Abortion

Abortion, euthanasia, genetic engineering, Just War theory and other such hot topics.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7219
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by iambiguous »

henry quirk wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 3:13 am
iambiguous wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 2:03 am
So, at no point will you and me talk about reproductive control before pregnancy, yeah?
Note to others:

Please explain to me how the points I raise here...
No, what abortion is always about is this: a woman [and only a woman] gets pregnant and does not want to be pregnant. For any number of personal reasons rooted in the life that she [and only she] lives. Then the part where squabbles erupt over when human life actually begins. And then the part where there are conflicting reactions to how the pregnancy occurred...defective birth control device, rape, incest. Then the part where things change in the woman's life prompting her to change her mind about the pregnancy. Then the part where to abort or not to abort becomes deeply embedded in the woman's mental health. Or in her physical health.

Then the part where in some states [or in some entire nations] none of that complex "existential stuff" matters. If a woman gets pregnant [whatever the circumstances] she must give birth. Or be charged with first degree premeditated murder.

Reproductive control is obviously an important component of the debate. If the state can seize control of it and force woman to give birth, what does that tell you about the gap between men and women in regard to social, political and economic equality?
And here...
A woman wants to become a mother, but given the circumstances in her life, not now. So, knowing that birth control is not always 100% effective, or the possibility that she might be raped, she should get an operation to prevent a pregnancy. Then, when she wants to become pregnant, get the operation reversed?

Okay, what if during the pregnancy that she does want, circumstances dramatically change in her life and she no longer wants it. Too bad? If she has an abortion then it is perfectly reasonable to charge her with first degree premeditated murder? Or if she has the baby and then decides to hold off on her next child, get the operation again? Repeat as necessary until menopause?
...have nothing to do with reproduction from many a woman's frame of mind both before and after a pregnancy.

I'm not about leaving women in the dark regarding tubal ligation and vasectomy. I'm about how a woman might not think about them in the same way a man does, given the biological fact that no man can ever be confronted with an unwanted pregnancy.

My ex-wife and I decided that my getting a vasectomy was the right thing to do after the birth of our daughter. Me because I definitely did not want to be a father again, her because she did not want to be a mother again then but she might want to be down the road. Now, imagine she had become pregnant again with another man after our divorce but did not want to be. If Roe was not the law of the land back then she could have been arrested and charged with premeditated murder if she had an abortion.

there's how you view this, never, ever having to deal with an unwanted pregnancy re your own body, and how women who can become pregnant view it.
henry quirk wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 3:13 amYou're a woman?
That's precisely my point. I'm not a woman. I can never get pregnant. So I can never be charged with first degree murder for aborting a pregnancy. Only if I perform it. Which is not a biological imperative. So, how can women who can be ever achieve true political and economic equality with men if the state -- the government -- can force her to give birth or be charged with murder?

"As though that part is, what, completely irrelevant because in 'following the dictates of Reason and Nature', you know everything that can possibly be known about an unwanted pregnancy?"

And, please, don't pretend that when I note my arguments it's a "script", but when you note yours, it's not.

After all, you're the fulminating fanatic objectivist here, not me. I'm always the first to acknowledge that my own thinking is no less rooted existentially in dasein.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22265
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by Immanuel Can »

iambiguous wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 7:27 pm
henry quirk wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 3:13 am So, at no point will you and me talk about reproductive control before pregnancy, yeah?
No, what abortion is always about is this: a woman [and only a woman] gets pregnant...
I keep having this hilarous picture of Biggie trying to raise cattle.

He goes to another farmer and says, "I have cows, lots of cows, and only cows...but no calves."

The farmer says, "Maybe your bull's infertile."

And Biggie says, "What's a 'bull'?"
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7219
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by iambiguous »

Mr. Snippet aka Mr. Wiggle aka Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 7:59 pm
iambiguous wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 7:27 pm
henry quirk wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 3:13 am So, at no point will you and me talk about reproductive control before pregnancy, yeah?
No, what abortion is always about is this: a woman [and only a woman] gets pregnant...
I keep having this hilarous picture of Biggie trying to raise cattle.

He goes to another farmer and says, "I have cows, lots of cows, and only cows...but no calves."

The farmer says, "Maybe your bull's infertile."

And Biggie says, "What's a 'bull'?"
Again, shameless! Absolutely shameless!! :shock:
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Abortion

Post by henry quirk »

Please explain to me how the points I raise here...And here......have nothing to do with reproduction from many a woman's frame of mind both before and after a pregnancy.
Here's the thing: you can beat the drum about how unfair and wrong it is RvW went the way of the dodo, and you can lament over and over about how women, abortin' in states where it is or is soon to be illegal, might get arrested and charged and tried and convicted.

You can do that.

Or: you start figurin' how to navigate around The State.

I've been talkin' about two ways.

You'll have none of it.

Okay, fine.

You won't scoff the law, so: what're you to do?

If you actually wanna do sumthin': start lobbyin' congress, by way of your congress folk, to pass legislation guaranteein' abortion access, nation-wide. Start lobbyin' your state legislature to pass legislation guaranteein' abortion access, state wide.

And, of course, you can sit and wait a few decades for the composition of the SC to shift in a direction where a challenge to Dobbs would get some play.

In other words: you can make appeals to The State to save women from predation by The State.

Full-time job, that. With no guarantee of success (hint: the more you grease palms, the louder and more meaningful your appeals will be).
I'm about how a woman might not think about them in the same way a man does
I can tell you how women I know think about it (my ma, sis, three cousins, my best friend, acquaintances, women I work along side): all of them favor TL. Some are glad RvW is done; others are pissed it's done. Not a one, however, is sittn' around hand-wringin'. Granted, this is anecdotal, and the sample size is small (no more than 30), so take it as you like.
I'm not a woman.
Then mebbe you oughta talk to some of them and see what they think face to face.
how can women who can be ever achieve true political and economic equality with men if the state -- the government -- can force her to give birth or be charged with murder?
I've been tryin' to talk about a means of circumventin' The State, of takn' that control away from The State, but you'll have none of it.
don't pretend that when I note my arguments it's a "script"
Sez the man who quotes himself over and over and over and...

It's a script.
you're the fulminating fanatic objectivist here, not me
Sure you are. You've shown no indication of bein' fractured in this thread. You obviously picked a side. You demonstrate no willingness to see good points on either (any) side as you supposedly did with Mary & John.

You're as fulminatingly objectivist as anyone here.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Abortion

Post by henry quirk »

iambiguous wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 8:09 pm
Mr. Snippet aka Mr. Wiggle aka Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 7:59 pm
iambiguous wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 7:27 pm

No, what abortion is always about is this: a woman [and only a woman] gets pregnant...
I keep having this hilarous picture of Biggie trying to raise cattle.

He goes to another farmer and says, "I have cows, lots of cows, and only cows...but no calves."

The farmer says, "Maybe your bull's infertile."

And Biggie says, "What's a 'bull'?"
Again, shameless! Absolutely shameless!! :shock:
funny, though... 👍
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7219
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by iambiguous »

Please explain to me how the points I raise here...
No, what abortion is always about is this: a woman [and only a woman] gets pregnant and does not want to be pregnant. For any number of personal reasons rooted in the life that she [and only she] lives. Then the part where squabbles erupt over when human life actually begins. And then the part where there are conflicting reactions to how the pregnancy occurred...defective birth control device, rape, incest. Then the part where things change in the woman's life prompting her to change her mind about the pregnancy. Then the part where to abort or not to abort becomes deeply embedded in the woman's mental health. Or in her physical health.

Then the part where in some states [or in some entire nations] none of that complex "existential stuff" matters. If a woman gets pregnant [whatever the circumstances] she must give birth. Or be charged with first degree premeditated murder.

Reproductive control is obviously an important component of the debate. If the state can seize control of it and force woman to give birth, what does that tell you about the gap between men and women in regard to social, political and economic equality?
And here...
A woman wants to become a mother, but given the circumstances in her life, not now. So, knowing that birth control is not always 100% effective, or the possibility that she might be raped, she should get an operation to prevent a pregnancy. Then, when she wants to become pregnant, get the operation reversed?

Okay, what if during the pregnancy that she does want, circumstances dramatically change in her life and she no longer wants it. Too bad? If she has an abortion then it is perfectly reasonable to charge her with first degree premeditated murder? Or if she has the baby and then decides to hold off on her next child, get the operation again? Repeat as necessary until menopause?
...have nothing to do with reproduction from many a woman's frame of mind both before and after a pregnancy.
henry quirk wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 8:24 pmHere's the thing: you can beat the drum about how unfair and wrong it is RvW went the way of the dodo, and you can lament over and over about how women, abortin' in states where it is or is soon to be illegal, might get arrested and charged and tried and convicted.

You can do that.
No, no, no, it's not me doing it that matters here, it's the women who are arrested, the women whose lives are utterly upended, the women who have to drop out of school or lose their job or find their lives grimly impacted in any number of ways that will be doing it.
henry quirk wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 8:24 pm I've been talkin' about two ways.

You'll have none of it.


Again, I've noted a number objections that women might make to that above. But you'll have none of it. They are clearly not following the dictates of Reason and Nature as impeccably as you are.

So, why don't you introduce them to Deism?
henry quirk wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 8:24 pm If you actually wanna do sumthin': start lobbyin' congress, by way of your congress folk, to pass legislation guaranteein' abortion access, nation-wide. Start lobbyin' your state legislature to pass legislation guaranteein' abortion access, state wide.

And, of course, you can sit and wait a few decades for the composition of the SC to shift in a direction where a challenge to Dobbs would get some play.

In other words: you can make appeals to The State to save women from predation by The State.

Full-time job, that. With no guarantee of success...
I'm with you 100% here. That's what thousands of folks on both ends of the political spectrum are doing of course. It's called democracy and the rule of law. Works the same way for buying and selling bazookas too.

But five of the six Supremes here and now are all Catholics. And a sixth was raised a Catholic. They won't admit it, but abortion is a moral issue to them. So what if they rule that any legislation in any state that permits abortion is "Unconstitutional".

Nope, the only sure-fire way to guarantee women the right to abortion, is a Constitutional Amendment that states this as a right. Back again to democracy and the rule of law.

In the interim however the state -- the government -- in any number of jurisdictions, can compel women to give birth or face serious legal consequences. Let's just hope it doesn't turn out to be any women you know and love.

You would turn them in, right?

Then back to this:
Reproductive control is obviously an important component of the debate. If the state can seize control of it and force woman to give birth, what does that tell you about the gap between men and women in regard to social, political and economic equality?
henry quirk wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 8:24 pm I've been tryin' to talk about a means of circumventin' The State, of takn' that control away from The State, but you'll have none of it.
And [again] you'll have none of the points I [and many women] raised in regard to that above. Looks like we're stuck.
henry quirk wrote: Tue Jul 05, 2022 8:24 pm you're the fulminating fanatic objectivist here, not me
Come on, henry, over and again I own up to a belief that my arguments here are no less but subjective political prejudices rooted existentially in the life I lived. I flat out agree that those in the pro-life camp make arguments against abortion that the other side can't just make go away. "I" picked a side existentially not because I believe there actually is a way to "follow the dictates of Reason and Nature" in regard to the morality of abortion. Or in regard to gun legislation. There's no God in my narrative.

"I" truly am fractured and fragmented here. Drawn and quartered down to the bone. My leap of faith to women's rights in the abortion wars revolves mostly around the fact that for over 20 years I was a political activist from the left.

On the contrary, "I" don't believe that there exists a Real Me Self able to become in sync objectively with the Right Thing To Do.

That's what I mean by an objectivist. The fulminating fanatic part is reserved for those who are particularly fierce when dividing the world up between "one of us" [the good guys] and "one of them" [the bad guys].

I fully acknowledge that given new experiences and new relationships and access to new information and knowledge and ideas, I could change my mind about abortion. I have in the past. That given a No God world [merely an assumption on my part here and now] "I" in the is/ought world is understood by me to be based on the arguments I raise in these threads:

https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=194382
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 5&t=185296

And all I can do is to invite the objectivists among us to read the OPs and discuss why they are convinced this is not applicable to them.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Abortion

Post by henry quirk »

biggy,

Here's how it is...

RvW is dead as a dodo and it doesn't matter if RvW bein' dead as a dodo is unfair and wrong. That boat has sunk and it ain't gonna be raised for a looong time, if ever.

The SC is the last stop and it has spoken (folks like yourself shoulda never poked the bear: it was the MY BODY-MY CHOICE crowd who sued Dobbs and opened the door for RvW to go bye-bye [talk about your unintended consequences!]) and there ain't a flippin' thing anyone can do about it 'cept...

...wait a few decades for the court's composition to shift in a direction where a challenge to the Dobbs decision can get some traction.

...lobby for an amendment to the federal constitution (and be prepared to work hard for a looong time...Article 5 doesn't provide for ease or speed).

...lobby congress, by way of your congress folk, to pass legislation guaranteein' national abortion access (and, if you get it, be prepared for legal challenges, cuz they'll happen).

...lobby your state legislature to pass legislation guaranteein' state abortion access (and, if you get it, be prepared for legal challenges, cuz they'll happen).

...encourage folks to be self-responsible and to take advantage of birth-control and -regulation methods includin' tubal ligation and vasectomy.

...scoff the law (quietly back-alley junior right into a dumpster).

If you, or anyone, has any other options, please, add 'em to the list.

Me: I think only the last two options are worth a damn.

-----

As for women who are pregnant, who want to abort, who live in a state where abortion (via trigger law) is now forbidden, and who have no means of haulin' ass to a neighborin' state where abortion is favored: them's the breaks.

Sounds cold, I know, but that's the truth of it. RvW is dead, it's a new world when it comes to abortion, so learn to navigate it.

Last word is yours.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7219
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by iambiguous »

henry quirk wrote: Thu Jul 07, 2022 12:48 am biggy,

Here's how it is...

RvW is dead as a dodo and it doesn't matter if RvW bein' dead as a dodo is unfair and wrong. That boat has sunk and it ain't gonna be raised for a looong time, if ever.
Please, you just noted above that...
If you actually wanna do sumthin': start lobbyin' congress, by way of your congress folk, to pass legislation guaranteein' abortion access, nation-wide. Start lobbyin' your state legislature to pass legislation guaranteein' abortion access, state wide.
No one can predict how long it will be before the left is able to bring it back into existence.

Whereas the dodo has been extinct now for over 300 years.

What's crucial is the distinction between those who are willing to pursue moderation, negotiation and compromise [Roe in a nutshell] and those who won't settle for anything less than their own dogmatic, objectivist assumptions. From either the left or the right.

That's where you are: "following the dictates of Reason and Nature".

And from a God, the God, your God no less!

Come on, admit it, how much respect can one have for another's intelligence when they fall back on the supernatural to back up their moral convictions?!

Well, unless, of course, you are able to demonstrate to us that your God [and not IC's or any of the others here] really does exist. Or are you one of those ubiquitous "leap of faith" sheep? A member of the flock that the shepherd up and abandoned?

On the other hand, I was once a sheep myself. Not a member of either your flock or IC's. But a lamb of God's nonetheless.
henry quirk wrote: Thu Jul 07, 2022 12:48 amAs for women who are pregnant, who want to abort, who live in a state where abortion (via trigger law) is now forbidden, and who have no means of haulin' ass to a neighborin' state where abortion is favored: them's the breaks.

Sounds cold, I know, but that's the truth of it. RvW is dead, it's a new world when it comes to abortion, so learn to navigate it.
Hear that ladies? Tough luck.

Back to this:
In the interim however the state -- the government* -- in any number of jurisdictions, can compel women to give birth or face serious legal consequences. Let's just hope it doesn't turn out to be any women you know and love.

You would turn them in, right?
* and we know how much henry loves the government!

And it's not so much that it sounds cold to the "women who are arrested, the women whose lives are utterly upended, the women who have to drop out of school or lose their job or find their lives grimly impacted in any number of ways"...it's that they are hearing it from someone who, as luck would have it, was born with a dick and not a uterus.
Last edited by iambiguous on Sat Jul 09, 2022 8:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8536
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by Sculptor »

henry quirk wrote: Thu Jul 07, 2022 12:48 am biggy,

Here's how it is...

RvW is dead as a dodo and it doesn't matter if RvW bein' dead as a dodo is unfair and wrong. That boat has sunk and it ain't gonna be raised for a looong time, if ever.

The SC is the last stop and it has spoken (folks like yourself shoulda never poked the bear: it was the MY BODY-MY CHOICE crowd who sued Dobbs and opened the door for RvW to go bye-bye [talk about your unintended consequences!]) and there ain't a flippin' thing anyone can do about it 'cept...

...wait a few decades for the court's composition to shift in a direction where a challenge to the Dobbs decision can get some traction.

...lobby for an amendment to the federal constitution (and be prepared to work hard for a looong time...Article 5 doesn't provide for ease or speed).

...lobby congress, by way of your congress folk, to pass legislation guaranteein' national abortion access (and, if you get it, be prepared for legal challenges, cuz they'll happen).

...lobby your state legislature to pass legislation guaranteein' state abortion access (and, if you get it, be prepared for legal challenges, cuz they'll happen).

...encourage folks to be self-responsible and to take advantage of birth-control and -regulation methods includin' tubal ligation and vasectomy.

...scoff the law (quietly back-alley junior right into a dumpster).

If you, or anyone, has any other options, please, add 'em to the list.

Me: I think only the last two options are worth a damn.

-----

As for women who are pregnant, who want to abort, who live in a state where abortion (via trigger law) is now forbidden, and who have no means of haulin' ass to a neighborin' state where abortion is favored: them's the breaks.

Sounds cold, I know, but that's the truth of it. RvW is dead, it's a new world when it comes to abortion, so learn to navigate it.

Last word is yours.
They could Jump state lines to have you abortion elsewhere. RvW being overturned does not, I understand, prevent legal abortions in states where they want to have it. It is only backward states.
This shall, of course put pressure on the public service provision in the modern free states. Were I President I would offer Federal Grants to any woman wanting to visit out of state abortion clinics and also provide extra funding for those clinics.
I suppose really backward states would try to penalise women having abortions outside the state, as they returned. Were this the case I would either send in the National Guard to bang some heads together, offer presidential pardons, or even offer relocation grants to allow these women to leave their home states for good.

However I understand that although the ration against roe v wade in the public is 62/38 in favour of legal abortion, American rarely follows public opinion being a broken democracy
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Abortion

Post by henry quirk »

They could Jump state lines to have (an) abortion elsewhere.
Sure. Ain't nuthin' stoppin' someone from travellin' from a state where abortion is forbidden to a state where abortion is favored except themselves.
I suppose really backward states would try to penalise women having abortions outside the state
Some of that is goin' on, yeah. The response is abortion-favorin' states won't cooperate in the extradition, arrest, indictment, and trial of women who seek legal abortions. The workaround for the abortion-seekin' woman who lives in a state forbiddin' abortion is to just go get that abortion in a neighborin', abortion-favorin', state and don't advertise it.
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Abortion

Post by Walker »

Naw. An abortion in one state will be "honored" in another state.

When folks go to Las Vegas, Nevada for a fun way to lose money, they can also get a quickie wedding. That's also honored in all states. They can also get a quickie divorce. That's honored in all states.

Now, folks can add a quickie abortion because even in the age of No Shame, there’s still some residual contamination of that secular ideal of No Shame. Relativism justifies that ideal. Relativism says, there is no absolute by which to judge gambling, divorce, or abortion as being wrongful and unvirtuous. If it feels good, do it.

Divorce, abortion, gambling … these used to be shameful activities because of the influence of religions and conservative traditional customs such as formal vows before God and mortal witnesses. Warriors also make secular vows, they're called blood oaths. The principle of "the vow" makes words and the meaning absolute and inviolate, even sacred.

In the age of No Shame, vows are worthless.

There is still plenty of that residual shame lingering in the modern cultures of secular relativism. It's what made, and makes Sin-City possible, despite Disneyfication. This residual shame is why it must be emphasized through advertising, winking and proper tips that what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, because Vegas isn’t really a part of real life for folks who have yet to become woke enough to conquer the boundaries of shame that discourages aberrations both good and bad.

When federal approval of all abortions declared with Roe v Wade that abortion was no longer shameful, abortion became honored by all states. Anyone who disagreed with that legal justification, was the aberration. Now, all the hubub and threats to the SCOTUS is partially because abortionists don't want any legal disapproval of abortion from anyone, anywhere, even if they are in another state or country such as the USA, the greatest country on the face of the earth, objectively speaking and of course, all things considered.

:|
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6666
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by Iwannaplato »

Walker wrote: Sun Jul 10, 2022 9:16 am Naw. An abortion in one state will be "honored" in another state.

When folks go to Las Vegas, Nevada for a fun way to lose money, they can also get a quickie wedding. That's also honored in all states. They can also get a quickie divorce. That's honored in all states.

Now, folks can add a quickie abortion because even in the age of No Shame, there’s still some residual contamination of that secular ideal of No Shame. Relativism justifies that ideal. Relativism says, there is no absolute by which to judge gambling, divorce, or abortion as being wrongful and unvirtuous. If it feels good, do it.
There are certainly problems due to the giant category secular society. And you are complaining about No Shame. Well, it's probably in part a reaction to ALL SHAME and All guilt from before. The consistant stiffness, unexpressed fear in response to religions telling people desire and sex were problematic at the feeling stage (Jesus' increase of the commandment around lust).
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Abortion

Post by Walker »

Iwannaplato wrote: Sun Jul 10, 2022 9:40 am
Walker wrote: Sun Jul 10, 2022 9:16 am Naw. An abortion in one state will be "honored" in another state.

When folks go to Las Vegas, Nevada for a fun way to lose money, they can also get a quickie wedding. That's also honored in all states. They can also get a quickie divorce. That's honored in all states.

Now, folks can add a quickie abortion because even in the age of No Shame, there’s still some residual contamination of that secular ideal of No Shame. Relativism justifies that ideal. Relativism says, there is no absolute by which to judge gambling, divorce, or abortion as being wrongful and unvirtuous. If it feels good, do it.
There are certainly problems due to the giant category secular society. And you are complaining about No Shame. Well, it's probably in part a reaction to ALL SHAME and All guilt from before. The consistant stiffness, unexpressed fear in response to religions telling people desire and sex were problematic at the feeling stage (Jesus' increase of the commandment around lust).
And you are complaining about No Shame.
Right there. That's it. That's where you interject bias. (You should frame it as a reminder to break that habit.)

That's where you confuse reporting the news, with "complaining."

Once you stop bitching about everything, you see the world in a new light. You see Objectively. You see it as it is.

Fortunately for you, I'm here to point that out.

:wink:
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6666
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by Iwannaplato »

Walker wrote: Sun Jul 10, 2022 9:58 am That's where you confuse reporting the news, with "complaining."
Those are not mutually exclusive. What gets focused on, what doesn't. If I could hear a conservative put what you are calling news in the context of what has gone before when their values had more sway, then I might have a different reaction.
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Abortion

Post by Walker »

Iwannaplato wrote: Sun Jul 10, 2022 10:32 am
Walker wrote: Sun Jul 10, 2022 9:58 am That's where you confuse reporting the news, with "complaining."
Those are not mutually exclusive. What gets focused on, what doesn't. If I could hear a conservative put what you are calling news in the context of what has gone before when their values had more sway, then I might have a different reaction.
In theory, but not the real life example that prompted the comment.
Post Reply