#insert meaningless list of woke catchphrase and slogans without understanding what they mean or how they are applied

[quicklyseverebird]

Question for pro-choicers cont

*previous post inserted since the poster has apparently blocked me from reposting.  Or maybe tumblr is acting up again….*

 pro-abortion-rights

You claim that abortion is murder and, in the same breath, that you intend no moral judgment about the intentionally cherry-picked most repugnant of the reasons people commit murder. How convincing! The joke is that you have the exact same moral hierarchy since you too believe that bodily autonomy may be exercised for bigoted reasons.

Imagine not understanding the concept of “for the sake of argument.”Pro-choicers don’t actually concede the point on fetal personhood, they assume it for the sake of argument with anti-abortionists because it doesn’t actually matter either way. It’s an argumentative tactic, not a concession, but keep imagining you’ve scored the point if it helps you feel better.

Lethal self-defense may be used to prevent death or great bodily harm. You want to talk about great bodily harm? I have a four-inch scar across my lower abdomen from a C-section to deliver the three-year-old that’s playing next to me right now. Earlier in my pregnancy I had a brief cancer scare whose treatment I was going to put off until after birth to avoid harming the fetus. And mine was a HEALTHY pregnancy–I was lucky enough that it wasn’t cancer, and I had no more than the “normal” symptoms in pregnancy. I worked out every day, climbing 15 flights of steps. I still had to write much of my Ph.D. thesis in bed because sitting up was so hard and when my due date came I was in labor for three days, feeling like I was being ground under a wheel the whole time, and in the end I had to get an emergency C-section. I had a hard time moving for weeks. And this was with all the latest technology available.

Great bodily harm? You bet your ass, son. I took on all of this willingly because I wanted a baby with all my heart and that was the only reason I could bear it. Forcing ANY of the above on someone who doesn’t want it when it can be safely prevented is fucking monstrous. “Imagined peril?” Yeah, right. I’m sure I’m imagining my entire pregnancy and birth and the kid. And mine was, again, a healthy pregnancy where almost everything went well and I had access to the best medical technology and humane medical care. No one can tell when something is going to go wrong in pregnancy and childbirth, and even if nothing goes “wrong” it is significantly taxing and injurious on the body.

Hmm soooo your analogy of abortion to putting a gun to someone’s head is total bullshit and you’re not okay with pregnant people changing or otherwise impacting their OWN bodies in order to end their pregnancies, either? So now you’re resorting to the intent to end the fetus’s life instead of the specific method used. Even if the primary intent is to end the pregnancy and the fetus’s death is a corollary to that, much like the person who refuses a blood or bone marrow donation, right? Does your back hurt to carry around the goalposts like that?

No, the people who use desperate and injurious means to try and end their pregnancies are distraught because people like you denied them a safe and dignified abortion. I’ve noticed before that anti-abortionists think women (while keeping the caveat that not all people who can get pregnant are women, not that most of your crowd admits it) have to be literally crazy not to want to have a baby and you’re sure that if we just knew the truth we wouldn’t do it. Nope, some of us just don’t want to have a baby, because some people with uteruses don’t! Get that through your head lol.

Also, self-defense doesn’t require the fetus be at blame in order to be justified, and here is where your fallacious and disingenuous conflation of conceding personhood for the sake of argument and actually conceding personhood does actual harm. We know, like anyone with the most basic understanding of the world knows, that the fetus does not mean harm and cannot mean to do anything. Their lack of intent does nothing to lessen the actual harm of pregnancy, however, because intent does not equal impact.

Also your coward’s way to wriggle out of the politically inexpedient specter of forcibly hospitalizing and jailing abortion clients is to infantilize and condescend to women instead of demonizing us. Lmaooooo because that’s so much humanizing. Not. This is what it looks like when you don’t have the strength of your own conviction and resort to sexism instead. Too bad, because your fellow “pro-lifers” are indeed jailing women for miscarriages and suicide attempts (link). I’m sure you’re upset by that because these women are just victims, right? Nah you’re not, you’re just out there electing the people who do this, who cut public support for women and babies (CPCs don’t count lmao like abortion scaremongering, diapers, and useless ultrasounds done by unlicensed personnel are enough support to have and raise a baby?? [link]), who make life precarious for families so fewer people will WANT to have babies, and making sure more women will be injured and die from unsafe abortions. Mission accomplished!

      “The joke is that you have the exact same moral hierarchy since you too believe that bodily autonomy may be exercised for bigoted reasons.”

And you got this from my post….how exactly?  No seriously, explain this.

“Pro-choicers don’t actually concede the point on fetal personhood, they assume it for the sake of argument with anti-abortionists because it doesn’t actually matter either way. It’s an argumentative tactic, not a concession, but keep imagining you’ve scored the point if it helps you feel better.”

Well since I’ve heard members of your group state outright that they know and accept (with no handy little “for argument’s sake” caveats included mind you) the unborn child is a person, etc, would kind of undermine that notion.  Unless you’re now saying you’re lying.  And of course, for your whole argument of self-defense to fly, they must be persons/actors as well to defend yourself against…  But sure, backpedal if it helps you feel better.

32 hour labor, followed by C-section as well, followed by infection and adhesions here.  High five, sister.  Yet I remind you, that your entire argument for self-defense involves criminalizing an unborn child.  A child that had no say in being where it was or what is happening to it.  A natural, biological process.  The vast majority of which were placed there consensually.  I know you always like to go to the extreme cases of rape, incest, medical emergencies etc to make your point, but those are a minuscule fraction of abortion cases.  I’m sorry, you do not get to say, “oops, I didn’t mean that to happen” and then use that, with the natural results of said actions to kill another person. No.  You don’t.  That is sick and perverse.  A life is in your hands because of your own choices.  You DO NOT have the right to kill it because you don’t like the consequences.  Does that mean discomfort, yes.  Does that even mean a chance of medical complications like we both faced?  Yes.  Life is hard. It means having to deal with the results of your actions, even when those involve pain and discomfort.  I don’t get to murder someone because there is a chance I might break my leg.  I’m sorry, I do not see murder—and I maintain it is murder, not self defense—as a viable option.  The fact you do, I find disturbing.

 “Hmm soooo your analogy of abortion to putting a gun to someone’s head is total bullshit and you’re not okay with pregnant people changing or otherwise impacting their OWN bodies in order to end their pregnancies, either? So now you’re resorting to the intent to end the fetus’s life instead of the specific method used. Even if the primary intent is to end the pregnancy and the fetus’s death is a corollary to that, much like the person who refuses a blood or bone marrow donation, right? Does your back hurt to carry around the goalposts like that?”

 I’m not okay with people taking actions to deliberately end their unborn child’s life.  No.  The specific method never mattered, only the outcome and intent.  I don’t see how I ever gave you reason to think I believed otherwise.  Where did I do so?  My goalposts have never moved.  Every example you gave was a deliberate attempt to kill their child.  It’s no different than whether someone chooses to burn or drown their child after birth.  The child ends up dead both ways, the means is secondary.  I honestly don’t understand the reasoning behind most of this paragraph.  “if the primary intent is to end the pregnancy and the fetus’s death is a corollary to that”  Ummm, if the primary intent is to end the pregnancy…that is literally the same thing as killing the fetus, not a corollary.  By definition.  Did you miss-type this?  

Unless you mean re: the gun analogy.  Okay then if so.  No, I do not think refusing a blood/marrow transfusion is the same as actively killing another life.  Is there a fine distinction?  Absolutely. Lack of action vs deliberate action. Ethics is hard, like life. There are grey areas.  Do I believe a person, capable of providing blood or marrow to help another person, should do so if they can?  Absolutely.  I’m listed as an organ donor, was a blood donor for years, and was recently tested to see if I could donate a kidney.  Do I feel the state has the right to force that?  No.  That is not the same as, “I don’t want the discomfort and difficulty this other life might bring me, because of actions I took, therefore I will make a conscious decision to end its life rather than deal with the known, understood consequences.”

 “No, the people who use desperate and injurious means to try and end their pregnancies are distraught because people like you denied them a safe and dignified abortion.”

 “A safe and dignified abortion.”  Wow.  Just...wow.  When you reach for the moon, you really go for it!  And no. You don’t get to pawn other people’s bad decisions, born of a whole spectrum of backstories and circumstances, onto the pro-life crowd.  That’s intellectually dishonest and you know it.  Their reasons are legion.  And I sincerely doubt any of those underlying issues would be solved by abortion. Please, can your brush get any broader before you need a crane to lift it?

 “Nope, some of us just don’t want to have a baby, because some people with uteruses don’t! Get that through your head lol.”

Then…simple solution…  Don’t take action that can result in the creation of another life.  Get that through your head lol.

“Also, self-defense doesn’t require the fetus be at blame in order to be justified… Their lack of intent does nothing to lessen the actual harm of pregnancy, however, because intent does not equal impact.”

I see.  So it gets to die because you were…scared/etc?  It’s not to blame, but you don’t like the consequences, so yup, it has to die. Yes.  That sounds so much better.  “intent does not equal impact.”  When your intent ends with another life’s ending, that’s a very real impact and a very real harm.  But that’s okay here because...you want it to be?  Who needs the self-defense argument more, I wonder?  The mother or the child?  Seems like the only rule here is the argument from power.  Where the person with power gets to determine what is right.  That’s a scary hill to take your stand on.

“Also your coward’s way to wriggle out of the politically inexpedient specter of forcibly hospitalizing and jailing abortion clients is to infantilize and condescend to women instead of demonizing us. Lmaooooo because that’s so much humanizing. Not.”

 Coming from someone whose position is to, in essence, demonize and dehumanize unborn children in order to justify killing them for the sake of your own convenience like every genocidal advocate ever, this rings a little hollow. Especially with the body count you’ve racked up so far.  Nice straw man though.

 And wow, one cherry-picked account of a terrible miscarriage of justice and a CA law to crack down on centers providing help and alternatives to abortion (though I do concede that using misleading, and deliberate lies to ‘fight the good fight’ is wrong, and any center that does it—“half” according to that article--should stop immediately.)  Wow, you got me there! /end sarcasm  

Yes, we’re people too, who also make mistakes, and we form a huge spectrum of views of what is acceptable and what is not in this cause, just like your side does.  If I cared to enter the mines, you know very well I could come up with plenty of counter cherry-picked examples from your camp. Women being lied to about their pregnant state, their options, the nature of their pregnancy and the very real medical risks of abortion, deliberately pushing abortions for monetary gain, husbands/boyfriends/parents forcing them to have abortions, and so on. Do I need to do so, or do you have the intellectual honestly to admit those happen too?  

Sexism? Oh please. At least be original with your slogans.

But if you want to compare notes, only one of our sides is responsible for supporting and enabling 45.7 million dead babies between 1970 and 2015 in the US alone.  The body count is clearly in your favor.  And I know you can’t possibly be so naïve as to think diapers or those crisis centers are all the pro-life movement do.  Or do I really need to link to the lists of many many many other programs and help made possible by our side?  And what do you put your money to anyways?  Oh yeah, pink pussy hats and placards.  One side promotes and encourages life, one side promotes murder and death and spreads known lies about the “millions of babies killed in back-alley abortions!” (see https://www.hli.org/resources/doesnt-legal-abortion-save-women-filthy-back-alley-abortion-mills/  )   See!  I can use hyperbole and innuendo too! :D