need to just take responsibility for their actions. I had a friend have a kid at 15, and instead of vacuuming that kid out they decided to keep it, and he straightened his whole life out. These people are scared of losing their "freedom" to keep being degeneratesm

[@zach6210]

@@gagekellstrom3978 the babies are the most innocent party in all this, every time.

[@ShintoArt]

I think it's fair to say a baby in the womb is a part of the mother's body, but it's still a separate human lifeform. They shouldn't be allowed to kill it for any reason. If I had a conjoined twin I wouldn't be justified in killing them just because they're literally a part of my body.

[@mayorofbasedville7680]

If a baby in the womb were part of the mother, that would mean my mom has had three penises in her life. And forty fingers.

[@elijahcohen2951]

Amazing how fast the concept of bodily autonomy vanished during COVID.

[@Lobsterwithinternet]

When bodily harm is put on the table, all those ‘rights’ suddenly vanish.

[@eliseosterbrink8000]

So much of the issue of abortion would be solved if people just kept it in their pants. But I guess growing up, accepting responsibility, and not chasing hits of dopamine is secondary to being degenerate children in the bodies of adults.

[@slydoorkeeper4783]

This, like why can't people just calm themselves and not have sex. Not having a one night stand, or even making relationships solely for the purpose of them being sexual. And when you do have sex, why not use one of the many forms of birth control. Technology has gotten better, so even the ones with the lowest effectiveness is still quite high, and if you were to double up, it takes it to a near zero. I think we could honestly talk less about abortion, and more about using proper protection. And just overall, personal responsibility.

[@IceQueen975]

This. A woman doesn't magically fall on a dick. You chose to. Abortion is not a contraceptive. Close your legs.

[@MeanBeanComedy]

They pretend like it's impossible, but most people did it prior to the 60s.

[@smileychips7448]

@@slydoorkeeper4783 exactly!

[@blackosprey2219]

Because anything less than unrestrained hedonism is repressing yourself for the patriarchy lol

[@whosagreekgod4135]

As an independent thinker I am pro life. But most of the people doing the abortions are the type of people I want less of.

[@christophermonteith2774]

would that be completely pro-life, or just in abortion terms?

[@chad_bro_chill]

@@christophermonteith2774 If you're being facetious, you could just as easily ask the opposite question: "Are you completely pro-choice, or just in abortion terms?" If you're not being facetious, then I don't understand what exactly you're asking ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[@whosagreekgod4135]

@@tann_man Chad: Yes...

[@christophermonteith2774]

@@chad_bro_chill what I was asking is if they are against killing in its entirely, or just the context of abortion. for example, would they be against war and capital punishment? there are other things that could be used as examples, but those for some reason seem to be the most relevant.

[@generalsweet8212]

I love sitting and watching all the social circles I am in tear themselves apart with contradictions and hypocrisy over just about any take they make.

[@16m49x3]

@Jinxed Swashbuckler fascism is not about traditionalism. It's about using force to push everyone into actively supporting government goals, else they are a traitor. Which in Italy happened to be traditionalism

[@16m49x3]

@Jinxed Swashbuckler Not at all. A government forcing everyone to actively support some new frontier in a brave new world is equally fascist.

[@Tyler_W]

Were I in your situation, at some point I'd wonder why I'd continue to subject myself to these social circles unless the only reason I'm still there is for the lulz.

[@gladonos3384]

@@priapulida Ooops lol...

[@16m49x3]

@Jinxed Swashbuckler yes, it would

[@twiggledy5547]

The choice in your "pro choice" is the choice to have sex or not. Consequences are consequences.

[@ThatFalloutGod]

The idea of being pro-choice in almost any capacity (the only legitimate cases for abortion would be if we had to choose between the mother or child, or within a very small window after a rape) is a position that’s completely and utterly untenable, because not only does the science say that it’s a unique human life as early as two weeks post-conception, but the morality of the topic is set in stone. It’s literally the same argument as pro-slavery people used in the 19th century, “I deny this person their rights based on my own sense of convenience in this moment.”

[@TerryBradstreet]

Anyone who wants to abort because of “fetal defects” should be asked, “So you want to walk up to an adult or child with Downs Syndrome and tell them you wish they had never been born?”

[@johnseppethe2nd2]

Yeah it feels a little like eugenics to me. I'd rather have down's syndrome than not exist at all

[@TerryBradstreet]

@@johnseppethe2nd2 All the money spent funding abortions could have been spent funding research into medicine to correct Downs Syndrone.

[@GabrielAKAFinn]

Do you think it's an epic gotcha moment? It's defect prevention, not defect genocide.

[@ShintoArt]

The birth defects argument never seemed very good to me because, not all birth defects are the same. A cleft lip is a birth defect, but isn't anywhere near serious enough to warrant an abortion.

[@TerryBradstreet]

@@GabrielAKAFinn So go tell people born with defects that you wish they were dead. If you're not afraid to get your ass beat.

[@vitalyklimenchuk8392]

5:18 Really sounds like a LOTR style legend of the rings. "Safe" was for the unity of both, a common ground to stand on, "Legal" was for the Progressives, to assuage their fears, "Rare" was for the Conservatives, to ensure that the fact it is a necessary evil is never forgotten. Someone could probably do a very good version of it, much better than I can.

[@januarysson5633]

I don’t believe in the concept of necessary evil. Change my mind.

[@Webmaster4531]

@@januarysson5633 Should raped women be allowed abortions?

[@CountArtha]

@@januarysson5633 Justifiable homicide is a necessary evil.

[@januarysson5633]

@@CountArtha If it’s justifiable is it evil?

[@bignasty6395]

@@januarysson5633 is murder evil?

[@mantasr]

A fetus has a right to body autonomy as well

[@doggo6517]

baby *

[@jonj1163]

You're usually on the ball Dev, but let me make a small but pertinent correction here: This isn't 'violating the legal' in any way. It's simply giving the choice back to states instead of the fed. I doubt much will change in places like California or New York. It's democracy at work. Split the pie in 50 parts as opposed to 1. This has nothing to do with the legality of abortion but rather each states right to make up their mind on the matter.

[@MrBoatMaker]

"Abortion is a mitzvah!" the amount of Jewish people on twitter claiming that abortion is part of their religion and that criminalizing it would infringe on their religious rights is really eye-opening. Really make ya think.

[@hammerheadd]

Yet they can't imagine why Christians, including messianic jews, have always rejected and opposed the so called oral torah, like the Talmud and such.

[@greensmurf221]

Especially since most on twitter are non-practicing seculars. You should ask them when was the last time they attended temple next time lol.

[@cyberninjazero5659]

And then one day for no reason at all...

[@Good_Emperor]

Are they sure they don't actually worship Moloch?

[@verindictus3639]

A lot of supposed Jews in the US are actually secular Liberals.

[@absolutelydegenerate1900]

Also those articles look like a twisted cope where “it’s morally good” and “I feel good about it” are more them telling themselves these things than they are their audience. It’s pretty traumatic for many women and comes with a lot of consequences including complications having children in the future, and the woman’s body treating it like a miscarriage including all of the depression that comes with it. I could be wrong, I’ve never had one, but it is a traumatic procedure even if those other things are wrong.

[@jamesflowers1295]

You want to piss people off? Tell them that "the crystal gems are pro-life." You don't even have to know what it means, because they will😉

[@barneystinson2781]

They worship that show

[@kameronpan2939]

Oh is it a Steven Universe reference? Lmao 🤣

[@kyodarkness9243]

They probably gonna make a cringy PSA about abortion

[@TheJeremyKentBGross]

What crystal gems?

[@hildegardvonbingen9092]

@@TheJeremyKentBGross It's a show for Kids and emotionally instable adults/sjw. It's super progressive, gender non conforming ideological garbage. The Main character's mother died during his birth and knew she was going to end but still decided to give life to him

[@LordAini]

Dev is wrong about natural rights and abortion. The natural rights of the victim take precedence over the natural rights of the provoker. You have no right to self defense in a fight you started, you have no right to property when you caused another's life to be attached to it, etc. Me not being able to revoke my consent and throw a guest off my helicopter in the middle of a flight is not a violation of my rights to property, and not being able to terminate a pregnancy you instigated is not a violation of your right to bodily autonomy. This does not extend to cases of rape, where the mother did not consent to having sex, or if she was lied to about the chances of becoming pregnant, but in all other cases, consenting to sex is accepting the risk of pregnancy.

[@AnExcellentChef]

Even if you took all safety precautions, that helicopter of yours still has a chance to crash. Should medical care be denied to you since your injuries were the result of your own actions, the risks of which you were fully aware of? As for rape, why are you punishing a third party by violating its natural rights for the crimes of another? Hypocrite.

[@LordAini]

​@@AnExcellentChef If that medical care would result in the death of another who didn't willingly take that chance, then yeah, I should be denied. The priority is hapless victims over willing participants. As for rape, it is reinstating the rights denied to a victim from an act that victimized her preceding the conception. Hopefully, the mother would bear the child, but if she wants her denied rights, that should take precedence. She did not consent to an act that would potentially result in her bodily autonomy being suspended, so she bears no responsibility to see the child to safety.

[@FestusOmega]

Why does a woman's bodily autonomy allow her to violate the bodily autonomy of her child?

[@Xplora213]

The Far Left doesn’t have an answer that allows for sanctity of the other that is sustainable. If allowed to go unchecked they will all turn into Maoists or Stalinists, given time. I appreciate they have their beliefs but the human race is not built on personal sanctity before children, and the protection of children and mothers. Everything is built around that. The Far Left rejects that, but mass graves aren’t prevented by the sanctity of the self - they ignore the other Self in favour of their own, at any cost.

[@Angrenost02]

Why does a child's bodily autonomy allow them to ignore the bodily autonomy of their mother?

[@Webmaster4531]

The United States has *birth* right citizenship.

[@debordeleur2005]

Because it’s better for the baby to not be born than be born in a family that is not ready for it. It’s not just about human life, but the value of the future life.

[@FestusOmega]

@@debordeleur2005 I'll buy into that if it means I get to kill people who have a bad relationship with their parents.

[@Starius2]

don't pretend pro abortionists have any valid arguments, it's embarrassing

[@mango_raider4116]

Of course they don't, they're either evil or mentally ill or sociopathic/psychotic. Literally no human or animal should have an instinct that says to kill their own offspring, unless said parent is defective in the brain.

[@TigerPinko]

I'd like to propose an update of terms: Really when you think about it there's three sides to this argument: Pro-life Pro-Choice Pro-Abortion The people crying about wanting what they want with no consequence are pro-abortion. Those of us that are pro-choice still generally agree on the legal, safe, rare argument. In the past the pro-abortion types were lumped in with "pro-choice" because there were just so few of them... but at this point theres enough of them and they have a loud enough voice to stand on their own. For this reason, I'd like if those of us that are pro-choice separate from those that are pro-abortion.

[@christophermonteith2774]

absolutely

[@HenshinFanatic]

As a Pro-Lifer, I can agree to those terms. The true enemy have always been Pro-Abortionists, whereas we merely disagree under what circumstances abortion is appropriate, they want it regardless of circumstances and even support post-term applications. Clearly, the Pro-Abortionists are enemies of both our positions.

[@danl0134]

One of the most spot on videos you've made in recent time. 100 percent agree with everything here, coming from another pro-choice person. Safe, legal, rare.

[@remyllebeau77]

Except it isn't safe, a baby is always murdered. Murder is already illegal, and abortion isn't even close to rare. The body count from the USA alone puts WW2 Germany to shame, both in terms of overall numbers and the number of minorities killed.

[@ryankasch5561]

I was pro choice growing up, but then I saw the remains of abortions and then how proud the people were that they had abortions and was disgusted by it. And then I grew up, became more religious, and also realized how simple it is to not have sex/how in a culture that doesn't see it as permissable people don't have sex prior to marriage (I went to a Christian college). The people who say they need it seem to have no self control. Also, I don't understand how someone can divorce sex from procreation. That is its purpose. It's secondary outcome is people liking it. I do hope this goes through though, and isn't swayed by the inevitable leftist riots over the topic. Any increase to pressures that make states politically homogeneous is good in my book, as I don't see the point of the modern USA beyond as a convenient economic area for corporations. I see separation between conservatives and liberals as a moral good.

[@mango_raider4116]

I'm atheist but we can fist bump over this one chief, because I'm my mind it is pure evil, degeneracy of the highest order, and definitely sprinkled with mental illness and sociopathy/narcissist

[@sam7559]

Would you become vegan then if I showed you how to butcher different animals, because it's not exactly a clean process either.

[@debordeleur2005]

Do you really not see how one could divorce sex from procreation? Really?

[@mango_raider4116]

@@debordeleur2005 oh I can see it, I just know it's desperate degenerates huffing copium to try and justify why they have to fuck anything that moves and then execute the known consequences of said actions.

[@n_0477]

@@debordeleur2005 yes, because the whole reason people enjoy and desire sex is your brains primal way of trying to get you to conceive a child Even when you're having sex for fun your brain is trying to make you get a woman pregnant/get pregnant yourself.

[@NootalieWalf]

Bro I can’t not laugh when either side calls the other “reactionary” when *they’re being reactionary themselves.* I am pro choice, but damn that word is hilarious in these contexts

[@mrdee2454]

Pro killing babies, if want to pick a side at least be honest

[@moose6869]

It's a nonsense buzzword that makes little sense regardless of where it's used. Human existence, existence as a lifeform in nature, is fundamentally a large matter of *reacting and adapting* to things that occur. So it's like, "well of course they're being reactionary(to something). That's what we all do all the time. We aren't the seminal humans; let alone the seminal organisms. Our entire existence all our acts are 'reactionary'/adaptive in nature.

[@sol7967]

"I can't help *but* laugh....". Anyway I agree, it is funny. The selfie generation has no self awareness...

[@KaNoMikoProductions]

Dev, this isn't meant to be a "gotcha" or anything, I am just genuinely curious. Where do you draw the line on when "just a clump of cells" becomes a human life? This is a line that must be drawn, considering the natural rights we apply to humans, including the right of bodily autonomy and the right to life, and how they conflict in the case of abortions. From where I sit, the various lines people have drawn after conception seem incredibly arbitrary, such as brainwaves, sense of pain, heart-beats, ect. Those are all just different points in a continuous biological process, and they are all inevitable once the process has started (unless terminated). It seems silly to go, "all right, right now it's not a person, but give it a day or two (or even weeks), and it will be, because by that point it'll have developed slightly more than now." The only reason If you then do say, okay, life begins at conception, you have to then weigh the right to life vs the right to bodily autonomy. One has to be ranked above the other, because those two are at the center of the conflict. And as a side note, at this point, things like defects, rape, risk, ect, all go out the window, because none of them justify killing the baby. But I don't see how one could argue that the right to bodily autonomy would win out against the right to life. The latter seems far more fundamental, to me, than the former. But of course, there ARE exceptions to it, such as self-defense. If you threaten someone with a weapon, you forfeit your right to life in that situation, by how you're infringing on the rights of someone else. But then, can we apply this to abortion? Is the baby infringing the rights of the mother? Is a baby, an unconscious non-actor, even capable of infringing on someone's rights, or of being held accountable in the first place? We implicitly understand children to bear less responsibility for wrongdoings in society already, by giving them much milder punishments compared to adults. And that's for adolescents, generally. Is the idea of holding a baby responsible for a crime and punishing it accordingly even tenable? From where I sit, the answer is an obvious "no." I wouldn't hold a baby accountable for fatally shooting its mother, on the basis of its complete lack of comprehension of what it's doing, and so I don't see a reason why I should hold it accountable for being inside its mother when said mother doesn't want it. Of course, either occurrence is BAD, but I figure anyone reading this is smart enough to realize that. Going through all this, I cannot help but come to the conclusion that abortion is murder, and I'm consequently against them. So I'm curious how your thought-process differs to the point of being pro-choice. On a much more emotional and subjective side, I find the idea of "it's just a clump of cells" or even "it's a tumor; who cares?" to be abhorrent, because it implies that the person speaking would be absolutely fine with everyone around them, including themselves, never having existed in the first place, whether on the basis of a medical risk or merely a whim. It's almost a cliche in fiction, with the asshole parent who hates their child and who tells them, "I should've never had you. I should've killed you when I had the chance." Except if these people were ideologically consistent, they'd have to go, "Yeah, she should've been able to do that if she wanted. This person right in front of us should've never existed in the first place."

[@ShortFatOtaku]

I think it's pretty clearly a life from the moment of conception. But, let's be honest here - politics is the art of living together but it is also the art of death. A good politician is one who understands that his job is not to protect every single person, but run a cost-benefit analysis on his resources to see the maximum number of people protected. That is simply the sad reality of the game, and morally grandstanding about how awful that is will not change it. That's the nature of political power. There is no "no death" option in governance, only less or more death. The left relies on the 'personhood' argument because it allows them to just outright ignore all of the right's positions (it's not a person so none of your arguments apply). But that's not necessary for abortion to be justifiable. It will never be good, but justifiable is still on the table. Is it better for a mother to die in childbirth or for a child to be aborted? It's not good, but abortion is justifiable there. Do we live in a better society if abortion is banned or not? You can run through some moral calculus on that - the answer seems to be, that "safe, legal and rare" is the best possible world to live in. Abortion-for-alls are grotesque, but the severe restrictions placed upon women, and the efforts they will go to to bypass prohibition, will also be grotesque. The average rightist reply to this is to call me heartless and talk about the sanctity of life and how every single baby is precious. Sure. But you don't apply that standard anywhere else. You go to war, when necessary, even if it results in death, even if the most precious thing is wiped out. 30,000 people die a year in car accidents, nobody talks about banning cars. Covid killed many people, we all nonetheless fought for the right to live as we please. You enforce laws, you uphold rights, when necessary, even if it results in death. A necessary part of living together is infringing on each other. Navigating that, that's what it means to rule.

[@don2nd650]

@@ShortFatOtaku based🔥 love how you don't pick sides

[@KaNoMikoProductions]

@@ShortFatOtaku Thanks for the reply, Dev. I'm not as utilitarian as your comment seems to imply you are. As far as I'm concerned, this is a question of natural rights, not "more or less death." Therefore, I don't have much to say in response, except for >Is it better for a mother to die in childbirth or for a child to be aborted? It's not good, but abortion is justifiable there. I don't believe it is, because you're stacking a certainty vs a chance. If the child is aborted, it is killed. With out current level of medical technology, that's a certainty. You are choosing to kill someone. But the mother dying is absolutely not a certainty whatsoever. It's a chance, and it's a shitty chance to have to take, but the "moral calculus" seems clear to me. Those two lives are equal. One choice of action leads to certain death. One leads to potential death. Abortion isn't justified.

[@ShortFatOtaku]

@@KaNoMikoProductions here's the thing, i am also a natural rights person. but i understand the nature of politics and power. when you are steering the ship of civilization, it's not the same as being a regular person.

[@chad_bro_chill]

I draw the line about where we draw the line on human vegetables that no longer have sufficient brain activity.

[@albertcastro3500]

If the baby is considered a human life, there is no argument that can be made, except the mothers life being in danger, that can rationalize the termination of that babies life. So in my opinion I don't think even talking about rights changes anything at all because there is no right that trumps the right to life except self defense.

[@hippopilot6750]

I'd honestly be open to abortion in certain scenarios but the people I argue against refuse to even believe it's objectively a life. Once people admit that it's taking a life, then we can actually discuss it properly. Only the answer is still no because despite the truth, one of the core tenents of western society is all man being considered as equals. That means even if your kid is going to come out retarded or poor or alone or black, he has an innate right to be born. We value being over non-being. To go against that is to go against one of the founding principals of our modern world and with this action chaos will break out if people actually want to change that. In summary: Killing unborn babies is an affront to life, who knew?

[@fighting_bones]

Sending it back down to the State level is the right thing to do it might help temper the polarization at the fed level and it will further the divide of red states getting more red and blue states getting more Blue

[@Xplora213]

It will make all states more Red… bipartisan pro abortion law for RAPE cases was only 70%. That is a number I would have thought was 98% at least…. The Left severely overestimates how popular their position is. They are living motte and bailey examples.

[@CountArtha]

Purple states will be more contested, but the red and blue states will be able to chill the f**k out.

[@tuskiomisham]

Dev, do you not see the litany of people who support postpartum abortion? They do not say bodily autonomy anyone. They say free from responsibility

[@orangeninja8022]

Gotta admit, this comment section warms my heart. There are lots of people sharing different opinions reasonably and talking about their differences of opinion while still being civil and respectful. It's a rare thing to see these days, and it genuinely makes me happy. Cheers to you, Dev, for making great content that attracts people who are willing to talk and listen and engage in actual reasoned debate ✌

[@elsyesetiawinarty364]

I think it has become pretty obvious that most of us are generally on the same side (don't want to normalize abortion but realized that there are some exceptions). But it's such a shame that the media portrayed it as a problem with no some sort of middle ground..

[@Hynotama]

I love how people declare themselves "pro-choice", but always ignore several choices in this argument, such as keeping the knees closed, using condoms, using contraceptives, plan B or even adoption. It's always "pro-choice", never pro-accountability. Oh and of course, the discussion always pertains to women, but if a woman baby traps a man, he has absolutely no choice in the matter whatsoever. If a guy gets baby trapped he can lose his parental rights, but he still has to pay, regardless of the situation. Hell! Men have been made to pay, even when the baby is not theirs. But, we already know that this whole "pro-choice" sham is nothing more than a cover for women wanting to dodge accountability. There's nothing they'd like more than to cheat with another man, attempt to use their womb to get the man to commit and when the weasel ghosts her, to still have the ability to silently terminate the pregnancy and still use the poor husband as a free meal ticket. I have heard and seen way too many of these stories to believe it is otherwise. And if you can connect the dots, it's plainly obvious. And that is why I'm against this supposed choice. There are several other choices women have, before deciding to murder a baby. Of course, there are legitimate cases, but nowhere near as many or commonplace as the masters of victimization would have you believe. Oh and in the event that we're talking about a legitimate case, those should be very well documented and have legitimate and definitive proof. If a woman is in medically proven danger of losing her life or if she was legitimately "force hugged", than I'm all for abortion. But if not, getting drunk and ganged on the "girls' night out" or at bachelorette parties, is not responsible adult behavior and should not be rewarded or forgiven.

[@Buck7205]

If you read the blog reasonwithoutrestraint, look at the post titled, 'defense of abortion: bodily integrity, responsibility, and deprivation'. Then read the posts 'Why I'm not a consequentialist' and then 'Why I'm not a utilitarian'. The writer has some points to ponder over.

[@thanatosdriver1938]

The majority of abortions happen in spite of the use of contraceptives because they aren't always effective

[@Hynotama]

@@Buck7205 “Fortunately, I think progress can be made in the abortion debate (in favor of the pro-choice position) by sidestepping these disputes.” - If you have to sidestep disputes instead of resolving them, then you don’t actually have an argument. “Sidestepping disputes” is basically the author telling me that he’s giving up one or some of his arguments, in order to ignore my own arguments. Sure, you could argue that he has more arguments than me, but this is one of those situations where quality trumps quantity. “The majority of the abortion debate seems to revolve around premise 1, whether the fetus is a person. These debates often involve complex philosophical questions regarding consciousness, sentience, vagueness, etc. and scientific questions regarding when certain features become present in the fetus.” - It’s not just that the fetus is a person. It’s a potential person. You don't just take away the person's life, you take away their future and everything they might have been. Just imagine if an important historical figure had been a terminated pregnancy. It’s not just about the immorality of terminating a person. It’s also about the immorality of terminating the potential improvements that person could bring to society. And yes, I am well aware that such impactful people are extremely rare, thus the probability of such a person coming from an immoral woman, that is willing to terminate a pregnancy, is really REALLY low. But that same gamble is taken with every termination, thus increasing the chance of snuffing out an important person. Furthermore, I see a lot of these “pro-choice” people are so fixated on a few isolated arguments, that they don’t see the forest for the trees. You should consider that most of these people, educated as they may be, lack the wisdom or foresight to accurately predict what impact such legal measures could bring. For example, the most obvious ramification is for men, as I’ve stated in my initial comment. Men are already second-class citizens, contrary to what feminist propaganda tells us. Do you really want to live in a society where your wife or future wife has the ability, and thus encouragement, to betray you and have better chances of hiding it from you? We already see what family laws, the clear privilege women have and the antagonization of men, have done to society. Women being incentivized and rewarded for divorcing and breaking apart their families has led to divorces skyrocketing, 80% of those divorces being initiated by women and as a result having a single mother epidemic, children being raised fatherless and broken and making it easier than ever to disseminate propaganda because the current generations of adults are overly weak and emotional, just plain stupid and entitled and easy to manipulate. In fact, for all the education that’s going around these days, people are actually less wise and more arrogant than they used to be. And in fact, women themselves have been affected by these changes as well. They have been made cruel and selfish and they are actually more unhappy than they were in “the dreaded 1940s”. But that’s enough of that. I’m not here to preach about men’s rights. I only give it as an example, to make my thought process more clear. And before you think about accusing me of complaining (because a lot of people like to shame and attack the person instead of the ideas), I am not complaining about the current condition of the male population. I hold men equally responsible for the current state of affairs. However, I am not willing to close my eyes and pretend like everything is fine, just to put on a tough façade.

[@Hynotama]

@@thanatosdriver1938 condoms are pretty damned effective. Furthermore I listed multiple contraceptive methods, meant for different stages in the baby making process. If you're expecting me to believe that 3 simultaneous methods, one of which has 90+% effectiveness, don't work, then you must think me braindead. Also, if you're referring to the pill, there are a lot of women around their 30s that claim they are on the pill, but secretly stopped taking them. It's a story as old as society. Trap a guy with "an accident" to convince him to marry you. And when he refuses, you want to get rig of the plan's consequences. Sorry, but that's not how it works. And I do believe that both men and women should vet their love interests more thoroughly and stop having Disney delusions of "true love". Naivity doesn't pay. If the other person is truly a good person, let them prove it and allow them to surprise you, instead of having blind faith and complaining afterwards that he smashed and dashed and left you a single mom or that she trapped you and you owe her child support for 18 years. A lot of these problems would solve themselves if people would have actual respect for themselves and stopped being naive children in adult bodies.

[@Buck7205]

@@Hynotama It was just something to ponder, the author is arguing more based off of the permisibility of abortion rather than the morality of it. He further argues that the permissibility exists despite its morality or immorality. Also, if read the whole thing the author does acknowledge it as a person. Personally, I don't think rights should be based on trees but their own merit, the way we manage these things later should be argued on case by case basis. I'm personally in favour of abortions rights if, 1) men get paper abortions and 2) citizens can revoke funding or their taxes to any and all abortions, abortion medication and abortion facilities should they ever wish to opt out.

[@spudeism]

Do americans not know about condoms, birth control pills, Plan B and such?

[@itssofunny8611]

(the same argument used to legalise birth control was used to in Roe v. Wade so why tf not)

[@coblow1681]

The problem is that Noone answers the actual question bc it cannot allow for federal intervention because to do so it would require to dictate policy to the states in a way that is unconstitutional

[@BuckROCKGROIN]

The immediate violation of the "rare" compromise is because women are a protected class, and you can't negotiate with, penalize, or compromise with a protected class.

[@dolanvanpool5470]

I've said it a few times already, but I'm neutral on this topic. I agree that abortion is murder, but I'm cynical enough to know that the people using abortion as a contraception should not be parents in the first place. Collectively, the left is mentally defective and will abuse their kids, so the real question is "is it better for the kids to be killed early or live a life of misery?". A very difficult question. The left doesn't believe in personal responsibility. Their idea of socialism is everything should just be handed to you. They want the easy way out, so they choose abortion, rather than contraception. They believe that minorities can't think or speak for themselves, so they coddle the ones on their side, and instantly dismiss those with opposing points of view. But this isn't news.

[@3eve0n]

imo whether or not misery is worth than death is something that can only be determined by the person experiencing the misery.

[@dolanvanpool5470]

@@3eve0n That's the crux of it. They'd more than likely end up worse than their parents.

[@3eve0n]

@@dolanvanpool5470 I wouldn't be so sure of that. if teens of conservative parents rebel by going farther left politically, then I don't see how that pendulum can't swing both ways.

[@dolanvanpool5470]

@@3eve0n funny you mention that. They absolutely are. But on the whole, if I had to guess, it's a "grass is greener" situation.

[@DistributionMackerel]

@@dolanvanpool5470 Both of my parents came from horrendously abusive households - actually abusive, not like the kind of modern day "aboose!!!!!!111!" - and while they might have not been the world's best parents, they tried and put their best feet forward, and they tried to be infinitely better people than they were raised to be. My parents aren't everyone, they might not even be the majority, but the truth of the matter is that people always have a choice, to be what they're made, or to decide what they are, if that makes sense. I've also seen children in awful situations, having been a temp worker for my sister when she worked for CPS, but I've never once felt that those children would have been better off dead. The only person who can decide whether or not life is worth suffering through is the person living that life, imo.

[@terellcase9231]

Hearing this I feel like I've crystalized an opinion I've felt for a while but didn't truly understand. The reason the punished mother girl on twitter wanted the right to get an abortion was for her and herself alone with no thought for the possible child, I know kind of obvious but let me finish. I'm not a religious man but I do believe what I do will be looked at by my children in the future so I let that inform me on how I want to vote, act and live. The left in general only cares for themselves in the here and now and a vague idea of something that might be good for the world later on down the line and couldn't care less for their own predecessors.

[@AngloSaxonWheatFarmer]

Wear a condom. The left: AAAAAAHYYYYAAAA *Agonised screamjng*

[@CrazyJabberwock]

My main Critique on the... Open and downright Gleeful outlook many have to abortion is that, well simply put it feels like a step to legitimizing the idea of Selective Person-hood, its only a human baby when the mother decides it is, that attitude is a slippery slope, and many times we have seen the slippery slope has been proven a valid argument based in fact lately it seems.

[@CoryTheRaven]

Up here in Canada, it still hasn't quite been 100 years yet since women were declared legal persons. Conditional personhood is never not horrific.

[@GearGearRingLeader]

Had some friends freak out over this, and tell me that they will repeal gay marriage, tried to explain to them the arguments the Right uses for Roe V Wade and how they are different than Gay Marriage, but they weren't in the mood to listen.

[@omegazerotg17]

Justice Alito's Abortion opinion said that other decisions, such as Gay Marriage, Same Sex Sexual Relations in the bedroom, and contraceptives, were based on the same "Privacy Rights" that was found in Roe V Wade. He explicitly stated that the Right to Privacy is NOT found in the Constitution, and he hinted at the possibility of the Court revisiting those decisions to overturn them the same way they did to Roe. I don't blame your friends one bit being worried about where this decision leads to.

[@GearGearRingLeader]

@@omegazerotg17 Ah an actual reason beyond Republicans bad, Religious people bad, they hate the gays. And of course it is a Bush appointment who is against privacy rights.

[@surprisedchar2458]

I’m pretty sure the Right is happy that gays can’t exactly have abortions lmao

[@semanticalman7802]

Not surprised, this is why it's frustrating trying to present someone with opposing viewpoints in an attempt to get them to empathize and understand the other side. So many kneejerk reactions, it just feels like a lost cause

[@cptndunsel3364]

People who are suffering from hysteria rarely want to sit down and have a rational conversation.

[@WPSent]

I value bodily autonomy, this includes the bodily autonomy of the child inside of the mother.

[@raxxology]

The whole "my body, my choice" argument is fine until another person's life comes into play. An unborn child would qualify.

[@somerandomnesspoo8467]

They can't even say "my body my choice" anymore- WHHEEEEEEEEZE**cough****cough****cough**hahahahahhh... HAHAHAHAHahaha... hehhehhehhehhehh...

[@TylerINDY1]

Dev, Your view and my views on this issue will likely never line up. However, I respect you deeply for trying to see my side when you consider your own. I wish the parties in this nation had not moved to both sides of the extremes, as I'd love to be able to have honest discussions with others. Thanks for sharing your views, and at least we can both appreciate the salt.

[@flacjacket]

The right to bodily autonomy isn't absolute, swinging your fist is something you do with your body, nonetheless your rights to do so ends where my nose begins. Locke declared the fundamental rights as life, liberty, and property in that order because it is necessarily lexical, you can't have property without liberty, you cannot have liberty without life. This means that life is the superordinate right and your right to liberty must necessarily bow before another's right to life (as it relates to one's conscious actions, this doesn't justify vaccine mandates because those make a claim against the incidental consequences of one's existence and that is an untenable standard). If a fetus was found on Mars every scientist on the planet would claim we had discovered extra terrestrial life, the mothers right to bodily autonomy necessarily cannot supercede the fetus' right to life because otherwise the lexical system of rights is broken.

[@bluecoin3771]

They would rather kill than be mothers. Just look at their favorite show “The Handmaid’s Tale”. Could only come from the mind of someone who doesn’t know how good they have it.

[@dexter2392]

The handmaid's tale legit sounds like an actual utopia to me.

[@TheJeremyKentBGross]

It's womenist pron.

[@conserva-chan2735]

God still loves us

[@conserva-chan2735]

@DragonSlayer Marr it happens every now and then. It wouldn't be a fallen world if that were the case.

[@CountArtha]

*“If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes."*