TaleWorlds News: New News Necessary for the OT Neophytes

Currently viewing this thread:

Yeah, it's been on the books since Trump filled SCOTUS with conservatives. That's their end game.
All that politics just to screw up women, it's mind-boggling.
 

Ikea Knight

Master Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
I don't get how men can even sign such bills. I wouldn't call myself a feminist but you have to be a major ******* to restrict half your population access to something which doesn't affect yourself at all.
Next thing you know they make laws for who can have sex with whom, when and where and we're right back in the dark ages.

Your brain has to be as smooth as a bowlingball if you pass such a law.
 

eddiemccandless

Knight at Arms
WBNWVC
I don't get how men can even sign such bills. I wouldn't call myself a feminist but you have to be a major ******* to restrict half your population access to something which doesn't affect yourself at all.
Next thing you know they make laws for who can have sex with whom, when and where and we're right back in the dark ages.

Your brain has to be as smooth as a bowlingball if you pass such a law.

The funny thing is, if you talk to the people who support this kind of thing most of them will tell you that they are fiercely opposed to government interference in any matter (land of the free and all that). It is truly mind boggling.
 

Adorno

Bedroom Assassin
Archduke
WBNWM&BVC
That's easy to argue against, since they see abortions as practically illegal acivities, which the government should abate.

Next thing you know they make laws for who can have sex with whom, when and where and we're right back in the dark ages.
KAzjn.gif



... she was being held under constant surveillance in a 6x9ft (1.8x2.7m) cell...
... she is under 24-hour round-the-clock surveillance with 10 cameras, including one that moves and tracks her movements...
AWIfZ.jpg
 

Pentagathoos

Regular
I'm probably pro-choice but I really don't understand people who can't understand people who aren't. It seems pretty simple, they believe human life starts at conception, that this life is meaningful and therefore to end this life is immoral and should be illegal.

What I don't understand however is what the **** brother Maxwell thinks he's going to achieve with that appeal? There's a very strong legal case against his sister that she molested multiple children and helped Epstein run his child sex trafficking ring. Does he really believe that anyone who isn't themselves a child molester is going to feel any sympathy for her?
 
We understand anti-abortion people, or as they misleadingly call themselves pro-life. What we object to are these two things:
- Most "pro-life" campaigners are anti-life when it comes to the death penalty ("but the embryo is innocent, this is different blah blah"), so maybe they are not so pro life as anti women? Hypocritical beliefs are less credible.
- Forcing your group beliefs upon the whole society is wrong. Forcing pregnant women to give birth is particularly wrong. If anti-abortionists want to live their lives without abortions, that's fine, but they need to leave other people alone.
 

Ikea Knight

Master Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
I'm probably pro-choice but I really don't understand people who can't understand people who aren't. It seems pretty simple, they believe human life starts at conception, that this life is meaningful and therefore to end this life is immoral and should be illegal.
It's not like I don't understand their point of view.
I just absolutly disagree with that.
What about rape victims?
What if your contraceptive simply fails.
What about people that are just uneducated when it comes to sexuality.

There are so many reasons to have ( or not have ) an abortion, I don't think one should generalise it by law.
 

Pentagathoos

Regular
Then why did you say you don't understand?
It seems pretty simple to me, if you accept their premise then they are totally justified. The genocide of Muslims in China doesn't affect me in anyway but I would still stop it if I had the power to. Provided it wasn't too much effort. It also may be worth pointing out that women are just as likely to be pro-life as men are (at least in the US and I may be wrong here so look it up if you want but you get the idea).
The "pro-life but pro death penalty hurr hurr" argument is simply moronic, you are obviously capable of understanding the difference between executing a murderer and killing an innocent person.
The forcing your beliefs argument I'd disagree with too, if an individual believes that they have the right to murder someone then we force our belief on them that they actually don't.
However, I don't believe in souls and I don't really think I give a **** about other people having abortions. I'm mostly just writing this because lockdown is really dull.
 

Adorno

Bedroom Assassin
Archduke
WBNWM&BVC
Being against abortion but pro death penalty is easy to argue. The "embryo" is innocent.
The real hypocrisy is exceptions in cases of rape and a few others. The child remains innocent regardless of how it was conceived.
But those are typically political compromises - they would prefer a complete ban, as several countries have.
If the mother's life is in danger, you can argue her safety comes first (in those cases the life of the child is typically also in danger).
"Forcing your belief on others" is literally politics.
 
The "pro-life but pro death penalty hurr hurr" argument is simply moronic, you are obviously capable of understanding the difference between executing a murderer and killing an innocent person.

Pointing out hypocrisy is usually just masturbatory and doesn't really prove anything, but in the case of anti abortion people the argument they stick to is "abortion violates the sanctity of life", which you can prove isn't their actual motivation. It just so happens that practically every anti-abortion person (in America at least) is a dogmatic republican, so all you have to do to highlight all the things about the republican consensus which also violate the sanctity of life, but they seem to not give a crap about.

The real motivation of anti abortion people I've talked to is just a general fear of social change and lack of control over their families. For example freely available abortions mean you can't exploit teen horniness to lock them into marriages since there are no consequences for rawdogging. Or the fact that there is no punishment for female promiscuity. Or the fact that they might not have any grandchildren because they all get fetus deletus. The whole sanctity of life thing is just a way for them to organise all these desires into something they can rally other people with. Nobody would support a "regain social control over your children's sexual habits" movement, even if they all believed it.

This is all similar to how neoconservatives almost cheered on the discovery of HIV because it gave them a reason to make sense of their homophobia.
 
Then why did you say you don't understand?
It seems pretty simple to me, if you accept their premise then they are totally justified. The genocide of Muslims in China doesn't affect me in anyway but I would still stop it if I had the power to. Provided it wasn't too much effort. It also may be worth pointing out that women are just as likely to be pro-life as men are (at least in the US and I may be wrong here so look it up if you want but you get the idea).
The "pro-life but pro death penalty hurr hurr" argument is simply moronic, you are obviously capable of understanding the difference between executing a murderer and killing an innocent person.
The forcing your beliefs argument I'd disagree with too, if an individual believes that they have the right to murder someone then we force our belief on them that they actually don't.
However, I don't believe in souls and I don't really think I give a **** about other people having abortions. I'm mostly just writing this because lockdown is really dull.
Maybe thinking about things is not for you and you should look to your strengths, like using that edginess to cut pastries.
 
Last edited:

eddiemccandless

Knight at Arms
WBNWVC
To me the point is quite simple: abortions will happen whether they are legal or not. All you are doing by making them illegal is pushing people to do it in secret and using unsafe methods. If you actually want to reduce the number of abortions it would make more sense to take the money and resources that one would devote to prosecute women who abort and use it in programs that can help reduce the incidence (e.g., economic support for mothers who can't afford to have children, better sexual education etc.). In other words, you can be anti-abortion and pro-choice (I actually know several very religious people that have that position).

And sure, I get that some people think that the life of a fetus is sacred. I still don't see how that justifies forcing on a woman what she can or can't do with her body. Pregnancy is not something that someone else can decide for you.

I find it depressing that we are still having this debated in 2021. If you had asked me ten years ago I would have said that this was settled.
 

Count Delinard

Lord of Uxkhal
Global Moderator
WBNWVC
And sure, I get that some people think that the life of a fetus is sacred. I still don't see how that justifies forcing on a woman what she can or can't do with her body. Pregnancy is not something that someone else can decide for you.

I am pro abortion, but the few people I know who are pro life state that this is invalid because:

a. indeed we don’t allow people to murder other adults just because “it’s their choice to do so, so to each their own”

and

b. They argue it’s not about the woman anymore, once that fetus exists the woman is but a vessel, it’s not about her anymore.
 

eddiemccandless

Knight at Arms
WBNWVC
I am pro abortion, but the few people I know who are pro life state that this is invalid because:

a. indeed we don’t allow people to murder other adults just because “it’s their choice to do so, so to each their own”

and

b. They argue it’s not about the woman anymore, once that fetus exists the woman is but a vessel, it’s not about her anymore.

b. Is the real issue I think. a. doesn't really hold for me because a woman deciding not to go through pregnancy is not the same as someone abstaining from murder (in fact I don't think it can really be compared to anything else). Delivering a child is no walk in the park.
 

kurczak

Section Moderator
WB
They're the same point imo. If you want to be intellectually honest about abortions, the only thing that matters for 99.99% abortions is the moment "it" becomes a "person".

Once you have a person, it only leaves the cases where the mother risks life, which is a teeny, tiny amount of the total number.
 

eddiemccandless

Knight at Arms
WBNWVC
I don't deny that it is a complex issue from an ethical and moral point of view. I honestly even think that we should try to create the conditions to try and make that happen as little as possible (it's not like abortion is a fun experience for the women either). I just don't think that forcing pregnancy and throwing women who abort in jail is the way to go about it, is all.

Regarding the fetus vs person debate, there really is no objective answer to it. It is not a person when the "deed" happens, and then there's definitely a person at childbirth. The process that leads to that is gradual, and the way I see it there is no precise time where one can flip a flag and say "ah yes, it's a person now, there you go". I would argue that a third of the process is not enough to get there, but it's not like anyone can say that irrefutably.
 

kurczak

Section Moderator
WB
The rabbit hole goes even deeper, when you have to hit the pipe and ask questions like what separates life from non-life, what makes an organism an organism, as opposed to a part of an organism. Are identical twins actually two distinct organisms? What about clonal colonies?

To me there are three moments that have a merit:

1) conception, when the sperm's and egg's DNA is combined to create a new, unique distinct DNA. Every development from there on is just a bus driving itself. This would make illegal not just abortion, but many form of commonly used contraception.

2) development of the nervous system. Whether consciousness is a function of the NS, or the NS is "just" a vessel of an immaterial soul, they seems to be strongly connected. This happens before week 10, which would give women not that much room for a decision. A pregnancy can even easily go completely undetected the entire time.

3) passing the mirror test as a hard proof of consciousness :grin: this would give women up to 18 months after the birth to make up their mind.
 

Orion

Still Not Worthy
Global Moderator
M&BWBWF&SNW
I'm probably pro-choice but I really don't understand people who can't understand people who aren't. It seems pretty simple, they believe human life starts at conception, that this life is meaningful and therefore to end this life is immoral and should be illegal.
The disconnect that I see in it is that many of these same people in the US are--as others have already pointed out--against gov't intervention or support for vulnerable people. As eddie said, the money which goes into fighting abortion could be used to support unaborted pregnancies (soften the blow of missed or reduced work, extended maternity leave, guaranteed paternity leave, subsidies for child care for working parents), sex education, and increasing awareness of more forms of contraceptives. All of these things are shown to reduce abortion rates considerably without (de)regulating the procedure itself. Having a child is expensive and burdensome, but it doesn't have to be as difficult as American society makes it.
 
Actually, I would like to see the conservatives overreach themselves and ban abortion, so they can enjoy furious reaction from the sane public. The end game would be that they'll never try this discredited policy again and would need to shift their political muscle into bullying ethnic and sexual minorities or whatever worthy cause is supported by their values and beliefs.
Y'all religious countries need catharsis.
I wonder if part of the rising conservativism is reactionary to new developments in women's and LGBT rights. Each time something like #metoo happens, there's a considerable campaign to discredit it and mobilize the faithful with scaremongering.
 
Top Bottom