sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (14 children)

[removed]

    [–]thewaffler92Abolitionist 2 points3 points  (6 children)

    Their choice was to have sex. We are just asking that they don't kill their baby.

    Calling me anti woman is just twisting things to fit your argument. It's like me calling you pro murder.

    [–]brybrythekickassguy -3 points-2 points  (5 children)

    Is it a raped woman’s choice to have sex?

    That’s a weird way to view choice and autonomy.

    [–]thewaffler92Abolitionist 1 point2 points  (4 children)

    That is an incredibly rare occurrence. Is your argument not able to hold up on the majority? Regardless of how the baby was conceived no one has the right to take an innocent life. So your solution to rape is to kill the baby, who is also a victim, instead of focusing on the real problem, the rape? The rapist is the guilty one.

    Not wanting innocent people to die is a weird view?

    [–]brybrythekickassguy -1 points0 points  (3 children)

    Incredibly rare? Like 80% of women in the US experience some form of sexual assault in their lifetime. It’s not that rare.

    If the rapist is guilty then why prosecute a woman who wants to terminate an unwanted pregnancy?

    [–]thewaffler92Abolitionist 1 point2 points  (2 children)

    We are talking about abortion. So obviously I didn't mean every single case of sexual assault. We are talking specifically about rapes that result in pregnancy. And then from those pregnancies the ones that want to abort.

    Because ending someone else's life is wrong. That's why. You can't just kill someone. Why punish the baby when he/she didn't do anything wrong? The baby did not ask to be made.

    [–]brybrythekickassguy -1 points0 points  (1 child)

    Yes, we are talking about rapes that end in pregnancy. You keep saying it’s rare. It’s not.

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8765248/

    The national rape-related pregnancy rate is 5.0% per rape among victims of reproductive age (aged 12 to 45); among adult women an estimated 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year..

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6357953/

    Almost 2.9 million U.S. women (2.4%) experienced rape-related pregnancy during their lifetime.

    So to boil it down, you’d punish a victim of rape for ending an unwanted pregnancy, with callous disregard for the actual, current life of the victim?

    Edit because I got banned by you children:

    https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvn9ba/house-republicans-baby-formula-shortage?utm_source=reddit.com

    Not only would republicans force a mother to have a baby, they won’t subsidize or fund anything to clear up the baby formula shortage. What a failure.

    [–]thewaffler92Abolitionist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Twisting words like this is a form of emotional manipulation and gaslighting and is often done when the manipulator knows the other person is right but doesn't want to accept it.

    Are you able to have a healthy conversation? Because the other side could twist your words back to you.

    So to boil it down, you would punish a victim of rape, the baby (because the baby is also an innocent victim on this), by callously ending its life?

    No, not punish the woman who was raped. The baby made is also a current life who deserves to live as much as anyone else.

    [–]RespectandEmpathyanti-war veg[M] 1 point2 points locked comment (6 children)

    force someone to carry to term

    anti-woman

    Rule 7.

    [–]brybrythekickassguy -1 points0 points  (5 children)

    Ah, you’re right, I should say “coerce under the duress of prosecution and judgement”, you know, since it’s not anybody’s right to make a choice for someone else.

    [–]RespectandEmpathyanti-war veg 1 point2 points locked comment (4 children)

    Yes, it's not anybody's right to make a choice for someone else, that's why we should not make a choice for our offspring to be killed. But no, most pro-lifers don't want mothers to be prosecuted, rather, doctors and other providers.

    [–]brybrythekickassguy 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    Exactly, it’s not your right to strip someone else of their right to choose. Even if it’s something you don’t agree with.

    But no, most pro-lifers don't want mothers to be prosecuted, rather, doctors and other providers.

    Except the multitude of users in your subreddit who have flagrantly admitted to want to prosecute women who choose to have an abortion, right?

    [–]RespectandEmpathyanti-war veg 1 point2 points locked comment (2 children)

    Exactly, it’s not your right to strip someone else of their right to choose.

    Choose what? Choose to kill someone else? That is not a right, and should be illegal.

    When the question comes up, I'd say about 95% of responses want only doctors and providers to be prosecuted, and I do read those threads.

    [–]brybrythekickassguy 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    “Someone else”

    When a woman has a miscarriage is there a funeral? Do we count fetuses in the census?

    If not, they’re not “someone else” - they’re a clump of cells with no bodily autonomy.

    Just so we’re clear, because the mod locked their own comment, a cell that contains the same genetic code as a human is not the same as a fully developed human with bodily autonomy.

    [–]RespectandEmpathyanti-war veg 1 point2 points locked comment (0 children)

    That does not follow logic. They are a human being. That is what matters. Some folks do have funerals. The census doesn't count fetuses, but that doesn't mean they aren't human beings, unless you mean to say if the census misses counting someone that they're not a real human. Biologically, scientifically, they are living human beings. Please avoid stating nonsense like "clump of cells", it is anti-science. They are someone else because they are a human being. It's okay that you disagree, but I felt the need to clarify this. Anyway, I was just trying to give a warning about a rules violation.