IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites
'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'
But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.
Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/noem-defe...161637081.html
Do Republicans just really hate women in general?
I'll tell you what's chilling, conservatives like you who don't give a damn if women with septic uterus or ectopic pregnancies die from those complications in a hospital bed while fiddling around with lawyers to see if what the doctors are doing is legal or not. There are multiple states right now after the fall of Roe V Wade that don't make exceptions for rape, incest, OR the health of the mother. My own mother had a miscarriage back in the 1980s, the first time she was pregnant. Evangelical Conservatives (and conservative Catholic allies) would rather have my mother DIE than give birth to me and my siblings later in her life.
That's the sort of evil rotten horrific garbage you are peddling here. How nice of you! Conservatives also don't care about kids, they care about punishing women. It's very clear. Women are just incubators and the kids are just fodder, to be fed into abusive foster homes for all the GOP cares. Here's a fun little article detailing the trigger laws and laws that will soon come into effect state-by-state, and take notice how some states don't have exceptions for rape, incest, or even the health of the mother. That is the nightmare that SCOTUS has now unleashed.
A miscarriage is a spontaneous (rather than an artificial) abortion. I don't see how a woman suffering a miscarriage illustrates that "evangelical conservatives" want women to "die".
Which states do not provide exceptions in cases of medical emergencies? So far as I could see, the cited article does not claim any state has denied such exceptions.That's the sort of evil rotten horrific garbage you are peddling here. How nice of you! Conservatives also don't care about kids, they care about punishing women. It's very clear. Women are just incubators and the kids are just fodder, to be fed into abusive foster homes for all the GOP cares. Here's a fun little article detailing the trigger laws and laws that will soon come into effect state-by-state, and take notice how some states don't have exceptions for rape, incest, or even the health of the mother. That is the nightmare that SCOTUS has now unleashed.
Last edited by Cope; June 26, 2022 at 10:18 PM.
Not my country of course, but seems a retrograde step when women can't end a pregnancy that will kill them. Is self defence not a valid argument anymore?
Seems a perfect cause to divide US citizens. Compromise is needed, and consensus building. I hope our ally can navigate this.
Some pretty vile trolling going on too.
[Edit: geez Thomas lined up runs at contraception and marriage too, getting a bit dismal. Alito specifically rejected public opinion, are they removing "We the people" next?]
Last edited by Cyclops; June 27, 2022 at 12:48 AM.
Jatte lambastes Calico Rat
I honestly think they do not, can not, see women as people. In that regard they can't understand why someone might get upset their wife or daughter died of a septic uterus. Just go buy another one.
Of course the right cares about kids. Who else are they going to shoot en-masse when they are told no/aren't treated as special for being white/are bored?
Not for women no. I wouldn't be surprised if the right starts jailing rape victims for bruising or scratching their rapist.
The only compromise I could see happening is if someone found a way to perform an abortion with a gun. Then the right would see it as the most sacred of rights.Compromise is needed, and consensus building.
Between gerrymandering and voter suppression and being able to just toss Democratic wins by merely alleging fraud, they are no longer accountable to the people.[Edit: geez Thomas lined up runs at contraception and marriage too, getting a bit dismal. Alito specifically rejected public opinion, are they removing "We the people" next?]
I'm not a biologist, but I believe Kristi Noem is a woman.
This might not be as you'd expect:
Source: Republican Women And AbortionRepublican women express more opposition to abortion than Republican men - 68% of Republican women call themselves pro-life compared to 59% of their male counterparts. Also, Republican women were the only group in this poll to oppose exceptions for abortion in cases of rape and incest. A majority opposed that, while most Republican men do support those exceptions.
Here is a PDF of the poll being discussed.
Cause tomorrow is a brand-new day
And tomorrow you'll be on your way
Don't give a damn about what other people say
Because tomorrow is a brand-new day
If abortion is the murder of an innocent human being, there's no rational reason to allow exceptions for rape or incest. Is a child conceived in rape or incest any less of an innocent human being than other children?
Ignore List (to save time):
Exarch, Coughdrop addict
This.
Biblically, while abortion is never permitted it is also not necessarily considered murder unless the mother dies in the process, as when a man causes a woman to miscarry as the result of a fight. So while an abortion in case of rape or incest (incest typically involves the coercion of a younger woman) is morally wrong, it would not be murder and the man should be held liable, not the woman. The lack of consent essentially caused the termination of the pregnancy and the innocent blood is on his hands. By the same token, exceptions for medical emergencies are feasible because the life of the mother is more important.
Last edited by Lord Thesaurian; June 27, 2022 at 08:27 AM.
Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII
None of that changes the fact that if you consider a fetus to be a live person the act of aborting the pregnancy is the act that's killing the fetus. With your logic its same as a mother not feeding a baby. You guys can try to twist it as much as you like.
The Armenian Issuehttp://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930
GTA 6 Thread
https://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?819300-GTA-6-Reveal-Trailer
"We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."
Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII
The self-defense argument for abortion in the case of rape seems to be a weak one, since a child conceived in rape is no more of a threat to the mother's life than a child conceived in a consensual sexual encounter. Certainly in the case of rape, the child was placed in the woman's body without her consent, but it's hard to see how this gives her a right to kill him.
Imagine that you live alone in the woods and you're woken up in the middle of the night by the sound of someone rummaging through your kitchen. You come downstairs with a loaded shotgun ready to kill the intruder, only to discover that the person stealing your food is in fact a toddler. Would you say you have a self-defense right to kill the toddler for being on your private property and eating your food without your consent? Probably not, because a hungry child is no threat to you.
The same applies to an unborn child siphoning nutrients from a woman's bloodstream. Granted, there will be some cases where a woman's life is genuinely at risk if she continues a pregnancy; in such cases, an abortion of some kind might be permitted to save the woman's life. But in the absence of a credible threat to the mother's life, it would seem hard to justify an abortion as an instance of legitimate self-defense.
Ignore List (to save time):
Exarch, Coughdrop addict
- Ok for the US but not all legislations are like this (although the topic is specific to the US case, from a general pov, it doesn't hold because a lot of countries have the obligation in their laws)
- Furthermore, if there is no obligation to assist a stranger in peril in a context not involving you, it is not necessarily the case if the issue is related to you or if you have another obligation toward the person in peril. Notably a parent is obligated to help his/her children in peril.
- Finally, you are not obligated to help someone in peril but do you have the right to terminate the life of the person? I don't think your position is really defensible.
- If the fetus is a human being and is considered an individual, killing him for a motive he is not responsible for is hard to justify.
- And if responsibility matters that much, so a minor can abort in any case because she is not responsible for?
LOTR mod for Shogun 2 Total War (Campaign and Battles!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIywmAgUxQU
The Armenian Issuehttp://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930
GTA 6 Thread
https://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?819300-GTA-6-Reveal-Trailer
"We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."