|
On November 05 2020 20:11 mahrgell wrote:
Btw:
if I understand it correctly, that for some obscure reason Biden gets Georgia, Trump everything else thats left open, it ends as 269-269. Which then, given how the House and Senate are currently distributed, would end with a Biden+Pence presidency?
Not possible. There is zero probability from everything i looked at for a deadlock based off where everything is atm.
|
On November 05 2020 20:12 dbRic1203 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2020 20:09 maybenexttime wrote:On November 05 2020 19:51 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 05 2020 19:46 GreenHorizons wrote:
I think the people that fall for "democrats are marxists!" and think "I'm against that" do it for a lot of the same reasons regardless of their ethnicity.
Democrats want welfare capitalism that is less bad than Republicans offer (like a better ratio of welfare to people vs corporations), but indisputably worse than most industrialized social democracies, and a lot of people just don't like that policy regardless of ethnicity or experience (or family stories of such) with Castro, Maduro, or otherwise.
Democrats have had strong support among those groups despite them not really liking their policy in large part because the opposition was so racist they couldn't even safely attend rallies to support them.
What Kanye was right about, was that under the right circumstances, a MAGA hat could greatly improve the perception of a minority. The Mexican-American with the Trump flag hanging off his truck doesn't make much sense until you see it pull up to the construction site where they are the foreman for a mid-sized construction conglomerate. Well I gues if beeing for basic social security and against beeing robbed of the freedom to go bankrupt from an illness is "marxist", I m a marxist as well  Also what someone mentioned earlier with votes soley based on religion is completly alien to me as well.. It's a natural consequence of a two-party system. If you consider abortion murder, most other policies will be relatively irrelevant. Damit. I hope you re doing fine a poland, as you have kind of the same problem over there atm  I still don t get why a single women would ever think, "this is a good idear to give away my choice, what I want to do with my body" Show nested quote +On November 05 2020 20:11 mahrgell wrote:
Btw:
if I understand it correctly, that for some obscure reason Biden gets Georgia, Trump everything else thats left open, it ends as 269-269. Which then, given how the House and Senate are currently distributed, would end with a Biden+Pence presidency? I didn t see this one before, but that s probably not even close to the worst possible outcome.
Lol. People give up choice of what to do with their own body all the time. Prohibition, Drug War, suicide, being for "hate speech" being criminalized (last I checked your mouth and vocal chord are part of your body), testing experimental pharmaceuticals, etc. There's also the nanny Democrat that taxes sugar, soda, cigarettes, etc. Is it really a right if you have to pay a fee?
|
I don't think it's that far fetched to think that the life growing inside you is not your own and thus it's not your choice to kill it or not.
Armchair psychology: Humans like simple explanations because it makes everything easier. When you try to bring nuance into every single issue the complexity becomes overwhelming and there are no conclusions to reach and you will be unable to make choices. To balance this most people stick to complexity in areas they care about and stay with simple solutions in others.
|
I mean, my gut has a lot of life growing inside of it but if I wanted to fuck with my gut bacteria I should probably be allowed to.
|
The way to a tie from here is that Arizona, Nevada, and PA have to go to Trump with Georgia going to Biden. I could pull a probability out of my ass but that's the scenario that is still within the realm of possibility (albeit just barely).
|
On November 05 2020 20:22 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2020 20:12 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 05 2020 20:09 maybenexttime wrote:On November 05 2020 19:51 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 05 2020 19:46 GreenHorizons wrote:
I think the people that fall for "democrats are marxists!" and think "I'm against that" do it for a lot of the same reasons regardless of their ethnicity.
Democrats want welfare capitalism that is less bad than Republicans offer (like a better ratio of welfare to people vs corporations), but indisputably worse than most industrialized social democracies, and a lot of people just don't like that policy regardless of ethnicity or experience (or family stories of such) with Castro, Maduro, or otherwise.
Democrats have had strong support among those groups despite them not really liking their policy in large part because the opposition was so racist they couldn't even safely attend rallies to support them.
What Kanye was right about, was that under the right circumstances, a MAGA hat could greatly improve the perception of a minority. The Mexican-American with the Trump flag hanging off his truck doesn't make much sense until you see it pull up to the construction site where they are the foreman for a mid-sized construction conglomerate. Well I gues if beeing for basic social security and against beeing robbed of the freedom to go bankrupt from an illness is "marxist", I m a marxist as well Also what someone mentioned earlier with votes soley based on religion is completly alien to me as well.. It's a natural consequence of a two-party system. If you consider abortion murder, most other policies will be relatively irrelevant. Damit. I hope you re doing fine a poland, as you have kind of the same problem over there atm I still don t get why a single women would ever think, "this is a good idear to give away my choice, what I want to do with my body" On November 05 2020 20:11 mahrgell wrote:
Btw:
if I understand it correctly, that for some obscure reason Biden gets Georgia, Trump everything else thats left open, it ends as 269-269. Which then, given how the House and Senate are currently distributed, would end with a Biden+Pence presidency? I didn t see this one before, but that s probably not even close to the worst possible outcome. Lol. People give up choice of what to do with their own body all the time. Prohibition, Drug War, suicide, being for "hate speech" being criminalized (last I checked your mouth and vocal chord are part of your body), testing experimental pharmaceuticals, etc. There's also the nanny Democrat that taxes sugar, soda, cigarettes, etc. Is it really a right if you have to pay a fee?
I don t know how it s handled in the US constitution, but in Germany the freedom of one person ends where it would violate the freedom of another person.
Driving drunk and taking the risk of killing another person is interfering with his freedom to live, so your freedom to drive drunk is taken away from you.
Saying holocaust wasn t real or people from one religion or ethnicy are worth less than others is interfering with their freedom and equal rights, so it s also forbiden here.
It s not giving up choices, as those aren t even choice to be had in the first place, as they would always severerly reduce the freedom of others.
But I gues that s very different in Murica, so I m not going to argue with you about that.
If someone tests experimental pharmaceutics on themselves in a clinical trial, they usually get paid for that, so that doesn t realy belong here.
Taxes have different functions in
A. fund public services
B. control costumer behavior
If a tax can internalise external effects, like making people pay for the environmental damage their consumation causes, or the economic damage their obesety or bad health due to sugar or cigaretts causes, its a good tax.
Granted all that isn t realy on topic with birth control, I give you that, as it s way more complicated there and I m not going to dive into risk of death in childbirth, abuse, rape and so on
|
On November 05 2020 20:23 schaf wrote:
I don't think it's that far fetched to think that the life growing inside you is not your own and thus it's not your choice to kill it or not.
You're going to have to be more specific with "not your own", because not only is the pregnant woman clearly the mother of a fetus growing inside of her, she literally created it (with a man/sperm, presumably). Are you saying there's a chance that the fetus of a mother isn't her own baby? Like she's carrying someone else's child? Or that there are two heartbeats / a second, separate life inside of the mother, which is also obvious to those of us who are pro-choice?
|
Germany1309 Posts
I have nothing to contribute here but I want to say thank you for everyone here who does - I really enjoy this thread and feel the level of depth and insight here is way beyond what I could get with any other source of news. This is why I love TL :-)
|
On November 05 2020 20:36 dbRic1203 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2020 20:22 Wegandi wrote:On November 05 2020 20:12 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 05 2020 20:09 maybenexttime wrote:On November 05 2020 19:51 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 05 2020 19:46 GreenHorizons wrote:
I think the people that fall for "democrats are marxists!" and think "I'm against that" do it for a lot of the same reasons regardless of their ethnicity.
Democrats want welfare capitalism that is less bad than Republicans offer (like a better ratio of welfare to people vs corporations), but indisputably worse than most industrialized social democracies, and a lot of people just don't like that policy regardless of ethnicity or experience (or family stories of such) with Castro, Maduro, or otherwise.
Democrats have had strong support among those groups despite them not really liking their policy in large part because the opposition was so racist they couldn't even safely attend rallies to support them.
What Kanye was right about, was that under the right circumstances, a MAGA hat could greatly improve the perception of a minority. The Mexican-American with the Trump flag hanging off his truck doesn't make much sense until you see it pull up to the construction site where they are the foreman for a mid-sized construction conglomerate. Well I gues if beeing for basic social security and against beeing robbed of the freedom to go bankrupt from an illness is "marxist", I m a marxist as well Also what someone mentioned earlier with votes soley based on religion is completly alien to me as well.. It's a natural consequence of a two-party system. If you consider abortion murder, most other policies will be relatively irrelevant. Damit. I hope you re doing fine a poland, as you have kind of the same problem over there atm I still don t get why a single women would ever think, "this is a good idear to give away my choice, what I want to do with my body" On November 05 2020 20:11 mahrgell wrote:
Btw:
if I understand it correctly, that for some obscure reason Biden gets Georgia, Trump everything else thats left open, it ends as 269-269. Which then, given how the House and Senate are currently distributed, would end with a Biden+Pence presidency? I didn t see this one before, but that s probably not even close to the worst possible outcome. Lol. People give up choice of what to do with their own body all the time. Prohibition, Drug War, suicide, being for "hate speech" being criminalized (last I checked your mouth and vocal chord are part of your body), testing experimental pharmaceuticals, etc. There's also the nanny Democrat that taxes sugar, soda, cigarettes, etc. Is it really a right if you have to pay a fee? I don t know how it s handled in the US constitution, but in Germany the freedom of one person ends where it would violate the freedom of another person. Driving drunk and taking the risk of killing another person is interfering with his freedom to live, so your freedom to drive drunk is taken away from you. Saying holocaust wasn t real or people from one religion or ethnicy are worth less than others is interfering with their freedom and equal rights, so it s also forbiden here. It s not giving up choices, as those aren t even choice to be had in the first place, as they would always severerly reduce the freedom of others. But I gues that s very different in Murica, so I m not going to argue with you about that. If someone tests experimental pharmaceutics on themselves in a clinical trial, they usually get paid for that, so that doesn t realy belong here. Taxes have different functions in A. fund public services B. control costumer behavior If a tax can internalise external effects, like making people pay for the environmental damage their consumation causes, or the economic damage their obesety or bad health due to sugar or cigaretts causes, its a good tax. Granted all that isn t realy on topic with birth control, I give you that, as it s way more complicated there and I m not going to dive into risk of death in childbirth, abuse, rape and so on
I never said people don't rationalize ways to give up control of their own bodies like you just did, but it was to point to...all the ways people do give up control of their own bodies like it's some weird thing. Women who are against abortion are so primarily because they believe the unborn *gasp* also have rights.
I don't want to get into how you rationalize your illiberalism.
|
On November 05 2020 20:23 schaf wrote:
I don't think it's that far fetched to think that the life growing inside you is not your own and thus it's not your choice to kill it or not.
Armchair psychology: Humans like simple explanations because it makes everything easier. When you try to bring nuance into every single issue the complexity becomes overwhelming and there are no conclusions to reach and you will be unable to make choices. To balance this most people stick to complexity in areas they care about and stay with simple solutions in others.
This is side tracking a bit but why not. Not much news from the elections coming in right now.
Its about 2 things kinda,your believe that it is not our choice to end an unborn life and your believe of not forcing your own opinion about this complicated subject on other people. This seems contradictory but i think its quiet relevant.
I have a weird position in this,my opinion is not based on christian religious believes yet on a fundamental level i still believe it is not our choice to end an unborn life. At the same time as a male this doesnt effect me as much as it effects females (though i can see this beeing debatable,this just goes for my own position) and i would not want to force my own opinion on this on anyone else.
This would probably define me as pro choice,even though i do believe myself that it is not our choice.
|
On November 05 2020 20:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2020 20:23 schaf wrote:
I don't think it's that far fetched to think that the life growing inside you is not your own and thus it's not your choice to kill it or not. You're going to have to be more specific with "not your own", because not only is the pregnant woman clearly the mother of a fetus growing inside of her, she literally created it (with a man/sperm, presumably). Are you saying there's a chance that the fetus of a mother isn't her own baby? Like she's carrying someone else's child? Or that there are two heartbeats / a second, separate life inside of the mother, which is also obvious to those of us who are pro-choice?
I think the answer is obvious to anyone with a brain.
You'd be surprised how many pro-choice people there are who don't consider the fetus human or alive.
|
Northern Ireland27471 Posts
On November 05 2020 20:23 schaf wrote:
I don't think it's that far fetched to think that the life growing inside you is not your own and thus it's not your choice to kill it or not.
Armchair psychology: Humans like simple explanations because it makes everything easier. When you try to bring nuance into every single issue the complexity becomes overwhelming and there are no conclusions to reach and you will be unable to make choices. To balance this most people stick to complexity in areas they care about and stay with simple solutions in others.
There’s definitely something to this IMO.
As the world becomes more (visibly) complex I suppose so too does the choice between being overwhelmed or retrenching into simpler solutions as you say.
|
Women abort anyway. It's just a matter of whether you want it to be illegal, a complete hazard with zero protection, and have A LOT of women dying in a sordid way, or done by professional medical personnel in a clinic or a hospital, safely and with people around preventing it to be a trauma and a risk to one's life.
Then you are free to think it's right or wrong. Most people I know who think it's wrong have never been confronted to the prospect of raising a child with the wrong person at the wrong time. But that's fine as long as you don't fuck with other's people lives and bodies.
|
On November 05 2020 20:42 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2020 20:36 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 05 2020 20:22 Wegandi wrote:On November 05 2020 20:12 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 05 2020 20:09 maybenexttime wrote:On November 05 2020 19:51 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 05 2020 19:46 GreenHorizons wrote:
I think the people that fall for "democrats are marxists!" and think "I'm against that" do it for a lot of the same reasons regardless of their ethnicity.
Democrats want welfare capitalism that is less bad than Republicans offer (like a better ratio of welfare to people vs corporations), but indisputably worse than most industrialized social democracies, and a lot of people just don't like that policy regardless of ethnicity or experience (or family stories of such) with Castro, Maduro, or otherwise.
Democrats have had strong support among those groups despite them not really liking their policy in large part because the opposition was so racist they couldn't even safely attend rallies to support them.
What Kanye was right about, was that under the right circumstances, a MAGA hat could greatly improve the perception of a minority. The Mexican-American with the Trump flag hanging off his truck doesn't make much sense until you see it pull up to the construction site where they are the foreman for a mid-sized construction conglomerate. Well I gues if beeing for basic social security and against beeing robbed of the freedom to go bankrupt from an illness is "marxist", I m a marxist as well Also what someone mentioned earlier with votes soley based on religion is completly alien to me as well.. It's a natural consequence of a two-party system. If you consider abortion murder, most other policies will be relatively irrelevant. Damit. I hope you re doing fine a poland, as you have kind of the same problem over there atm I still don t get why a single women would ever think, "this is a good idear to give away my choice, what I want to do with my body" On November 05 2020 20:11 mahrgell wrote:
Btw:
if I understand it correctly, that for some obscure reason Biden gets Georgia, Trump everything else thats left open, it ends as 269-269. Which then, given how the House and Senate are currently distributed, would end with a Biden+Pence presidency? I didn t see this one before, but that s probably not even close to the worst possible outcome. Lol. People give up choice of what to do with their own body all the time. Prohibition, Drug War, suicide, being for "hate speech" being criminalized (last I checked your mouth and vocal chord are part of your body), testing experimental pharmaceuticals, etc. There's also the nanny Democrat that taxes sugar, soda, cigarettes, etc. Is it really a right if you have to pay a fee? I don t know how it s handled in the US constitution, but in Germany the freedom of one person ends where it would violate the freedom of another person. Driving drunk and taking the risk of killing another person is interfering with his freedom to live, so your freedom to drive drunk is taken away from you. Saying holocaust wasn t real or people from one religion or ethnicy are worth less than others is interfering with their freedom and equal rights, so it s also forbiden here. It s not giving up choices, as those aren t even choice to be had in the first place, as they would always severerly reduce the freedom of others. But I gues that s very different in Murica, so I m not going to argue with you about that. If someone tests experimental pharmaceutics on themselves in a clinical trial, they usually get paid for that, so that doesn t realy belong here. Taxes have different functions in A. fund public services B. control costumer behavior If a tax can internalise external effects, like making people pay for the environmental damage their consumation causes, or the economic damage their obesety or bad health due to sugar or cigaretts causes, its a good tax. Granted all that isn t realy on topic with birth control, I give you that, as it s way more complicated there and I m not going to dive into risk of death in childbirth, abuse, rape and so on I never said people don't rationalize ways to give up control of their own bodies like you just did, but it was to point to...all the ways people do give up control of their own bodies like it's some weird thing. Women who are against abortion are so primarily because they believe the unborn *gasp* also have rights. I don't want to get into how you rationalize your illiberalism.
If the reason someone is against abortion is to belive that unborn also have rights, I m actually fine with that.
What I m not fine is, what for example just happened in poland.
There pretty much all abortions where deemd illegal with the reasoning, that even if the child dies days after the birth, at least it could get baptized before they die. I know someone, who lost a child and is traumatized with depression after 20 years later. That women then got pregnant again, for that child was the same illness diagnosed, so she aborted that one to get another one, that wouldn t die within the first few years.
That kid, that didn t die is now my best friend. If abortion would be forbiden here, that person would be long dead.
|
On November 05 2020 20:46 pmh wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2020 20:23 schaf wrote:
I don't think it's that far fetched to think that the life growing inside you is not your own and thus it's not your choice to kill it or not.
Armchair psychology: Humans like simple explanations because it makes everything easier. When you try to bring nuance into every single issue the complexity becomes overwhelming and there are no conclusions to reach and you will be unable to make choices. To balance this most people stick to complexity in areas they care about and stay with simple solutions in others. This is side tracking a bit but why not. Its about 2 things kinda,your believe that it is not our choice to kill and your believe of not forcing your own opinion on other people. This seems contradictory but i think its quiet relevant. I have a weird position in this,my opinion is not based on christian religious believes yet on a fundamental level i still believe it is not our choice to end an unborn life. At the same time as a male this doesnt really effect me and i would not want to force my own opinion on this on anyone else. This would probably define me as pro choice,even though i do believe myself that it is not our choice.
That's a weird position to take. Do you also take it on other matters? Rape generally doesn't effect middle and older men (e.g. to be on the receiving end) unless you're in prison, if you don't own pets pet cruelty and killings don't effect you, etc. Lots of things that are criminalized don't effect the majority of the people, but people generally don't confine their views of the penal code to things that only effect them. It's like saying...well I think murder is wrong, but it's not likely to effect me so I don't want to force my views on murder on others. It's a weird moral stance to acknowledge the wrongness of a thing and then to do nothing about it. /shrug
|
On November 05 2020 20:49 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2020 20:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2020 20:23 schaf wrote:
I don't think it's that far fetched to think that the life growing inside you is not your own and thus it's not your choice to kill it or not. You're going to have to be more specific with "not your own", because not only is the pregnant woman clearly the mother of a fetus growing inside of her, she literally created it (with a man/sperm, presumably). Are you saying there's a chance that the fetus of a mother isn't her own baby? Like she's carrying someone else's child? Or that there are two heartbeats / a second, separate life inside of the mother, which is also obvious to those of us who are pro-choice? I think the answer is obvious to anyone with a brain. You'd be surprised how many pro-choice people there are who don't consider the fetus human or alive.
You seem to think that being human is a yes/no answer, when it actually is way way more complex than that. The same goes for your other question of what is or isn't alive.
For starters, the fetus is not viable to be alive outside of a host body. If it were, it wouldn't be an abortion, but a c-section.
As for humanity: is a tumor human? It grows inside a human, and is entirely composed of human cells. Yet we do not consider a tumor human. Nevertheless, a fetus in the early stages contains fewer human cells than some tumors. So why is a fetus "human" but a tumor isn't. What is the essence of humanness?
But I don't really want to get into this here, as it is very very very clearly not about the US 2020 election. Just wanted to point out that you need to define "alive" and "human" better before positing that people do or do not believe a fetus is either of those.
|
Guys, gals and others I have no strong position on this. I wanted to make the point that a simple premise can lead to a strong conclusion if you are not able or willing to think about it in any more depth.
I do this, too. I am strongly against the death penalty simply based on my premise that killing people is wrong. There is no need to discuss efficacy or other things for me. Done and dusted.
|
On November 05 2020 20:49 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2020 20:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2020 20:23 schaf wrote:
I don't think it's that far fetched to think that the life growing inside you is not your own and thus it's not your choice to kill it or not. You're going to have to be more specific with "not your own", because not only is the pregnant woman clearly the mother of a fetus growing inside of her, she literally created it (with a man/sperm, presumably). Are you saying there's a chance that the fetus of a mother isn't her own baby? Like she's carrying someone else's child? Or that there are two heartbeats / a second, separate life inside of the mother, which is also obvious to those of us who are pro-choice? I think the answer is obvious to anyone with a brain. You'd be surprised how many pro-choice people there are who don't consider the fetus human or alive.
No mother will choose an abortion without an extremely good reason to. As a social liberal, I absolutely despise forcing your opinion on someone else who is in a completely different situation than you.
It is also highly debatable how to value a fetus which can not possibly survive on its own. Where to draw the line? What about pills you can take before you know if you are pregnant or not? A sperm? An unfertilized egg? A fertilized egg? A fetus with a heartbeat? A fetus with a statistical chance of survival with a LOT of help but a high chance of death or disabilities? A fetus which is already dead or can't possibly survive? You just have to pick a point somewhere, and it is different between almost every country.
Then add all the private reasons for not having a baby at a certain moment, as well as choosing not to keep a baby with major disfunction with the posibility of having a healthy baby in the future.
|
On November 05 2020 20:54 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2020 20:46 pmh wrote:On November 05 2020 20:23 schaf wrote:
I don't think it's that far fetched to think that the life growing inside you is not your own and thus it's not your choice to kill it or not.
Armchair psychology: Humans like simple explanations because it makes everything easier. When you try to bring nuance into every single issue the complexity becomes overwhelming and there are no conclusions to reach and you will be unable to make choices. To balance this most people stick to complexity in areas they care about and stay with simple solutions in others. This is side tracking a bit but why not. Its about 2 things kinda,your believe that it is not our choice to kill and your believe of not forcing your own opinion on other people. This seems contradictory but i think its quiet relevant. I have a weird position in this,my opinion is not based on christian religious believes yet on a fundamental level i still believe it is not our choice to end an unborn life. At the same time as a male this doesnt really effect me and i would not want to force my own opinion on this on anyone else. This would probably define me as pro choice,even though i do believe myself that it is not our choice. That's a weird position to take. Do you also take it on other matters? Rape generally doesn't effect middle and older men (e.g. to be on the receiving end) unless you're in prison, if you don't own pets pet cruelty and killings don't effect you, etc. Lots of things that are criminalized don't effect the majority of the people, but people generally don't confine their views of the penal code to things that only effect them. It's like saying...well I think murder is wrong, but it's not likely to effect me so I don't want to force my views on murder on others. It's a weird moral stance to acknowledge the wrongness of a thing and then to do nothing about it. /shrug
I can see your argument,if extended to any possible issue my line of reasoning would ran into trouble and start bordering anarchism (And just to be clear,i am anything but an anarchist, I am strongly in favor of rules in society to create a fair,peacefull and stable society).
Yet on this specific issue i would not want to force my own opinion on to others,i am not sure why i have this feeling on this specific issue while i dont have problems with forcing rules on other issues like the example you gave.
Maybe its because public opinion on other issues like your example is very clear cut in favor of forbiding and punishing it,while the public opinion on this issue is rather divided.
Anyway like others have said,lets move on.
|
On November 05 2020 21:03 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2020 20:49 maybenexttime wrote:On November 05 2020 20:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2020 20:23 schaf wrote:
I don't think it's that far fetched to think that the life growing inside you is not your own and thus it's not your choice to kill it or not. You're going to have to be more specific with "not your own", because not only is the pregnant woman clearly the mother of a fetus growing inside of her, she literally created it (with a man/sperm, presumably). Are you saying there's a chance that the fetus of a mother isn't her own baby? Like she's carrying someone else's child? Or that there are two heartbeats / a second, separate life inside of the mother, which is also obvious to those of us who are pro-choice? I think the answer is obvious to anyone with a brain. You'd be surprised how many pro-choice people there are who don't consider the fetus human or alive. No mother will choose an abortion without an extremely good reason to. As a social liberal, I absolutely despise forcing your opinion on someone else who is in a completely different situation than you. It is also highly debatable how to value a fetus which can not possibly survive on its own. Where to draw the line? What about pills you can take before you know if you are pregnant or not? A sperm? An unfertilized egg? A fertilized egg? A fetus with a heartbeat? A fetus with a statistical chance of survival with a LOT of help but a high chance of death or disabilities? A fetus which is already dead or can't possibly survive? You just have to pick a point somewhere, and it is different between almost every country. Then add all the private reasons for not having a baby at a certain moment, as well as choosing not to keep a baby with major disfunction with the posibility of having a healthy baby in the future.
Yeah an abortion is not, ever, an easy or fun decision. At all.
Anyway.
Why are results coming so incredibly slowly? It seems time has stopped in the last fifteen hours. I'm especially curious about Georgia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
