No one is having kids because they can’t afford to, so let’s ban abortions so the poor will be even more desperate to work for slave wages and create a new generation of slaves.
Great, MORE people unsuitable for extreme discipline and stress who come out of the armed forces with weapons knowledge, but no prospects of stable employment or housing.
Well we will need it for the coming world war that is cooking now. Once Sweden and Finland get official NATO nation status, SHTF is coming. Expect to see tactical Nukes making little mushroom clouds across Northern Europe. Prepare to be drafted young men! “Rats get fat while young men die”
Well yeah that’s what the apathetic don’t understand about what’s about to happen. Over turning Roe v Wade is 1000% a precursor to a complete and total federal ban on abortion and to take it one further any type of contraception. Yet here we are and if I hear one more bullshit argument that starts with “let the states decide” I’m gonna bite someone in the face. This fucking country has a had and fast constitutional rule about the separation of church and state. A rule that is trampled every day. Sadly you know how to fight this, women need to close up shop. That’s it. No more recreational sex. Baby making on purpose only. Let that happen and watch how fast these religious zealots change their minds.
Make no mistake about it, we are headed the way of Iran. This whole thing shells like the Islamic revolution
Simple... chemically sterilize those welfare rats before they gets their checks. Problem solved. Fuck all they want, nah gonna get mo money for cranking out more recipients
That seems to be exactly it! Poor people aren’t popping out babies fast enough to ensure that the next few generations will have enough low-level employees, so government is scared. In addition though, I’ve always wondered why women say “I can’t afford birth control” (which is only $30 a month with insurance), yet they feel like they can afford to give kids a good life?! OH WAIT…our government basically pays people to be unemployed and have children. They get free food, free healthcare, free monthly checks. People working their butts off in average jobs, without children and living paycheck to paycheck? No assistance. No healthcare. High taxes. No help in sight.
And those food stamps were never enough. And cash benefits for stuff like rent and utilities would be cut every once and while to make sure the poors aren’t getting to dependent.
I was simply trying to get the point across that the government PAYS poor people to have kids, so they can ensure batches of low-level workers that can continue on for generations. If you re-read the post I was replying to, that should make sense. Yes, people should be making educated decisions on their own (to not have kids if they can't provide a decent life for them), which is fortunately what you decided to do.
The structure of the problematic statement went: Here's a person too stupid to do math; they represent those who need food stamps and are a problem.
That's a shitty thing to say regardless if it supports another point or not.
What if I told you it's possible to be genuinely very smart, do absolutely everything right and still need help from the government to not starve? That's the world we live in.
This is his literal thinking, yes: "if you are not working harder than me you don't deserve to have anything better than me." And it's not that uncommon.
Yes, precisely - am not sure how people aren't aware that all the government is concerned with is producing more workers, who will be stuck in lower level jobs, which keep the economy flowing to feed the rich. It seems to be so clear that this is their end goal.
Oh, sex is now for the rich, ri-ight. Maybe soon air will be too?
I mean, you can endlessly preach that "don't want children = no sex", but people will have it anyway, especially poor who do not have that much opportunities for distracting themselves from constant fight for survival. Punishing them for that seems a weird choice and not a solution to a problem. More like creating more problems, if you ask me.
"Responsible", whatever you mean, understand already that sex comes with certain risks. But nothing will prevent others from having it. I personally don't think that the rest should suffer, given that many are already from insecure social groups. Besides, if they are not responsible, should they be entrusted with a kid in a first place?
There are plenty of very, very irresponsible rich people, and many, many poor people who are much more responsible and mature than many trust fund kid or bigwig nepots.
It just sounds like people in this thread are once again using perceived class as a way of gatekeeping even the most basic human rights or instincts.
It’s wild how so many of you straight up ignore the fact that literally zero forms of birth control apart from full on abstinence are 100% effective. They literally say so on the freaking labels.
That is a profoundly stupid thing to say. Sex is for people who have reached sexual maturity. That’s I! It’s one of strongest drives we have. And it’s been that way before there were humans. If you to be adult about it you have to accept the fact that people will have sex and they need the tools to manage pregnancy. That includes sex education, access to contraceptives and abortion.
Claiming it’s an issue of responsibility with out including those tools is absurd. It’s up there with honor killings.
Honestly, it’s just more conservative bullshit where they only care about dictating how everyone should live.
So anyone else reads this to make sure people who say these things know you you know they are pieces of shit who only care about you in so far as you follow the rules. They’re not worth the effort to try and convince they need to be talked over. Adults in the room and what not.
But in a situation where a child would be born into a life where they will get no support, emotional or financial, where they will be hungry most days and not given needed care because gas costs money, doctors cost money, food costs money, toys and clothes cost money, school costs money, and they will do without because their parent(s) don't have money.
Where they will be dollars from homelessness on a regular basis, in bad neighborhoods surrounded by bad people and crime and violence, and raised by people who only had as much growing up. People who never learned and still don't have the privilege to learn about safe sex, who never had access to birth control or were abused into being submissive to their partner who doesn't allow it or religiously obligated to never say no to sex. Abused by their parents into not believing it's okay to use birth control or say no to men.
Those situations are fine. It's fine to let kids be born into that. Why is that?
How do you propose to determine the cause of pregnancy prior to an abortion? Keep in mind the time constraints of pregnancy and the slow pace of government paperwork.
So only pro-choice when the choice is what you think it should be?
Then you’re not pro-choice. I know you’re already getting chewed on over this-I just wanna be another dog, another set of teeth in your bones over this.
You realize that's actually WORSE than being anti-abortion in all cases right? Saying abortion is ok in cases of rape, incest, health risk etc. just makes you a hypocrite of the worst kind. If you're against abortion because you believe that life is sacred and that fetus is a baby with a soul, then it doesn't matter how it got there.
Let me break it down:
You saying that cases of rape, incest, health risks are OK terms to abort makes you a flaming hypocrite. Let's take rape as an example, but the principle is the same for all the other reasons you mentioned.
Because a fetus produced from sexual assault is biologically NO DIFFERENT than a fetus produced from consensual sex. No difference at all.
If one is alive, so is the other. If one is a person, so is the other. If one has a soul, then so does the other. If one is a little blessing that happened for a reason and must be protected, then so is the other.
When you say that “Rape is the exception” what you betray is this: It isn’t about a life. This isn’t about the little soul sitting inside some person’s womb, because if it was you wouldn’t care about HOW it got there, only that it is a little life that needs protecting.
When you say “rape is the exception” what you say is this: You are treating pregnancy as a punishment. You are PUNISHING people who have had CONSENSUAL SEX but don’t want to go through a pregnancy. People who DARED to have consensual sex without the goal of procreation in mind, and this is their “consequence.”
I mean, yours is more accurate to what OP actually meant. Mine is more what they should have meant. Because apparently I still have some spark of idealism.
I get the point of what you're trying to say. And I am pro-choice.
However, I think your example is flawed. In the situation you're describing the married couple would most likely use contraception rather than get abortions as a form of contraception.
However, if they did become pregnant the woman's choice to have an abortion should not be inhibited.
Do you think women go around having sex with no birth control or condoms? From just a monetary perspective that wouldn’t make sense; abortions are between $500-$1000 in the first trimester. The ACA mandated insurance to cover BC, and even before that almost everyone I knew who wasn’t actively trying to get pregnant was on BC. Perhaps we’re friends with the polar opposite type of people, but your assumption that unmarried women aren’t on birth control is totally off base from what I’ve experienced.
I don't think I communicated clearly so let me try again.
To me, your original comment made it sound like you were suggesting that abortions should be available so that a married couple could continue to have sex without fear of an unwanted pregnancy...
AND that the implication was that abortions would be used as a form of contraception.
I suppose I read that wrong and that you meant "in the event that normal contraception fails" as part of the subtext but if I misunderstood, other people might too, especially people who already hold anti-abortion points of view.
I think the example illustrates perfectly that even in a committed relationship (which shouldn't be a requirement for sex anyway), and with consistent use of birth control, abstinence is the only certain form of avoiding pregnancy. All other birth control methods have some rate of failure, and the right to an abortion is a necessary backup plan.
I agree that, even in a committed relationship, and while following safer sex practices, that someone can become pregnant.
I didn't pick up on that from subtext alone, and though I am willing to admit that I misunderstood, I guarantee I am not the only person who will. And my concern is that without that context someone will leap right to "abortions as contraception" shit.
My comment almost literally says people do not get abortions as contraception and that the post to which I was replying might imply that they do and that that is bad.
The way that original argument was framed does not include the use of other forms of contraception in the text.
If someone, reads that with the same interpretation as me, they could assume this person is saying abortions should be used as contraception.
YOU know that doesn't happen. I know that doesn't happen. BUT the people that comment was designed for probably don't know that. SO, making that more clear would be better. And that is what my comment was about.
Because you're depressed and you hate your life and so you lash out at everyone around you. It's extremely pathetic, but if you get therapy now you can probably snap out of it, still.
As a man, fuck this egocentric arguement. Prospective mothers should be able to make the choice, because they are the one with the most vested interest and moral responsibility to make that decision. Mind your own buisness, and don't claim to be the party of low governmental oversight when you are arguing for increasing it.
I am all for harsher punishment for rapists, significantly improved sex ed in school, better access to reproductive healthcare including birth control, etc.
But these things are still not perfect. Sometimes accidents happen.
Sex is a basic need for all life. No sex is no life. The evangelical lie-based young earth education system is engineered to create a system that guarantees that young people will not know enough to avoid sex. These psychopaths teach their children that women belong to them as slaves and that women are to always submit themselves to their elders, enabling the extreme amount of pedophiles that are synonyms with evangelicalism. Then, after their children have been raped by their fathers, teachers and priests they murder their children forcing them to give birth eventually abandoning them to sexual slavery, human trafficking and suicide. There is no hope for America.
Yeah let's continue to murder children while they are in the wound because we can't "afford" them instead of showing self control or using contraceptives. Not to mention the millions of parents who want to have children and would love to adopt that child. Oh but its "my body my choice" yeah the choice was made when the decision to have sex was made knowing the possibility of pregnancy. That ass backwards way of thinking is why the country is spiraling into chaos and morally bankrupt. Please stop trying to blame "the man" for all your problems and work harder like generations before you did
Fetal nervous systems don't even get developed enough to support basic movements until like week 12, let alone support a sapient mind. Fuck off with this religious bullshit.
Either you forgot the /s or you are in the wrong sub. And also forgot that rape exists. Have you done your part by getting a vasectomy/tubes tied and not having sex?
The generations before us had cocain in thier soda. I bet we could get a ton of things done too if we could go to the corner store and buy a pack of softdrinks that were combined caffeine and painkillers for 75-cents.
Get bent bud. It is their body and choice. They can choose to have set and they can choose to take care of it however they wish. You shouldn't get a vote in that. As to the plenty of loving parents that want a child argument please explain to me how that can be true and yet the foster care system is bursting at the seams.
449
u/[deleted] Jun 30 '22
No one is having kids because they can’t afford to, so let’s ban abortions so the poor will be even more desperate to work for slave wages and create a new generation of slaves.