• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

GOP in Alabama attempting to end all abortions and birth control

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,233
472
126
To be fair: contraception that would be banned just encourages the spread of disease.

Most ironic that kids today can acquire boos, smokes, and drugs, no matter how many laws are past to ban them but somehow become totally helpless when it comes to acquiring Prophylactics.

Perhaps if they made this video part of sex education they wouldn't be so quick to raw dog it.:p
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nojWJ6-XmeQ

 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,658
13,740
136
To be fair: contraception that would be banned just encourages the spread of disease.
Most ironic that kids today can acquire boos, smokes, and drugs, no matter how many laws are past to ban them but somehow become totally helpless when it comes to acquiring Prophylactics.

Perhaps if they made this video part of sex education they wouldn't be so quick to raw dog it.:p
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nojWJ6-XmeQ

Pretty ignorant all the way around. In the Nordic countries, it's common practice to use both the pill and condoms, just to be sure- belt and suspenders.

They, of course, aren't nearly as stupid & repressed as average American Fundiewhacks who see guilt & shame as good things- in their world, if you don't think sex is delicious because it's dirty, you're not doing it right.
 

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,770
347
126
Pretty ignorant all the way around. In the Nordic countries, it's common practice to use both the pill and condoms, just to be sure- belt and suspenders.

They, of course, aren't nearly as stupid & repressed as average American Fundiewhacks who see guilt & shame as good things- in their world, if you don't think sex is delicious because it's dirty, you're not doing it right.
The argument was ignorant because it admits to the world view that you just espoused?

try again fail troll.
 

Stayfr0sty

Senior member
Mar 5, 2012
476
0
0
Ohh boy, touchy subject....
Im not conservative at all, in fact I lean more towards the radical left anarchism. But I will agree with them on abortion. Once an egg is fertilized its a life, period, there is nothing to argue. Saying its a womans right to choose what she does with her body is what some "neo-feminist" lawyer would make up. And thats utter horsecrap. Yes the fetus does need the mother to live, but its still alive and NO ONE except god (if he exists, still unsure) has the right to decide whether it lives or not. Dont get me wrong, if rape, incest or pedophilia is involved or the mothers life is in danger then yes abort. But for irresponsible promiscous women that use it as a "get out of jail free" card? No friggen way. In fact women like that should just have a vasectomy if they dont want kids, simple as that.
Not that im against promiscuity either, I used to be pretty promiscous myself, but lets look at things from this angle. Take prostitutes for example, they very rarely get pregnat hence no need for abortions. Why? CAUSE THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING AND DONT MESS UP.
In the end I find it ironic how conservatives say they are the most anti abortion when the truth is the highest abortion rate this country ever had was under the Bush Sr. admin when he cut funding for minoritys and all those pregnat minority women felt like they couldnt be mothers and aborted cause they had no money to take care of the kid. Gimme a break.
 

Eos

Diamond Member
Jun 14, 2000
3,448
2
81
Ohh boy, touchy subject....
Im not conservative at all, in fact I lean more towards the radical left anarchism. But I will agree with them on abortion. Once an egg is fertilized its a life, period, there is nothing to argue.
Sure there is something to argue. What is life? Two sets of DNA coming together inside a body, or something that breathes on it's own?

Saying its a womans right to choose what she does with her body is what some "neo-feminist" lawyer would make up. And thats utter horsecrap. Yes the fetus does need the mother to live, but its still alive and NO ONE except god (if he exists, still unsure) has the right to decide whether it lives or not. Dont get me wrong, if rape, incest or pedophilia is involved or the mothers life is in danger then yes abort.
It is the woman's right to choose how to apply lawfully available healthcare to her own body. That's where the argument should end, but some people in this country have the desire to put their nose in other people's business.

So, something that may or may not exist (there's no proof of god, in case you haven't checked) has the only say in carrying those cells to full-term? That's ridiculous. What about the thousands of spontaneous miscarriages every year attributed to NSAIDS? That's Ibruprofen, in case you didn't know.

But for irresponsible promiscous women that use it as a "get out of jail free" card? No friggen way. In fact women like that should just have a vasectomy if they dont want kids, simple as that.
Not that im against promiscuity either, I used to be pretty promiscous myself, but lets look at things from this angle. Take prostitutes for example, they very rarely get pregnat hence no need for abortions. Why? CAUSE THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING AND DONT MESS UP.
In the end I find it ironic how conservatives say they are the most anti abortion when the truth is the highest abortion rate this country ever had was under the Bush Sr. admin when he cut funding for minoritys and all those pregnat minority women felt like they couldnt be mothers and aborted cause they had no money to take care of the kid. Gimme a break.
"irresponsible promiscous [sic] women" are not the only women who have abortions. WTF kind of thought process do you have on this topic?

Know a bevy or whores do ya?
 

Stayfr0sty

Senior member
Mar 5, 2012
476
0
0
Sure there is something to argue. What is life? Two sets of DNA coming together inside a body, or something that breathes on it's own?
It has a heartbeat, its cells formed together, so yes technically it is a life dude.
It is the woman's right to choose how to apply lawfully available healthcare to her own body. That's where the argument should end, but some people in this country have the desire to put their nose in other people's business.

So, something that may or may not exist (there's no proof of god, in case you haven't checked) has the only say in carrying those cells to full-term? That's ridiculous. What about the thousands of spontaneous miscarriages every year attributed to NSAIDS? That's Ibruprofen, in case you didn't know.
Like I said, its not anyone but gods right to choose whether the child lives or dies, not the mother or the father or the pope or whatever.
And btw, a miscarriage is not intentional.....

"irresponsible promiscous [sic] women" are not the only women who have abortions. WTF kind of thought process do you have on this topic?

Know a bevy or whores do ya?
Nope, never said that. You seem to have misunderstood me totally, I said its the ones that are irresponsible who should not be allowed. If you read my whole post you would see that in some cases it should be allowed, not only allowed but mandatory, like for rape, incest or pedophilia. Trust me, I really used to be undecided about this, now im older and have a firmer stance and have come to this conclusion, simple as that. My point is that the "neo-feminists" are trying to paint this as a womans health issue when its not. Like I said, a fertilized egg is a new life and unless that womans life is threatned by the pregnancy then abortion should not be allowed.
And like I said, im not conservative at all as I explained in my post, if you want to read some real feminist views on abortion check out Emma Goldmans views. She was anarchist from the early 20th century, and I couldnt agree with her more.

Abortion, Anarchism, and a date with Emma Goldman
"A person's a person no matter how small" -Dr. Seuss (Horton Hears a Who)

If the late Emma Goldman and I were to sit in a room and discuss anarchism we could probably argue all day. She favored contraception and free love and I favor abstinence later followed by contraception. She favored no religion and I would most likely point to the clergy at fault (depending on the case of the issue of the religion in question) and not necessarily the religion itself (although more on that in a later article). She was known as "Red Emma" promoting socialism and I tend to bounce around economic theories like a pinball (yellow, orange, and red are all fabulous colors on me when matched with black). She favored propaganda of the deed and I favor non-violence. But there is one thing we could see eye to eye on. Abortion sucks.

Ms. Goldman and I both agree that abortion is a tragedy of an unborn human life. A person that never had a chance at the right to life. Imagine the potential the child could have had. They could have solved the energy crisis or brought world peace. Or maybe they just would have been a gas station attendant or a cab driver. Not everybody can grow up to run Microsoft. But good or bad rich or poor either way they are a human being. But anarchists are known for being pro-choice on pretty much everything. Can a pro-life anarchist really exist?

Folks, I have some news for you. Regardless of what you think about abortion, no government will ever successfully outlaw it. If a government by some miracle does stop bickering and decides to outlaw abortion it will not stop. The issue doesn't go away. It's just that "happy feeling" politicians and laws give you. People don't care if it works so long as the government is trying.

"If you destroy a free market you create a black market" -Winston Churchill.

I never thought I would say this but I agree with the politician. Outlawing something doesn't do anything to stop it except promote the fear of punishment. There are alternatives to abortion clinics. If a knowingly pregnant woman goes on a diet or crash-diet then nobody has to know but her. The fetus dies. End of story . Of what I hear there are home operated abortions that can be done with everyday household items. We can't very well put a ban on clothes hangers can we? There are even herbs made into some teas that would cause an abortion of a fetus. Drink the tea (accidentally or intentionally) and nobody is the wiser. The end. The list of possible ways to abort a fetus goes on and on and I would really rather not think about some of the gruesome ways it can be done.

So what do we do?


The more sensible solution is not punishment or legislation, but education. Am I suggesting showing pictures of aborted babies, encouraging people to make their friends Google Image search abortion or covering yourself in fake blood? No. As effective as these things might be they are quite gruesome and can be rather unsettling (if you Google it don't say I didn't warn you). I did not put pictures of abortion in this article specifically for that reason. I firmly believe that you can catch more flies with honey then you can with vinegar. Instead pro-lifers can teach the people about alternatives to abortion. There are things like adoption. Some people only have dreams of having a child and if you don't want the kid or cannot afford to keep it, then it seems like we have a logical solution. Dare I say a win-win. Possible advances in technology could lead us to fetal transplant where one couple could transfer the fetus to another couple. This would make both abortion and adoption almost totally obsolete. Even better!

It can also be mentioned that by about the 5th week a fetus already has a heartbeat. It's a living thing depending on somebody to take care of it before it's born. Others complain about the pain. Now before I dig a hole for myself on this one I have a shocking confession. I'm not a woman. However while many women say birth pain is unbearable others say it isn't so bad. Some women are even brought to the point of orgasm during birth. No two births are the same and the pain or pleasure will vary. There are a myriad of alternatives to abortion. Some special cases can be given in which it is a more understandable thing (such as risk of maternal life or fetal health), still tragic but understandable. But regarding other cases, with the voluntary will of the pro-lifers great strides can be made.


At the end of the day now that the knowledge of abortion is out in the open it will probably never stop. However make no mistake abortion isn't a modern concept. But old school or modern a law isn't going to change anything. Will education totally stop abortion? I'm pro-life but I'm also a realist. No it won't. Abortion is a decision and is left up to voluntary action. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't spread your message. This applies to anything in the world. Whatever side you are on it is up to you. To each his own. As for the question of whether or not a pro-life anarchist can exist I say yes. However if you don't believe me...maybe you should take it up with Emma.
http://anarchyinabottle.blogspot.com/2010/11/abortion-anarchism-and-date-with-emma.html?showComment=1313924846651#!/2010/11/abortion-anarchism-and-date-with-emma.html
 

Eos

Diamond Member
Jun 14, 2000
3,448
2
81
I shouldn't have even engaged you on this topic. Yes, that's me giving up because I don't fucking care.
 

Stayfr0sty

Senior member
Mar 5, 2012
476
0
0
hahahahahahaha

*breath*

hahahahahahaha
Uhh maybe you can try and prove me wrong instead of getting mad, which is an obvious sign of denial and then laughing about it.

If you cant take the heat get out of the kitchen.

Seriously prove me wrong, after my last post you wont be able to.
You cant even resort to flamming me off as a conservative a hole cause im no where near that, like I said, im even more farther to the left then you.

Its ok, like most people your just seeing things in black and white, like both conservatives and liberals do nowadays. There are no more free thinkers, only blind zealots that will follow so and so off a cliff if they say so.
 

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,770
347
126
I see so him getting all mad and then laughing is him winning?
How so? He couldnt even prove anything in my last post wrong.
An appeal to God is about as meaningless as an appeal to the fart I just let out.

My God is Jesus, came and died for everyone's sins, which was bad ass.

Someone else's God maybe a flying Serengeti monster; touches people with his noodly appendage, I don't think it's AS bad ass, but hell that's just my opinion.


When you can prove that whatever god you were appealing to exists then you get to appeal to that god otherwise... well...


Essentially, he's laughing because you made a fart joke and thought it was some crazy-profound point.
 

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
4
0
It has a heartbeat, its cells formed together, so yes technically it is a life dude.
So are you saying that life begins when the heart starts beating?

Or when the cell divides? Or upon gastrulation?

My experience has been that the less people know about developmental biology, the easier they find it to "draw the line".

It's a complicated process without any clear lines. And most of the lines that get drawn are extremely arbitrary and rife with unintended consequences, legally speaking.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,658
13,740
136
Pretty ignorant all the way around. In the Nordic countries, it's common practice to use both the pill and condoms, just to be sure- belt and suspenders.

They, of course, aren't nearly as stupid & repressed as average American Fundiewhacks who see guilt & shame as good things- in their world, if you don't think sex is delicious because it's dirty, you're not doing it right.
The argument was ignorant because it admits to the world view that you just espoused?

try again fail troll.
It's ignorant because it fails to account for the contraceptive desires of monogamous couples, just for starters. STD's are not an issue in such circumstances. It's also ignorant because the effectiveness of condoms alone is lower than that of the pill wrt contraception, and much lower than that of the combination of safeguards employed by Nordic & Dutch singles.

It's also ignorant when we believe that reducing abortion is a worthwhile goal, something that moralistic ravings about abstinence simply can't accomplish. Women very much want to avoid making any personal decisions about abortion, and the best way to do that is to enable them with better information, better choices and better access to other forms of contraception.
 

Stayfr0sty

Senior member
Mar 5, 2012
476
0
0
An appeal to God is about as meaningless as an appeal to the fart I just let out.

My God is Jesus, came and died for everyone's sins, which was bad ass.

Someone else's God maybe a flying Serengeti monster; touches people with his noodly appendage, I don't think it's AS bad ass, but hell that's just my opinion.


When you can prove that whatever god you were appealing to exists then you get to appeal to that god otherwise... well...


Essentially, he's laughing because you made a fart joke and thought it was some crazy-profound point.
:whiste: God is about 1% of my argument. Plz read the rest of my post......
 

Cairn

Junior Member
Mar 13, 2011
9
0
66
You'll have to follow the bouncing ball because the article does not mention birth control but wait...

http://jezebel.com/5788756/alabama-personhood-law-could-ban-all-abortions

This law will attempt to redefine a person as a fertilized egg. Now comes the second part. Assuming this passed and it wouldn't surprise me, if a fertilized egg is a person and that egg is prevented from entering the uterus it will die (by the bills definition). The most common forms of birth control do just that.
No they don't. There are many birth control medicines that only stop fertilization. The easiest and most common of which is of course a condom. However, whether the medicines interfere with implantation as a side-effect is debatable, some do more than others. Some don't by design.

However, you're right, there are many common forms, especially today that specifically use both methods, preventing fertilization and preventing implantation of a fertilized ovum.

And yes, I can tell you as an ultra-anti-killing-the-unborn Conservative, that would definitely be my next step to outlaw anything that would kill a child in such an undeveloped stage, because a child does not deserve to die just because that child happens to be undeveloped. This has never been a choice issue, this has always been, "does a mother have the right to kill her own child" issue. The answer is obviously no even to ultra-Liberals like yourself. The only difference is you ignore the truth and lie to yourself about what abortion really is, we Conservatives don't.
 

Cairn

Junior Member
Mar 13, 2011
9
0
66
Slaves can live on their own once freed. You can't get around the unborn dying when you free their masters from the role of providing support.



It doesn't.

You're right, government has an obligation to protect all citizen's rights, but only just to live. A government by the people, for the people is a government of the people, a true contract for a society that must be upheld and made sacred.

And I like your demonstration up there because the cruelty and horrific heartlessness of it regarding another human being proves the detrimental effect your kind of mentality has had on you, and indicates what kind of government we'd be living under if people with your same mentality had the power.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,630
181
106
Considered a smaller penis or larger condoms? :p The women you are with hold some responsibility as well, they should be protecting themselves as well. Abortion shouldn't be the answer to a condom breaking. Yeah, I realize the morning after pill probably isn't really 'abortion', but if a child was conceived because of your broken condoms I don't see why they should be punished because you and your partner failed to prevent it.

I think abortions are used too often to cover up for poor planning and decisions. While I am not necessarily in favor of outlawing them, I think they cheapen life and as a whole are something that should be absolutely avoided if at all possible. People can argue about when live begins and all of that, I don't really care. I think society as a whole has more harm done to it because of abortions than benefits.
No more orphan trains shipping children to the country to work slave labor on the farms? One of those benefits?
 

Cairn

Junior Member
Mar 13, 2011
9
0
66
This is absolutely true. It's about the GOP pandering to their religious base and trying to enforce a religious morality where women are punished for engaging in immoral sexual behavior by being forced to either raise a child or give it up for adoption.
You are sooo brainwashed. If religions says it's wrong to murder someone, does that mean it's the religious trying to push their religion on everyone when they call for outlawing murder?

Is outlawing theft the religious pushing their religion?

Killing someone for no reason or for selfish reasons is wrong. Aside from what religion says, it's still wrong. I mean why is it necessary for the religious to speak up just to tell you what you should already know? You're just proving how your lack of religion has been profoundly detrimental to you as a person.

We're not talking about self-defense, war, crime, or due process here. We're talking about a group of people who are murdered at the whim of another, usually for convenience sake, i.e, she's not ready, too young, e.t.c... these are the most common reasons, proven by silenced study after silenced study by far that abortions are done.

You Liberals are sooo blind, it's like trying light a freaking candle underwater. You just refuse to acknowledge the reality of what abortion really is. I don't understand how you cannot put yourself in their shoes just for a moment. Let me spell this out for you, YOU WOULDN'T EVEN BE HERE TO EVEN ARGUE THIS IF YOUR MOTHER AT ANY TIME AFTER YOUR CONCEPTION KILLED YOU!!! I.E. ABORTION.

Jesus H. Magilicudy, don't be giving me some stupid argument involving the personification of spermatozoa because spermatozoa is NOTHING!!! You want proof, keep it alive indefinitely for all I care, and you will see, without combining it with the human female ovum it is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!! I won't deny it's potential, but it is still nothing.

You know what, now that I think about it and the history of Christianity, you're right. Just about every humane righteous thing we hold so dearly to today is almost directly the result of past people's belief in it's righteousness due directly to their religion. In other words, it's their religion that drew them into supporting human rights and equality as such important things that has culminated into what we hold to today as important. So, yeah, you're absolutely right, it's all religion trying to force others into following their way. And thank God it happened that way because I shutter to think how unimportant life and equality would be today if they hadn't.
 
Last edited:

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
11,839
3,062
136
I wonder if States Rights also include the right to establish a Theocratic form of State/Municipal gov't?

It sure seems like what some States ultimately want to do.....if given the chance.
 

ShawnD1

Lifer
May 24, 2003
15,999
1
81
I wonder if States Rights also include the right to establish a Theocratic form of State/Municipal gov't?
To be fair, the constitution's separation of church and state is virtually meaningless in today's society. Its main purpose is to prevent the government from banning certain religions, which is something that happened quite often in most of the world for most of human history. The constitution has essentially no power to prevent a theocracy from forming because there's no way to prove that laws are religiously motivated. You might be against rape for common sense reasons, but maybe I'm against rape for religious reasons. Maybe I'm also against abortion for religious reasons. Maybe I'm against government healthcare for religious reasons. If my religion is the majority, then the laws of the land will reflect my religion. You still have freedom to practice your own religion, but it must stay confined within the rules of my religion.
 

dawp

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
10,560
1,785
126
The only difference between humans and other animals is the size of our cranium in respect to body size. I.E., intelligence. We are simply the smartest animal on the planet.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,017
571
126
LOL. Dude get off your freaking high horse.
High horse? Having an objection to a mother killing her own child constitutes looking down my nose at people?

First of all there is such a thing as the separation of church and state. Laws should not be passed on religious doctrine. They should be passed on practicality. Abortion is a highly practical practice. Highly practical. The reasons cited for outlawing it are highly impractical.
Which is utterly irrelevant to the larger abortion debate. I didn't bring up a single religious argument.

If you can come up with a logical, practical argument why a 16 year old girl who is pregnant, poor, lives in a dangerous household with an abusive father shouldn't have access to an abortion, I'd like to hear it. But if you want to spout religious bigotry, go tell it to your pastor. Concerning the above case I can give a million reasons why society benefits from her having access to at least one abortion.
I'd like to hear an argument why a child must die to save it from it's own life. The nature of the judgment we are passing on this child, that we can decide on its behalf whether or not it is worthy of life, with it utterly unable to defend itself, is horrifying.

What is it about leftists using the unbelievable exceptions to the rule to define the rule?

How does society benefit from allowing mothers to kill their own children?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY