Three plaintiffs testified about the trauma they experienced carrying nonviable pregnancies.

  • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’ll get downvoted because Lemmy appears as left wing as reddit, but it’s true.

    Y’all saying that all we want is to control women and enslave them is bullshit, they know our concern is about the life in the womans stomach, but always try to strawman that shit like we’re just heartless woman haters.

    As a conservative, why would I ever want to discuss and come to the table to discuss hard issues like these, when I just get called shit like I see in this thread. And people thinking I’m a literal nazi for considering the life of the baby?

    Then they have the audacity to ask why we’re so divided in this nation.

    • Kiky@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      1 year ago

      Unfortunately, it is very hard to believe that you are concerned first and foremost with a human life and not with controlling women. And that is because conservatives are usually vocal in their opposition to abortion, but you rarely (almost never?) hear them being as vocal in their support for low-income families with children. In other words, it seems as if you only pretend to care about the unborn life, but once it is born, you don’t care anymore. So how could anyone believe that this is all about life in general and not just about control?

      • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        rarely (almost never?) hear them being as vocal in their support for low-income families with children. In other words, it seems as if you only pretend to care about the unborn life, but once it is born, you don’t care anymore. So how could anyone believe that this is all about life in general and not just about control?

        I agree, it’s one of my huge criticisms to the R’s, and that’s what makes the whole thing more frustrating with these establishment politicians. We have to have better ways to take care of the basics kids need, make sure our people are fed, the foster care system needs a drastic overhaul and a very simple way is for both republicans and democrats to provide actual tax breaks for charitable contributions. We need to be a giving nation to charities that help people directly and efficiently.

        I can’t do much except for trying to say that conservatives aren’t inherently bad because we share a few loosely related world outlooks with Republicans, who I rarely consider being actually conservatives.

      • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        You think it’s a pile of cells with little value.

        I believe it’s a human life with inherent value.

        Why does that make me stupid? Because I believe something differently than you? Why does that mean I am giving fascists ‘coochie’?

        • Shikadi@wirebase.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          1 year ago

          Why don’t you believe the woman has inherent value and rights then? Even if I did think a lump of cells had human rights, nobody has the right to force a human to risk their lives for another human outside the womb, so why do you believe the government should force a human to risk their lives for an unborn one in the womb?

            • Shikadi@wirebase.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s heavily implied in the context. It’s okay for people to be morally opposed to abortion, but the moment it becomes about making the decision for someone else, the conversation is no longer about the fetus, it’s about the woman carrying it and her rights as a human.

          • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why don’t you believe the woman has inherent value and rights then

            I do, an equal value to every individual human out there.

            All humans are created equal.

        • CalvinCopyright@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          All human lives start out as piles of cells… but not all piles of cells can become human lives.

          This is my one concession to contributing to this argument. There are pregnancies that aren’t viable. For some fetuses, there is literally no way to make it so that those fetuses can live to become infants. Therefore, these fetuses literally objectively don’t have inherent value.

          Everybody who’s downvoting you, is downvoting you because you are advocating to kill mothers over fetuses that already cannot be kept alive. You’re not saying it outright, but by god, you’re implying it, because that is what is going to happen if those policies are implemented.

    • Shikadi@wirebase.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      Okay this argument is hypocritical AF. If this was about the fetus not the women, you wouldn’t support an outright ban. Twins are being killed because of you. Children are being forced to carry because of you. Women are dying because of you. In some cases you are forcing women against their will to attempt to save a lump of cells that is already dead. If the government forced you to risk your life for an unborn child that wasn’t attached to you, you would flip shit. If the government forced men to take responsibility for an unborn fetus in any way, you would flip shit.

      You don’t respect the autonomy or rights of a woman if you believe in forcing decisions on them about their body, hard stop. There is no wiggle room for you to argue that the fetus matters, because you wouldn’t apply that to any other situation in life. Stop acting like it’s the moral choice when it’s literally forcing woman to risk their lives against their will. Those women are already alive, why don’t their rights and lives matter to you?

    • zahel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      How is it a straw man? Regardless of what your “intended concern” is the result is control over a woman’s body autonomy. How can you not see that reality?

      • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        How is it a straw man? Regardless of what your “intended concern” is the result is control over a woman’s body autonomy. How can you not see that reality?

        Do you think because I believe the life in a womans belly has inherent value, that I literally want to enslave women?

        If you think that, that’s the the exact problem in our politics. You take things to the extremes and don’t actually want to have conversation, you want to dominate and have your way. I understand the argument that women have a right to make choices on behalf of their bodies and what’s best for it. Do you understand my argument?

        • zahel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          1 year ago

          it’s not alive until it is born and can survive outside the womb. Nice logical leaps though.

          • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You believe that.

            Many don’t.

            Does that make them enslavers to women?

            Say they can survive outside the womb at 6 months. That’s the point that you say ‘okay, no more killing this being’?

            • rabbit_wren@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              They can survive outside the womb at 6 months with the right kind of medical care (very high mortality rate, though) and the previous cutoff for abortion was around 5 months, so, yeah I guess someone did say that very thing at some point.

              • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yeah, unfortunately, I think it’s just bad law. I think it’d be okay legislatively, which is why it’s sooooo incredibly odd that the democrats didn’t codify RvW despite having many many many opportunities. But ultimately, I think it was a terribly ruled case that I think the SC was right to overturn. Fun fact, RBG also shares my belief.

                • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  They didn’t actually have so many opportunities. Yes, it’s terrible that it isn’t enshrined in law, but no. Don’t blame Democrats when they didn’t have near as much chance as everyone claims.

                • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  They didn’t actually have so many opportunities. Yes, it’s terrible that it isn’t enshrined in law, but no. Don’t blame Democrats when they didn’t have near as much chance as everyone claims.

                  • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    They had dozens of opportunities…

                    Don’t blame Democrats when they didn’t have near as much chance as everyone claims.

                    Yes they did. They didn’t so idiots would keep voting for them and to say that your rights are ‘under attack’

                    Have you heard of Stockholm syndrome? That’s where you’re at.

                • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  They didn’t actually have so many opportunities. Yes, it’s terrible that it isn’t enshrined in law, but no. Don’t blame Democrats when they didn’t have near as much chance as everyone claims.

        • hotdaniel@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, I don’t understand, because I dont respect your argument. The argument that women have a right to their bodily autonomy, is enough. Show me a problem in the argument before I care about your argument. When you realize the argument is successful, then you will give up on your own argument and become pro-choice. Asking me to consider your argument is exactly how you remain pro-life. To examine your argument is to pause consideration of my own, and to waste my time inspecting yours. You will never accept any flaw in your argument. Asking me to examine it is completely pointless. That is the conservative way, in essence. I can only ever fail, either fail to convince you or fail by erroneously becoming convinced. In the same way that you can walk East-West and never set one foot North-South, examining your argument has nothing to do with my own. If you want to convince me, convince me why I should not be pro-choice. The right to abortion seems like my own right to bodily autonomy. I see no reason why anyone should have any say over whether I choose to give from my body. Demonstrate why I should think it is so.

          • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            he argument that women have a right to their bodily autonomy, is enough.

            Well sounds like you already decided your argument is right and every other argument is wrong, so we don’t need to discuss any further. I would implore you to explore multiple sides of an argument, so even though you may not agree, much like I disagree with your side, you can understand it, much like I understand your side.

            • hotdaniel@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I refuse to consider your argument until you’ve considered mine. There’s no point otherwise. Your invitation to consider your argument, is an invitation to distract and waste my time. You will never accept any flaws in your own position, that’s why you invite me so openly. The only possibility by accepting, is that I lose. You will mistakenly become convinced that you have a strong argument, when your strategy leads yet another pro-choicer to fail to change your mind, because you won’t change your mind.

              That’s why, like I said, the only thing I care about, is if you can convince me that *I’m * incorrect. Abortion should be legal because of our right to bodily autonomy. There is no other argument that needs to be considered.

    • hotdaniel@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m happy to explain to you why you’re wrong to be anti-choice. Don’t pretend like conservatives don’t love to shit talk about liberals. I’ve seen it too. If you have something you want to talk about, then talk. Don’t ask me to feel sorry, unless you’re going to feel sorry for me, first.

      • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m happy to explain to you why you’re wrong to be anti-choice

        I’m open to hearing your argument, but as you can imagine, as a conservative on lemmy/reddit I’ve heard every argument, and it’s made me more refined in my belief, and more able to argue my belief well.

        Don’t pretend like conservatives don’t love to shit talk about liberals.

        I didn’t. but generally no, I don’t see conservatives talk trash about liberals, nor liberals conservatives. I see Republicans and Democrats talk trash, but I don’t equate them to conservatives and liberals.

        If you have something you want to talk about, then talk.

        Okay. I’m pro-life, you calling me anti-choice is an absurd mischaracterization of my argument, and you know it. You just try to name call instead of actually put forward your position. If you have a good argument, you don’t need to resort to such childish and rude comments.

        Additionally, my argument is, just because I’m pro life doesn’t mean I want to enslave women.

        If you’d like to discuss either of these in good faith, and without being a dick, I’m down.

        • hotdaniel@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I called you anti-choice because it’s accurate. It would be inaccurate to call you pro-life when we do not agree, yet I myself am in favor of life and living. It misrepresents my position when I agree to call you pro-life. It gives the impression that I am not pro-life because I am opposed to your position. So, I choose to label you accurately. If I’m pro-choice, that makes you anti-choice. If I’m pro-autonomy, you’re anti-autonomy. Which do you prefer?

          Additionally, my argument is, just because I’m pro life doesn’t mean I want to enslave women.

          That’s not an argument. Also, it doesn’t matter about your feelings about whether your actions are good or not. What matters is the impact it has, in reality. In reality, your positions have the effect of harming women. It matters not at all, that you want to pat yourself for believing you don’t want to enslave women. You don’t have to believe you are enslaving women to do harm. You just have to actually enslave them, which, in effect, you are supporting.

          • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I called you anti-choice because it’s accurate

            It’s more accurate to call me ‘pro-baby lives,’ which would make you ‘anti-baby lives’ which is a bold stance. If you want to play dumb games like that instead of civilly discussing, I’m fine with that. But I won’t converse with someone that continues to be this uncivil and rude.

            • hotdaniel@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You don’t civily discuss. I’ve asked you to tell me what is wrong with the argument from bodily autonomy. You will not. I’ve had, I think, 4 replies with you since then. Just like I thought, just like the other conservatives, you will not discuss. You have no discussion. You have no argument. Your tactics are manipulation and misdirection. That’s why you have words and words to say about every little tangential topic, but nothing to say about bodily autonomy.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      As a conservative, why would I ever want to discuss and come to the table to discuss hard issues like these

      Why would we want you to? Nobody’s changing their mind. And frankly I’ve seen conservatives engage in bad faith arguments so many times I no longer consider honest discussions a possibility.

      • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think that’s the problem. I’ve listened to each of the lefts arguments, it’s unavoidable for someone young and on social media.

        But the minute I speak up, saying I can be pro-life and not pro-slavery, I get 60 downvotes. Not that I care about the votes, more of the symbol of, what did I say that was controversial? That being pro life isn’t comparable to slavery? That’s not controversial to anyone, we all know it. But I’m a conservative, so downvote away.

        • Tabbycat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Look, I get that you think your logic is sound and that you don’t like being called pro-slavery. I guess in your head “saving a baby” cannot equate to “enslaving women”, right? The unfortunate truth, as this post shows, is that these laws and these concepts you support are indeed enslaving women. It doesn’t really matter if you don’t like it, or if you don’t want that. The fact of supporting these laws makes it an automatic consequence. The fact is, the US government is now forcing women to give birth. If you can put aside for an instant the fetus, baby, whatever, that is what’s happening. I’m not sure you can imagine all the possible psychological and physical consequences of giving birth. Now it’s forced on women. Can you imagine if for 9 months you were forced to do something that you don’t want, that has lifelong consequences and may put your life at risk? And this not only for adults, but also minors. Let’s bring it close: imagine you have a 13yo daughter. She is in school and may not have understood all of the sex ed that I’m sure you and the school system has given her yet. Her cycle has already started. Then she’s maybe r*ped maybe not and now she’s pregnant. Would you let her go through with the pregnancy, the trauma of it and the risks? It’s a 13 yo. What if it’s ectopic and she dies? What if she gives birth and she dies?

          In conclusion, it’s a lot like treating women like cattle. Also please don’t reply with anything like “but the baby”. A 13yo is a baby.

          • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            is that these laws and these concepts you support are indeed enslaving women.

            That’s where we disagree. I think it’s absolutely absurd you equate it to slavery, and belittles past and modern day slavery.