I think pro-life and pro-choice are both just semantics in a lot of ways and if we take the words "pro choice" and "pro life" to their literal meanings then there is a lot of hypocrisy by people who say they are for or against them. Really it's just, "pro-abortion", "anti-abortion". Trying to nail down one side because they say they are, "pro-life" but are for the death-penalty isn't a fair interpretation of what someone means when they say they are pro-life. Just as someone saying they are "Pro choice", but are for "mandatory face masks" isn't a fair interpretation of what someone saying they are "pro choice" is trying to convey. It's the issue with using 'slogans', and 'political word games', to speak of their position's on specific issues. One of the things that I think is somewhat of a logical fallacy is that if "people cared" they'd work tirelessly on all these issues. It's the same narrative that, "NBA Players don't care about China's atrocities because they are talking about BLM", well they can care about those things, but also care more and have better resources to help issues in Black communities than they can in Hong Kong. So saying how can you say you're "pro-life" but not be working tirelessly on foster kids, people have resources that are finite, both in time and money some people do work really hard to place kids with good families. I'm not defending anyone's position on this at all, just pointing out that I think there are logical flaws in some of the arguments you presented. Not that my logic is always spot on, I make mistakes too. It's obvious though that when someone says their "pro-life" that is really just saying they are anti-abortion, it doesn't mean that every other issue is defined by that phrase. Just like someone saying they are pro-choice, is saying they are for abortion. It doesn't mean they believe that people should have a choice in everything they do. Do you think everyone should be required to vaccinate? Do you think everyone should wear masks? Do you think everyone should be forced to go to school? Most people would say people should be required to do certain things to be part of the society at large, that doesn't negate that they are pro-choice in terms of abortion though.
Yes...because pregnancy is not a pandemic that can threaten or even spread throughout the community .....it's a relationship between a mother and a fertilized egg....not a mother and the general population...I'd say that's an unfair comparison..also I'll say women need to make these decisions and men need to respect them and allow them to control their own bodies and choices concerning their bodies...but they have a short window with which to do that.....late term pregnancies should not be treated like the morning after pill...as it stands those checks and balances exist concerning abortion
I have posted a lot about criminal justice reform in multiple threads. I even invited you to have the same discussion about the BLM website that invited ABM to have. I figured you were busy and that's why you didn't respond. Anyway, the thread is open, if you would like to reboot the conversation then I think a lot of people would welcome it.
It isn't actually that simple, though. There are a lot of people (largely Democrats) who oppose abortion personally but believe in a woman's right to choose. In other words, they would never have an abortion and they would never counsel anyone to have an abortion because they are personally opposed to it but they don't feel that they should enforce their beliefs on others. These people can in no way be called "pro-abortion." And calling even people who would consider abortion "pro-abortion" is fairly insulting, like they're all for killing fetuses--pro-choice people call themselves pro "choice" because they realize that sometimes people end up in shitty situations and have to make difficult decisions and they should have a choice in that circumstance. Acting like because someone understands why a 15 year old in a poor family might not consider that a good situation to have a child, that person is gung-ho about abortions doesn't make sense. I doubt there's really much of anyone who's "pro-abortion." A lot of people are pro-"Life creates a lot of very difficult choices around pregnancy and the government shouldn't make those choices." Or, "pro-choice" for short.
Jonnyboy posts a fact free screed saying against all evidence Trump is not a racist. Then claims with no evidence the Clintons are personally responsible for crack epidemic and somehow associated with Ku Klux Klan, which supports Trump. And ABM gives a like. To paraphrase West Side Story, when you're with Trump you're with Trump all the way. No nonsense about not really liking him but want to be able to force yourself on women. With Trump, accept lying and racism, incompetence and corruption, out of control pandemic, recession, bounties on American soldiers, everything. It's possible to critically support other candidates, most of us do. We vote for person with whom we are most aligned although we might disagree on some issues. But Trump is god emperor. No disagreement, no questioning, everything he does is perfect. Own it, Trumpers. Again to paraphrase West Side Story, everything he is, you are too.
I don't agree with the comparisons. I think they are unfair. But you got me thinking. If I my logic is flawed, it's because I tend to assume the best about people. I am assuming that pro-life means that they care about not only the child's life but also the child's WELL BEING. But perhaps the well being of the child doesn't matter. The politics of pro-choice voters certainly suggest it doesn't matter...
When I'm named king I going to do the following to end the pro-life/pro-choice debates. 1. No more abortions. Instead all fetuses of women no longer wanting to be pregnant will be removed and frozen for later implantation in women who want a child but are unable to conceive. 2. Fund science to implant frozen fetuses. 3. Increase federal deductions on adopted children or fetus implantations to twice that of a regular child as a way to encourage adoptions and fetus implantations. 4. Free birth control to everyone who wants it.
Harsh words. As @Minstrel sometimes bemoans, we'll just have to agree to disagree. And that's not a cop-out. Trust me.
Im not intending to make a comparison, Im attemping to show that pro-choice and pro-life are essentially buzzwords about a specific subject, not an all encompassing world-view.
Sure, but the topic is almost entirely about the abortion issue and when someone says pro-choice or pro-life that is the issue they are almost always talking about.
if we have the science to do that, then we have the science to implant the fetuses into pro-life men (use a draft lottery) and force them to carry the pregnancy to term the pro-life movement would die immediately
I thought he had a great point about anyone voting for Trump based on religious ideals though. Doesn't the bible preach treating each other equal and worshipping thy woman? I too do see a huge hypocrisy in saying one is voting for Trump because of Pro Life Ideals. Abortion is already legal. Do you think Trump is going to overturn RoevsWade? If not, then that argument should be irrelevant, should it not?
I was not trying to conflate or compare the two subjects, like I pointed out above. I was just pointing out that when the terms are used it is generally meant towards one specific issue (abortion).
that's all good but I also mentioned in that post that I don't think men have a vote in this issue because they cannot become pregnant or be forced to have a child....but they can pass laws that impose that on women who can become pregnant....let's include that in the choice discussion as well. ...women can choose to smoke, drink or do drugs during pregnancy whether I agree with it or not...it's their choice..a bad one but it's legal..this is not an abortion thread so sorry to derail it.
