What are your thoughts on abortion?

I think maybe we could start lynching rapists at lampposts and then have some community effort to help the victim along their pregnancy. Basic shit to help keep the pregnancy from having a lasting impact on their future if they intend on having kids.
If they don't want to have kids, no help. There's nothing the pregnancy can do to their life or body that they aren't gonna end up doing to themselves by 30.
 
1844 or something said:
I think maybe we could start lynching rapists at lampposts and then have some community effort to help the victim along their pregnancy. Basic shit to help keep the pregnancy from having a lasting impact on their future if they intend on having kids.
If they don't want to have kids, no help. There's nothing the pregnancy can do to their life or body that they aren't gonna end up doing to themselves by 30.
Click to expand...
least psychotic incel
 
DonutHole said:
It's a little weak to say that when her death was fully preventable.
Click to expand...
You speak of preventable death as if you aren't the one arguing for murdering children in their mother's womb. If you think murdering unborn children for the sake of preventing complications and possible deaths is worth it that's you, but I'm not going to bargain with lives.
 
Spasoje's Revenge said:
You speak of preventable death as if you aren't the one arguing for murdering children in their mother's womb. If you think murdering unborn children for the sake of preventing complications and possible deaths is worth it that's you, but I'm not going to bargain with lives.
Click to expand...
It's not "bargaining" when there are clear deformities and medical complications that will ensure death if health care is not provided to the mother.
 
DonutHole said:
It's not "bargaining" when there are clear deformities and medical complications that will ensure death if health care is not provided to the mother.
Click to expand...
I said bargain not gamble but It's medical care, of course it's a gamble! You wanna tell me no one ever dies in a hospital?
 
DonutHole said:
My bad. Is there a moral principle you have against bargaining for lives no matter the circumstance? If a mother develops sepsis, which guarantees that both the mother and child will both die, would you allow an abortion?

Click to expand...
In cases of children, yes. In cases of criminals, I would say prioritizing protecting children is paramount. In that case I would bargain with lives, that's to say sentencing pedophiles or murderers to death.
And for sepsis, if both deaths are guaranteed then one death to prevent another is morally right. I wouldn't take issue with that. I wouldn't take issue with abortion for the sake of saving the mother's life either if no other procedures are viable.
 
Some people do this thing where they say "not my problem, and I don't care about those people who have this problem!" which is an okay reaction- if you authentically mean it. Don't convince yourself out of what you are for convenience.

More practically, why haven't I heard of contracts to restrict a woman's ability to obtain an abortion? Shouldn't every "not my fetus not my problem" guy want to lock in the survival of his child? "Well, you shouldn't get her pregnant if you don't TRUST her bro..." Is it also the personally responsible approach to do a daily trust fall team building exercise with your wife while she holds your vulnerable child? Trust when you have to, not as a game of intimacy simulation.

Is it legally possible under e.g. USA law? I know that "specific performance" and court orders have always been disfavored, monetary compensation much more common- which is not great if you don't accept a judge's assessment of the economic value of your unborn son. Maybe there is something more to it with the medical aspect. The most direct precedence to this would be "surrogacy contracts" where there is a need to restrict the right of the surrogate to abort the children she gestates. I can't access it, but there was a Wiley link that came up when I searched this that seemed to imply that judges haven't been favorable towards compelling specific performance (not aborting the kid) so we might be fucked right now.

How psychotic would it be if an action of fluctuating legality still could not be contractually prohibited? Okay, the government can save my child's life if the politicians trade the right favors- but I can't take any effective steps to protect my child's life in advance. The Republican establishment obviously has an incentive to keep it this way because abortion is their most popular issue and will be their most sustainable issue throughout the based tradcath hispanic invasion. Some may even come to justify it as a way to maintain support for complete bans on abortion.
 
nonaborter said:
Some people do this thing where they say "not my problem, and I don't care about those people who have this problem!" which is an okay reaction- if you authentically mean it. Don't convince yourself out of what you are for convenience.

More practically, why haven't I heard of contracts to restrict a woman's ability to obtain an abortion? Shouldn't every "not my fetus not my problem" guy want to lock in the survival of his child? "Well, you shouldn't get her pregnant if you don't TRUST her bro..." Is it also the personally responsible approach to do a daily trust fall team building exercise with your wife while she holds your vulnerable child? Trust when you have to, not as a game of intimacy simulation.

Is it legally possible under e.g. USA law? I know that "specific performance" and court orders have always been disfavored, monetary compensation much more common- which is not great if you don't accept a judge's assessment of the economic value of your unborn son. Maybe there is something more to it with the medical aspect. The most direct precedence to this would be "surrogacy contracts" where there is a need to restrict the right of the surrogate to abort the children she gestates. I can't access it, but there was a Wiley link that came up when I searched this that seemed to imply that judges haven't been favorable towards compelling specific performance (not aborting the kid) so we might be fucked right now.

How psychotic would it be if an action of fluctuating legality still could not be contractually prohibited? Okay, the government can save my child's life if the politicians trade the right favors- but I can't take any effective steps to protect my child's life in advance. The Republican establishment obviously has an incentive to keep it this way because abortion is their most popular issue and will be their most sustainable issue throughout the based tradcath hispanic invasion. Some may even come to justify it as a way to maintain support for complete bans on abortion
Click to expand...
based tradcath hispanics support abortion almost exactly as much as the national average. Catholicism among US Latinos has been on a steady decline as they become atheists or convert to protestantism. In 2010, 67% of US Latinos were Catholic. 2024? 43%. A 2013 study found that nearly 1 in 4 Latino adults are "Former Catholics". Among the Latinos who are still catholic 38% report attending church "seldom or never"Among Latino youth: 49% are Unaffiliated, 30% are Catholic and 15% are Protestant.

Protestantism and Atheism is on the rise while Catholicism is on the decline.
1728669896662.png

Screenshot 2024-10-11 12.55.44 PM.png


The problem for republicans is that while being anti-abortion is popular among registered republicans, it is widely unpopular among the population as a whole, including independents. The split between Republicans, Democrats and Independents as a percentage of total population is roughly equal. The only group that is more against abortion than they are for it are white evangelical protestants and conservative republicans.
 

Attachments

  • 1728669256463.png
    1728669256463.png
    43.6 KB · Views: 18
  • Screenshot 2024-10-11 12.55.44 PM.png
    Screenshot 2024-10-11 12.55.44 PM.png
    23.6 KB · Views: 18
DonutHole said:
based tradcath hispanics support abortion almost exactly as much as the national average. Catholicism among US Latinos has been on a steady decline as they become atheists or convert to protestantism. In 2010, 67% of US Latinos were Catholic. 2024? 43%. A 2013 study found that nearly 1 in 4 Latino adults are "Former Catholics". Among the Latinos who are still catholic 38% report attending church "seldom or never"Among Latino youth: 49% are Unaffiliated, 30% are Catholic and 15% are Protestant.

Protestantism and Atheism is on the rise while Catholicism is on the decline.
View attachment 53355
View attachment 53356

The problem for republicans is that while being anti-abortion is popular among registered republicans, it is widely unpopular among the population as a whole, including independents. The split between Republicans, Democrats and Independents as a percentage of total population is roughly equal. The only group that is more against abortion than they are for it are white evangelical protestants and conservative republicans.
Click to expand...
Groypercacas aren’t gonna like this one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ribbon
Chud Thoughts on totalitarianism and authoritarianism
Replies
5
Views
112
Slvt4BIBISI
Slvt4BIBISI
𝗠𝗞𝗖
thoughts on the big 3 auto bailout
Replies
2
Views
54
4tehlulz
4tehlulz
FartmingerFuckwadCheeseSte
Serious Thoughts on "Non-binary", "Genderfluid", "Demigender" and other variants?
2
Replies
27
Views
365
Pepsilord
Pepsilord
Slvt4BIBISI
Thoughts on Hannibal?
Replies
8
Views
137
_account
_account
Ytsuken
Thoughts on cardposting?
Replies
0
Views
56
Ytsuken
Ytsuken
Back
Top