- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: So is "controlling women's bodies" the preferred term over "killing innocent babies"?
Posted on 5/29/19 at 10:06 am to piggilicious
Posted on 5/29/19 at 10:06 am to piggilicious
quote:multiple fail. first, women are anti abortion too. second, it has nothing to do with being a man or a woman. it is what's right or not. third, a pregnant woman does not have the right to murder a person for convenience, even if the person is unborn or she did not have a choice in getting pregnant. i'm sorry you don't understand that. is anyone allowed to stand up for the right to live of the baby?
But you, as a man I assume, or even the govt has the right to determine what is right for a woman’s body
quote:wrong and that is a stupid, antiquated rebuttal. the right to live of the baby is very much a part of the discussion. it falls under the rubric of sanctity of life.
the control of women’s bodies no matter how you slice it
if you feel man enough, go try this shtick in the thread i linked.
1
Posted on 5/29/19 at 10:12 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
ChineseBandit58
I know we dont agree with many things, but this is the pure truth.
Public officials (no matter the party) should forced to discuss national issues on the formal vernacular. It would kill 2 birds with one stone. You get rid of "dogwhistle" and other misconduct and also open yourself up for debate in the future.
That way politicians are susceptible to their CONSTITUENTS and have to answer for any lies they may spread.
Posted on 5/29/19 at 10:23 am to bfniii
quote:
if you feel man enough, go try this shtick in the thread i linked.
Well I’m a woman so... you know part of the section of the population that can actually get pregnant. And I haven’t clicked on your super duper thread and don’t intend to. the only reason I clicked on this one was to accurately state it is the control of women’s bodies.
quote:
it falls under the rubric of sanctity of life.
And you had the gall to use the word ‘antequated’ in your reply to something I had stated.
Posted on 5/29/19 at 10:41 am to Hog Zealot
quote:
I can keeeeel muh baby if’n I wont to. frick the patriarchy!!! No man gonna tell me what to do. That’s your logic?
Not exactly, and typically I try to avoid the abortion convos but I’ll admit the stupid Alabama thing has got my feathers a little ruffled lately.
If anything I’m possibly some version of an old school feminist- as in men and women are different, have different strengths- typically at least. That doesn’t make one lesser than the other nor give either the reason to blame the other side for all the problems in the world. And if someone is equal in ability then they should be treated as such regardless of sex. I am also for showing that with actions and not screaming it without merit.
Iow, I’m probably not as much of an enemy as you might have thought but as people tend to do at times, we disagree on this subject.
Posted on 5/29/19 at 11:00 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:Agreed.
should be REQUIRED ... to use the most efficient and direct description of the issue possible.
Can I put you on the list for never using the criminal term “murder” to describe a legal abortion, never using the ambiguous “baby” in place of the more-specific “fetus,” and never using the oxymoron “post birth abortion” in any context?
Posted on 5/29/19 at 11:04 am to stout
Don’t we control women’s bodies when we have laws against them using drugs?
Posted on 5/29/19 at 11:05 am to piggilicious
quote:If a fetus is a legal “person” (Person A, as abortion opponents insist), then forcing a woman (Person B) to carry that “person” everywhere for nine months certainly seems like forcing Person B into unconstitutional “involuntary servitude” to Person A, under the 13th Amendment.
Well it is controlling women’s bodies whether you, me or whoever thinks abortion is right or not. How is that even a tiny bit deniable?
Posted on 5/29/19 at 11:11 am to AggieHank86
quote:"[S]eems like" is not the same as "is".
If a fetus is a legal “person” (Person A, as abortion opponents insist), then forcing a woman (Person B) to carry that “person” everywhere for nine months certainly seems like forcing Person B into unconstitutional “involuntary servitude” to Person A, under the 13th Amendment.
Parents are also required to care for their children and not neglect their well being. Caring for your own children is a lot harder than a lot of jobs and comes with no pay (excluding tax credits and welfare). Seems like a form of involuntary servitude to have the government force someone to provide for their kids without just compensation, but it's not because a special relationship exists there, just like with pregnancy, except pregnancy is even more special because only the mother can care for the child.
This post was edited on 5/29/19 at 11:13 am
Posted on 5/29/19 at 11:12 am to stout
Women’s rights has been the spin for a long time about abortions. When in fact it’s a human rights issue
Posted on 5/29/19 at 11:16 am to AggieHank86
quote:
If a fetus is a legal “person” (Person A, as abortion opponents insist), then forcing a woman (Person B) to carry that “person” everywhere for nine months certainly seems like forcing Person B into unconstitutional “involuntary servitude” to Person A, under the 13th Amendment.
That is a ridiculously stupid and asinine argument.
Posted on 5/29/19 at 11:41 am to FooManChoo
quote:Except that a parent of a born child has the option (in most states) of surrendering a child to the state (or another person), if they do not want that responsibility. As such, the servitude is not “involuntary” by virtue of the parent’s election NOT to seek termination of the obligation.
Parents are also required to care for their children and not neglect their well being. Caring for your own children is a lot harder than a lot of jobs and comes with no pay (excluding tax credits and welfare). Seems like a form of involuntary servitude to have the government force someone to provide for their kids without just compensation, but it's not because a special relationship exists there, just like with pregnancy, except pregnancy is even more special because only the mother can care for the child.
This issue has been the subject of numerous law review articles and has even been briefed to SCOTUS. It is not nearly as outrageous as a layman might think.
This post was edited on 5/29/19 at 11:42 am
Posted on 5/29/19 at 11:48 am to Kashmir
quote:
liberals/communists are masters of misleading words and phrases
It just seems that way to those of you with a less than remedial level of scientific understanding and intelligence
Posted on 5/29/19 at 11:58 am to stout
quote:
So is "controlling women's bodies" the preferred term over "killing innocent babies"
It is not "their lies" that is a problem it is your ignorance. Abortions are not an easy thing for a woman to do and nobody in their Right mind uses it as their preferred method of contraception regardless of the lies told otherwise. Plus according to the Christian god of the bible life does not begin until one takes a breath, which does not occur while in the womb. Genesis 2:7 Then the Lord God formed a man[a] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
If you disagree take it up with your god, not the women facing tough choices.
Posted on 5/29/19 at 2:13 pm to piggilicious
quote:if you feel mature enough
Well I’m a woman so
quote:well that's a shame. sounds like you aren't very certain of your position
I haven’t clicked on your super duper thread and don’t intend to
quote:and i've responded to this. that statement is incorrect
it is the control of women’s bodies
quote:
And you had the gall to use the word ‘antequated’ in your reply to something I had stated
sanctity of life is antiquated? how so? gosh we've been working to save all those endangered species for no reason?Posted on 5/29/19 at 2:15 pm to piggilicious
quote:ok so explain how being pregnant gives a woman the right to murder a baby for convenience. is anyone allowed to defend the baby's right to live?
Not exactly
Posted on 5/29/19 at 2:17 pm to Huge Richard
quote:
You sound very concerned
That's better than what you sound like. Love the name, usually means the opposite but hey, do your thing.
Posted on 5/29/19 at 2:18 pm to AggieHank86
quote:wait, so you're not dead? you just ran away from the thread?
AggieHank86
quote:you realize i addressed this in that thread right? why are you repeating already refuted statements?
then forcing a woman (Person B) to carry that “person” everywhere for nine months certainly seems like forcing Person B into unconstitutional “involuntary servitude” to Person A
Posted on 5/29/19 at 2:18 pm to SSpaniel
quote:you're right and it is in fact addressed in the op of my thread that hank chickened out of
That is a ridiculously stupid and asinine argument
Posted on 5/29/19 at 2:20 pm to LeauxCountryTigah
quote:i've already debunked this with multiple verses. you are wrong
Plus according to the Christian god of the bible life does not begin until one takes a breath, which does not occur while in the womb. Genesis 2:7 Then the Lord God formed a man[a] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being
quote:how about you try reading the WHOLE bible before you make idiotic statements
If you disagree take it up with your god, not the women facing tough choices
Posted on 5/29/19 at 2:23 pm to bfniii
quote:Son, you promote that played-out thread like Trump hyping one of his golf courses.
That is a ridiculously stupid and asinine argument
you're right and it is in fact addressed in the op of my thread that hank chickened out of
Once again, you are fabricating facts. Both this site’s search and a google search provide exactly ONE post from you using the term “servitude.” This post is made in reply to that post.
As an aside, boredom at arguing endlessly with an idiot does nor constitute “chickening out.”
This post was edited on 5/29/19 at 2:32 pm
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News