The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Walker
Posts: 14245
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by Walker »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Oct 13, 2022 9:33 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Thu Oct 13, 2022 9:30 pm It's just good to know that IC supports abortion for older, educated women.
Back on "abortion" again? :shock:

I guess that's all you care about...baby killing. You don't seem to think anything like population control has any value at all, unless it involves your opportunity to kill babies. That's all you seem to want to do.
Putting Roe v Wade in its proper place seems to have made the A-word the new Godwin's Law.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by Immanuel Can »

Walker wrote: Fri Oct 14, 2022 6:32 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Oct 13, 2022 9:33 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Thu Oct 13, 2022 9:30 pm It's just good to know that IC supports abortion for older, educated women.
Back on "abortion" again? :shock:

I guess that's all you care about...baby killing. You don't seem to think anything like population control has any value at all, unless it involves your opportunity to kill babies. That's all you seem to want to do.
Putting Roe v Wade in its proper place seems to have made the A-word the new Godwin's Law.
It's just unnecessary to use abortion as a method of controlling population. Educating young women in developing countries is the best, healthiest, least invasive, most advantageous, most humane and most effective method for doing it.

It's impossible to believe any sane and decent person would choose a different strategy, since that one is so effective and so right.
Walker
Posts: 14245
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by Walker »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Oct 14, 2022 2:33 pm
It's impossible to believe any sane and decent person would choose a different strategy, since that one is so effective and so right.
If the conditions are ripe, nothing is impossible. Given the fact that at least 81 million folks voted for Brandon (they can't all be insane) :roll: , the conditions appear to be quite ripe for this proposal, in spite of all the "revelations," emerging about the government corruption that everyone knows has been going on for years and decades, and have ignored.

- The government wants to stick its nose into all phases of child rearing. What is being missed by this kind of mindset is the wasted opportunity.
- With just a shift in attitude the US government could easily print up a few more billion $ for a new program.

- The New Program. The government shall adopt the unwanted children. The government, on behalf of the people, will house, feed, educate, instruct, and raise an army whose views, outlooks, hopes and dreams are molded into an image that fits the prescribed narrative.
- In addition to the end product, this is also a jobs program for the Education-majors who have already been indoctrinated in other ways, and have thus proven to be compliant for this new use of their training.
- To make it work, the government will pay a bonus to any mother who carries the baby to term.
- In this manner, no more killing of the innocents; a win for anti-A.
- In this manner, the The Progressives get blank slates to indoctrinate; a win for pro-A (now pro-life).
- The control of the population is built in.
- If, from the beginning of Roe they had offered this alternative, the Progressives would now have an army of 60-70 million who would lockstep vote in each election.

- We need a name for this Brave New Government Program. To keep up with the trend in government-program-naming, it should intend the opposite of what it says.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7106
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by iambiguous »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Thu Oct 13, 2022 11:06 pm
iambiguous wrote: Thu Oct 13, 2022 7:57 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Thu Oct 13, 2022 7:05 pm

And you don't think it's possible that there are all kinds of reasons that women might need to terminate THEIR pregnancy? Have you ever even been with a woman? You don't seem to know anything about them.
So, if a woman terminates her pregnancy at 7 weeks with an abortion pill, then that's 'murdering a baby'? You would prefer for it to actually become a baby and THEN get murdered?
Take someone who terminates a pregnancy in the first few weeks (which most are): if she goes over her sanitary pads with a fine tooth comb and a magnifying glass she is NOT going to find anything that even resembles a 'baby' in any way. It's YOU who needs educating. What is your objection exactly? Be honest now. Is it the 'soul' that you are concerned about? Hmmm? The sacred creation of your 'god' that you feel you need to 'defend' because your 'god' might get mad at you if you don't? Hypocrites make me sick. You think your 'omnicient god' can't see hypocrisy? Especially when you consider that he's the most prolific abortionist imaginable.
A classic example of the irreversible force objectivist smashing headlong into the immovable object objectivist. Both absolutely adamant that they and only they are on the One True Path. Just entirely different arrogant, autocratic, authoritarian fonts.

Now, imagine either one of them having the power to, say, ban members here. That would certainly solve the problem that I pose for them.
But I have science, logic and reason on my side; he has superstitious nutjobbery. It's not an equal 'argument'. You are a moron (objective opinion).

Right, like only those who support a woman's right to choose an abortion have science, logic and reason on their side in regard to, say, when the unborn become human beings or whether it is ethical to kill the unborn in the womb.

Though I certainly agree with you that IC basically has only his own subjective belief in a God, the God, my God. A God that like all the other ones is, in my view, readily deconstructed in discussing these factors:
1] a demonstrable proof of the existence of the Christian God
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why the Christian God?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in the Christian God
4] the questions that revolve around theodicy and the Christian God
Besides, if the Christian God is revolted by abortion how does IC explain this:

"Fifteen to twenty percent of all pregnancies (or approximately 1 million a year in the U.S.) will end in a miscarriage or stillbirth. This means that In the U.S. nearly 1 million women who get pregnant each year experience such losses." NAPW website

Me and abortion?
iambiguous wrote:I believe what many would construe to be two seemingly conflicting [even contradictory] things:

1] that aborting a human fetus is the killing of an innocent human being
2] that women should be afforded full legal rights to choose abortion

As a result, the first thing many point out is that, regarding this issue, I am insisting women should be permitted legally to kill innocent human beings. And that doing so is in this particular context not immoral.

To which I respond:

"Yes, but..."

But:

Just because I construe the fetus to be an innocent human being does not necessarily [objectively] make it so. On the contrary, there are reasonable arguments prooffered by those who see the fetus as truly human only at birth or at the point of "viability".

And even if everyone agreed the fetus was an innocent human being from the point of copnception, I would still not construe the killing of it as necessarily immoral. Why? Because out in the world we live in there can be no such thing as true "gender equality" if we forced women to give birth against their wishes.

Abortion then is a human tragedy in my view precisely because, like so many other moral conflagrations, it necessarily involves a conflict of legitimate rights.

Consider:

William Barrett from Irrational Man:

For the choice in...human [moral conflicts] is almost never between a good and an evil, where both are plainly marked as such and the choice therefore made in all the certitude of reason; rather it is between rival goods, where one is bound to do some evil either way, and where the ultimate outcome and even---or most of all---our own motives are unclear to us.

In my view, moral dogmas are basically interchangeable when expressed as sets of essential [universal] convictions. And that is so because we do not interact socially, politically or economically in an essential manner; only in an existential manner. Which is to say that our behaviors bear consequences that are perceived differently by different people in different sets of circumstances.

That's the world we have to live in and not the ones we put together seamlessly in our heads.
An "objective opinion", eh?

And not, say, an oxymoron?
reasonvemotion
Posts: 1813
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 1:22 am

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by reasonvemotion »

Where does the father on the issue of abortion stand.

Does the law give him any rights?
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

reasonvemotion wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 3:20 am Where does the father on the issue of abortion stand.

Does the law give him any rights?
Just think about it for a minute...
reasonvemotion
Posts: 1813
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 1:22 am

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by reasonvemotion »

I did before I posted.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Obviously not, or you wouldn't ask.
reasonvemotion
Posts: 1813
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 1:22 am

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by reasonvemotion »

The question was directed at the men on this Forum.

Please give them some breathing space to answer, perhaps you could bow out for once.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

As you haven't expressed an opinion one way or another on the topic then why would I 'bow out'? I'm the only female on this site who has countered the excrement from the male anti-choice religiofucks on here. Maia is a complete fruit-loop, and the other females on here are more intent on flirting than posting anything worthwhile.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

reasonvemotion wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 4:11 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g9RI0GgRIQ

It was an Abortion
A movie scene? Seriously? Your point is??
reasonvemotion
Posts: 1813
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 1:22 am

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by reasonvemotion »

Are you still here?
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Yes. Waiting for an answer.
Walker
Posts: 14245
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The lie that'll destroy women for generations

Post by Walker »

reasonvemotion wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 3:20 am Where does the father on the issue of abortion stand.

Does the law give him any rights?
Before the little bundle of joy is delivered, the mother is known, but the father is only inferred. The known has more sway in the say. Also, possession is both nine-tenths of the law, and nine-tenths of the say.

In other words, Diane Keaton may have thought that gift from heaven was going to look more like the gardener than The Godfather, because the gardener has some distinctive physical characteristics. Not her fault, The Godfather was always so busy ...

I bet the maid's husband was surprised. This 4 minutes by Bill Burr is just brutal. I'd warn you about the language, but I don't think you'll have a problem with it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUrMSK8XWFc
Post Reply