Texas

[Bahamut810]

When it comes to personal sovereignty, people on the left and the right (in general) are for it till it conflicts with something else they feel strongly about.

Either be for it or against it, not kind of one side this time but not others. Be consistent, not "stunning and brave".

There is one statement that I want to reply to:

This is a long-game play to repeal Roe v Wade. Like I said, it's a move to keep women "in their place." Knocked up, in the kitchen, out of the workplace, and less of a "threat" to (IMO) emotionally immature men.

Please don't act like abortion is the only option for unwanted pregnancy. I am pro-choice (anti-abortion but I am very pro-personal sovereignty) but if a woman does not want a child she has a several choices ranging from not having sex to giving the child up for adoption to dropping the child off at a police or fire station with no questions asked (safe haven laws). To act like someone is forced to keep a child they don't want is incorrect.

[IndigoErth]

Guess I'll weigh in and say that I'm pro-choice, but I feel that counseling should absolutely be available in those same organizations and a mandatory session for anyone who shows up to have a 2nd done. That way they can get guidance on what birth control methods may be best for them AND/OR to have the opportunity to privately discuss if it's the result of a situation they need help getting out of.

Because lord knows there are people stuck in sex trafficking, families with sexual abuse, abusive partners who refuse the use of birth control, and other situations that could be a root cause of needing an abortion in the first place and it and pregnancy might have been against their own will.



Texas however, with this scheme that could create bounty hunters as a means of trying to keep it in check is seriously fricked up.

The twisted way they went bout this is a serious Pandora's Box Texas may have decided to open, as that tactic, as I've heard, would not be limited to just other red states possibly deciding to do the same on abortion, but could also be used against a lot of other rights that people, including conservatives, would not be happy about.

I'll let a couple paragraphs from an article say it best, so that no one need scream at me for being a meanie suggesting threatening other "rights" issues as if I came up with it myself:

https://reason.com/2021/09/03/conser...rtion-law-too/

The law bans most abortions but says that state officials are not the enforcers. Rather, the abortion ban "shall be enforced exclusively through…private civil actions." According to the law, "any person" may sue "any person who…aids or abets the performance or inducement of abortion" and win a $10,000 award plus legal fees if the civil suit is successful. According to Texas, this unique scheme means that the state cannot be hauled into federal court to account for its own law because it has handed over the law's enforcement to private parties.


Conservatives should be just as outraged by this legal ruse as liberals are. After all, if the Texas scheme actually succeeds in the long run, what's to stop an anti-gun state legislature from banning handguns in the home, in clear violation of SCOTUS precedent, and then placing state officials beyond the reach of federal judicial review by outsourcing the ban's enforcement to an army of private-sector gun control activists? Most gun shops would probably go bankrupt overnight when faced with the wave of private-sector civil suits that such a state law would unleash.

People don't want government controlling our lives (well, maybe women's lives are still okay to ), but yet here is a government not only trying to do exactly that BUT also shield itself and give itself immunity from any accountability of being the one upholding it.

That could get quite scary if people run off with that same idea and start applying it to other things, too.

[Andrew NDB]

"I don't want to have this kid I'm pregnant with."

Far be it for me to argue with any woman who says this! I'm more than OK with the government even funding abortions. Better the money go to that than the spiraling crescendo of welfare queens it will spawn in inner cities and elsewhere. Or worse, when you think big picture.

Really the only sound arguments against abortion boil down to a religious nature. Or bemoaning an argument tantamount to like, "But... it COULD have been a life!" Yeah, so could have the last ten jackoffs you did, or the last ten periods a woman had dropping an ovum... that COULD have been a life (should the women who didn't see to get those ovums fertilized be criminalized? That's crazy). A zygote isn't unlike a mosquito, and probably really less so as a mosquito is independent... and really, what is the first thing you remember, ever? I kind of remember like 1 1/2 (though I feel like it was earlier), though people tell me I couldn't remember that. But I do. Throwing my bottle over the crib, upset that I wasn't getting any attention, possibly more in my bottle. In the womb, at negative 1 years old? No.

[mrmaczaps]

Originally Posted by robertfiduciary

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/0...-to-sue-509244

Hours after justices issued their 5-4 decision early Thursday, top Republicans in Florida, Arkansas and South Dakota said they were examining how the law’s unique “private right of action” enforcement structure could be used for look-alike abortion bans in their own states.

Dear Republican Men of the The Technodrome,

Could you please explain to me how you can support a party that supports actions that are so clearly anti-women, so clearly designed to keep women "in their place" as this does?

You talk about how terrible Democrats are. How awful Joe Biden is. That's fine. You certainly have that right (this is, after all, America).

However, no one on the left, no Democrat supports a ban on abortions at six weeks (few women even know they're pregnant at six weeks!).

So, yeah. I'm genuinely curious. It is "cool" to hate on Democrats because it allows you to ignore the fact that you support a political party that hates on women, on women's right to choose?

If you could please explain this... what's the word I'm looking for here? I want to say "duplicity," but I'm not sure that's it.

Explain how you can support a party that obviously harbors some sort of resentment, some type of hate, for half of it's citizens (women).

I'm not... I just don't get it? I mean, maybe I *do* get it. I certainly *suspect* what might be behind it. But I don't know for sure.

To quote the great Sherlock Holmes, "Data! Data! Data! I can't make bricks without clay."

Please, kind sirs, give me some clay for my bricks. Explain yourself in a way that I, a dumb liberal (who believes in the Equal Rights Amendment, that women should be paid the same amount as men for doing the same job, that the choices of a women's body should be between her and her Doctor. The list goes on and on...) could easily understand.

Thanks for your time, and your input. I really would like to understand. And right now, I just don't.

Half(ish) of babies aborted are female. I believe in choice; to choose to or not to engage in sexual activity which will result in pregnancy if precautions are not taken that are not ever 100% effective. In the less than 2% of abortions that are rape or incest, killing the innocent life made from one terrible happening is no excuse for murder. Life starts at conception. Thats science fact. The choice after finding out you're pregnant is become a mother or give the kid up for adoption, never murder.

We also already have equal pay. The differences in pay the lunatic left always bring up tend to be part time or already low paying jobs vs overly physical demanding jobs most women won't do and has been repeatedly proven to be false/bogus data. Most every job I've had in my life, women made more money than me even when I'd be at the work longer & done a better job at doing the work. No one I know other than democrats hate women. They hate babies, they hate freedom, they hate making their men food, when they manage to talk some poor dude into dating them... There are plenty of stories of kids becoming successful despite having only a one parent household, a mom who worked 2 jobs & raised her kid alone and everyone turned out fine. You gotta want it and shut up & get to work for it. It has been done, it can be done.

Abortion will never go away, but you dear sad little democrat, can you explain why you're for murdering babies moments before they're born & up to the point of coming down the birth canal like in New York? Why do you feel its okay for a woman to decide 9 months in "nah, I don't want this responsibility" & have a "doctor" stab their nearly born kid in the skull? If that unborn child is female, isn't murdering her MORE hateful? What did that unborn child do that was so evil, you want to kill her?

[ToSte]

Could we please raise the age limit on abortions to like 40? I have some in laws that could use some incentive.

[Leo656]

The adoption/foster care system is woefully inadequate, many kids never get taken into a proper home because the people who can afford to adopt only want perfectly healthy and white babies, which most kids put into the system are not - many kids put into the system are non-white and among them a lot of those have physical or mental ailments which make them "unappealing" to potential adopters. Tons of kids never get taken in and just age out of the system, growing up disillusioned and bitter.

Also, tons of kids who get put into foster homes are physically and sexually abused. There's no promise whatsoever that a kid being fostered or adopted is going to be properly taken care of, people scam the system all the time.

People who say "Just put the kid up so someone else can take care of it" are incredibly over-simplifying the situation. Most of those kids end up having sh*t lives, too. They become overburden on a society that's already overflowing, and the sad part is, they're aware of it, and they don't fully ever get over it even if they manage to avoid being abused.

Condoms fail, birth control fails, "just don't f*ck" isn't realistic. Also, the lives of the Already Existing should always trump the potential/theoretical lives of "the unborn". If having a kid is going to ruin your life - which is often the case - then people need options so as to not have the kid. The lives of the parents AND child are all forfeit when people who can't properly care for kids are "forced" to have them. The parents end up hating/resenting the kid and the kid grows up in an environment where they're fully aware how unwanted they are. That's no good for anyone.

Making a woman carry the baby of the person who raped her is just cruelty beyond the pale. NOTHING good will ever come from that situation. Imagine if you were a kid and somehow found out you were a Rape Baby? Imagine if that information got out, knowing how cruel kids are to other kids just in general? Jesus.

I'm not saying this to be a dick to anyone, but in my experience the people who are the most gung-ho about "Never Abort, never EVER" are people who are never going to be in any position to make such a choice, either for themselves or someone else. Many of the women I know have had at least one, even the ones who already had kids - in their case the feeling was that they already had enough/too many kids - and at the end of the day, Sh*t Happens. That's real life. People get lung cancer without ever smoking, and sometimes people get pregnant while still taking every precaution.

Once again, I will forever and always prioritize the life (and quality of life) of the Existing Human Beings over that of the Hypothetical Unborn.

And as Carlin always pointed out, the "pro-life" stance is pretty hypocritical anyways considering how they ONLY care about forcing women who don't want to get pregnant to carry and give birth to a baby they don't want/can't care for; once that baby is born, those "pro-life" people couldn't care less if it dies, grows up abused, or poor, or in a broken home, none of that; once the kid is out of the womb, it's "Good luck, buddy!" Their sanctimony stops at the birthing stage; before that, they care VERY much what happens to the kid and the mother, but afterwards everybody's on their own. Seems shady, to me. OR, again as Carlin put it, "They're not so much Pro-Life as Anti-Women; so many of these 'pro-life' people go around killing doctors for performing abortions that the whole thing just seems like empty rhetoric."

Pragmatically, at this stage of the game having abortions makes MORE sense than having kids does, for most people. If every couple whose condom broke or whose antibiotic screwed up their birth control or whatever were forced to carry the kid, birth the kid, and then "just give it up for adoption" into an already overburdened system, the entire state of things would be even sh*ttier than it is. Especially considering the pandemic and subsequent economic collapse which will take a decade or more to recover from. Who the f*ck would dump a kid on the world NOW? That seems recklessly irresponsible.

It's an argument that I guess won't go away - although I'm a little bit surprised that it's even still a conversation, but then I guess Texas Gonna Texas - but as I've said, the ones with the strongest "Pro-Life" stance are generally people who likely won't ever have to deal with the situation themselves.

In the case of the anti-abortion politicians, the most absurdly comical thing is how often their little blonde Perfect Christian daughters (or their wives) end up getting knocked up, and in turn they very quietly pay for them to get an abortion to "take care of the problem". Who even listens to those people, and why?

If Texas Governor Greg Abbott's daughter ever got pregnant by a black guy, mark my f*cking words he'd be on the phone with an abortion clinic so fast you wouldn't see more than a blur. Let's just all be real about THAT.

[Andrew NDB]

On a conspirational note, I sometimes wonder if the fear of abortions from the right is -- at least in part -- coming from the same place as "We should let everyone vote at 16! And open borders for all future vot -- erm, undocumented immigrants!" from the left. i.e., the general idea that all of these abortionated fetuses might have one day voted Republican, or might at least stand some chance at offsetting the influx of illegal immigrants who sneak over here and have tons of kids that more than likely end up voting Democrat. But while that notion isn't probably wrong, that doesn't make it just either.

Personally, I think Republicans should just unify and say, "We've decided we're not against abortion anymore. Not even a little bit," just to completely throw a wrench into the Democrat party. Without "They're gonna end Roe vs. Wade!!!!!! My body my choice (unless it's a vaccine, and then everyone should be forced at gunpoint to take it)!!!" mantras to drive each other into hysteria, they have an increasingly shrinking list of things that they can actually complain about that make any sort of logical sense.

[Leo656]

I don't know if it's All That across the board. I do know of some folks (in some cases personally) who feel that it's the sacred duty of White Christians/Catholics to propagate the species. It varies between the Biblical End of Days or a long-prophesized Race War, but in either case, they believe that Something Is Coming and that in turn they're supposed to create tons of White Christian Soldiers to fight back against either Satan, the Muslims, non-Whites, or All of the Above. So basically any white Christian who has fewer than like four-to-six kids is literally a horrible person who's enabling bringing about the Apocalypse.

They honestly care a lot less about non-white women having abortions, outside of getting to shame them for it. Secretly, they're glad they're not having kids because it means fewer non-white people being born, BUT they can't resist the opportunity to throw down the "You're A Bad Person" card anyway.

People's "beliefs" are so often a spider's web of hypocrisy and disingenuous nonsense. But given that they're often personal there's probably no real One Size Fits All narrative for why they feel the way they do.

"Because God Says..." is probably the single dumbest reason why anyone does (or doesn't do) ANY thing, though, whether it's oppose abortion or cut clits off. I try and maintain a certain spiritual side, and am pretty Agnostic in general. But whenever a person tries to justify their firm belief for or against something that affects Everyone, by stating "Well GOD says...", I confess that's the point I immediately check out of the conversation.

Because if God spoke to half as many people as it appears (and in turn gives everyone so much conflicting information) then by this point I'm pretty sure He's just trolling everyone for lulz and thus nobody should take any of what He says so seriously. It can't ALL be accurate, by default He's gotta be screwing with SOME people.

....Or otherwise isn't real. Y'know. Either way, I think "Because God said so" shouldn't hold so much water if He's not gonna show up in person to plead his case. That ought'a just be common sense by this point.

[IndigoErth]

Originally Posted by Leo656

"Because God Says..." is probably the single dumbest reason why anyone does (or doesn't do) ANY thing

I was going to ask why doesn't religion teach people to leave others alone if something isn't impacting them or any other living, breathing people personally and, if they don't like it, then leave it between their god and that person...but then realized that doing that is a detriment to further spreading their brand of theism if they aren't trying to force others to adhere to it whether they've subscribed to it or not.



Drinking and driving, pandemics and vaccines, drug dealers/trafficking, too easy gun access for the mentally disturbed/ill and so on... some things are understandable arguments as they do impact other people and the "my body my choice" thing doesn't really fly when it does. Abortion however... no, not contagious and these anti-abortion types do not care for one moment who that would-be kid would have been or become outside the womb or what life they were forced into.

I fully believe that there are crappy people in this world for who one of the only decent things they will ever do in their life is spare a child from having to deal with having them as parents. People yell about adoption, but face it, most terrible people still just keep the kid and then are abusive and resent them for existing despite it not being the child's fault. Sometimes not having to exist is mercy.


Pretty disgusting that Texas isn't even making exceptions for rape or incest. Not only forcing women (or teens) to deal with the trauma of that and the constant reminder of it while having to carry a child to term (talk about effing PTSD -- but more present the whole time, not post) and then decide what to do from there... they also don't care about that child who may one day find out that they don't exist because "two people loved each other very much," but rather out of a violent or abusive act. No one wants to be the person.

There are probably some raped women who may end up dying because they are desperate enough to get out of that situation and how difficult it is to deal with that happened to them, and probably none of those office holders will even give a damn.

[Leo656]

Man, sometimes sh*t happens. I know that better than most.

I don't tell the story often, because I am in no way proud of it, but I've mentioned how I was screwing my neighbor back when I was 14 until I graduated, and she was in her late-30s. She was in the medical industry and really meticulous about things - she even made it a point to show me her most recent blood tests shortly before the first time we had sex, just to prove she was clean - but a few times Sh*t Happened. Like one time she wasn't on the pill since she wasn't seeing anybody at the time, so I had a condom on (which we didn't normally bother with) and it f*cking broke, and in moments like that Rational Thought doesn't always hit. I was like "What do we do?" and she was like "F*ck it, don't stop," so we didn't.

We got lucky THAT time, but oddly enough there was a time not long after that where we DIDN'T get "lucky", and disturbingly enough it happened at a time when she WAS on birth control (She'd gone back on the pill when she got a new boyfriend, but she cheated on him with me all the time). Then when they broke up, she kept taking it since we were having sex so often anyways and it was just easier than messing with condoms. BUT, one day a few months later she came over all distressed and was like "I have to tell you something..." and she had a printout from her doctor's visit saying she was pregnant. She hadn't been with the other guy for a few months so there was no way it could've been anyone else but me. Again, I would've been like 15 at this point.

I knew for a fact that she'd been on the pill, so I was like "What the f*ck?!" and as the story goes she asked her doctor the same thing, and apparently one of her other medications most likely screwed up her birth control and made it not work. Add to the fact that at that point, we were doing it pretty much every single day, and yeah. It was pretty much inevitable that it was gonna happen, but we both just figured "She's on the pill, she's 'safe'."

It's easy to say, "Should've just worn a condom," but she didn't like them. And it's easy to say, "Should've just NOT had sex," but at that age when you're not having luck finding a real girlfriend but this dizzy broad right next door is aggressively trying to hook up with you on purpose and is offering you all the sex you can handle, no strings attached... once again, Common Sense and Rational Thought don't really hit you, in those moments.

SO, I gave her the money to "take care of it" and we almost never spoke of it again. She went to the doctor and had some of her meds switched around so the same thing supposedly wouldn't happen again, but we did try and be more careful after that. It never happened again, so I guess all of that worked, but... yeah. That was a f*cked up situation.

You gotta realize, too, there were reasons why it had to be handled that way. She was technically committing a felony, and if she ended up having a kid there was really nobody else she could "blame" it on. She was always worried someone might find out what we were doing; things were a bit more lax back then but she still might've gone to jail. So "have the kid, then give it up" wasn't gonna work because there was always the risk someone would find out I was the guy she'd been with. Also, she was not in a place physically or financially to raise any kids. And I was a f*cking teenager.

Now, it's easy for someone to look at the ENTIRE situation A to Z and be like, "You guys were both sh*tty and doing illegal/immoral things from the jump," and I can't entirely dispute that, other than to say "A teenage boy who isn't getting laid otherwise isn't going to turn down a pent-up older chick who wants to get down." And I'm not gonna judge her for her part in it, either, regardless of legality. Sure, "She was the adult, she should've known better," whatever... when it happens to you, by all means, come back to me and tell me exactly how much better you handled it.

But yeah. After that whole "situation" my attitude towards certain things shifted a bit. I never had a huge problem with abortion to start with, but going through that whole ordeal just put it in bold that sometimes, "Sh*t Happens". Her having that kid would've been the worst-case scenario for everyone involved for many, many reasons.

Again, to reiterate, I'm not proud that this sh*t happened. It's just an example of, until it happens to YOU, you don't really know how you're gonna deal with it.

[The Deadman]

I like how the OP came here, posted this bullsh*t to stir things up, and hasn't been back in over a week.

[Mayhem]

Someone with sense and high up enough to cancel this crap...

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...ewsntp&pc=U531

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Mayhem

Someone with sense and high up enough to cancel this crap...

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...ewsntp&pc=U531

Cancel the ban on this? Yes. Hopefully. Pushing anti-abortion stuff particularly seems an odd thing to push for and especially now. If you simply remove "the right wants to remove abortions!" from the equation entirely and clearly then, I believe, a ton of more support would roll in.

Right now it's very easy to lump the right into some kind of religious sect that is deadset against women's rights simply because of that and you can never and will never talk your way out of that. At least on the talking level. Just let go of abortion as a "ground" spot. I want to strangle talkers on the right that begin these things with "the Bible says..." as if that's going to change a single mind that doesn't give af what the Bible says. Focus on the things you can change minds with. As in, practical things. With logic. Like, as soon as they mention anything about religion that sounds great to everyone who's already religious... everyone else? They've lost now and they're already the bad guys to, and I don't necessarily blame the opposition there. It's a dumb tactic. Logic and facts should be enough.