MasterOBee Master/King @ MasterObee @lemmy.world

Посты

0

Комментарии

514

Joined

2 yr. ago

You’re arguing that you don’t have to argue.

My argument is that our abortion policies tend to be in line, or more liberal than many of the western countries the left looks up to.

I'd be fine with a 12 week ban, that's in much of western europe.

You don’t civily discuss.

Okay, then we don't need to discuss if you feel that way.

“Abortion is limited in most western nations” isn’t even a arguement about whether abortion should or should not have limits.

I understand that. I argued the first part, not the latter.

If you want to argue that a woman that's 8 months pregnant should be able to get an abortion, that's fine. But find someone else.

Ok, you want to talk about countries. You don’t want to talk about abortion or autonomy.

Yes, I want to compare how we as a country deal with abortion compared to our peer countries than many of the left in this country look up to.

You have no argument and you’re wasting my time.

I do, you just responded to me looking for a different argument, that I don't care to discuss.

I called you anti-choice because it’s accurate

It's more accurate to call me 'pro-baby lives,' which would make you 'anti-baby lives' which is a bold stance. If you want to play dumb games like that instead of civilly discussing, I'm fine with that. But I won't converse with someone that continues to be this uncivil and rude.

That's fine, but that still makes the comment I'm responding to absurd.

'revolting that this is now a 'crime' - it's almost always been a crime in almost every civilized country for the last 200+ years.

I didn't say that.

I said you claiming sweden iceland and netherlands are all christo-fascist countries is objectively wrong.

Abortion is, is abortion at 28 weeks legal in the vast majority of the industrialized world?

do you actually argue why abortion should be legal or illegal.

Because that's not my argument, that's what you want to argue.

I'm simply stating that almost every single other western country, even ones that are much more liberal than the U.S., has laws restricting abortions in the scenario that this woman had an abortion. If the U.S. is a shithole 3rd world country because of this, those nations surely are as well.

Nebraska's abortion policy at this time was more liberal than europes, who we offten compare our policies to.

I'm also arguing that just because you think a policy would be good, doesn't make it 'right' for the other 7 billion people in the world.

Great, so Canada got it right

No, they enacted a policy that you agree with. That doesn't make it 'right.'

and you’re obviously swinging the weight of “western nations” as if it has any relevance.

It does, we're most comparable with other first world countries and specifically western countries. Pretty much in every comparable metric where we want to see how we're doing, we compare it to first world european nations.

What matters is what can be argued to be correct

There is no 'correct' - just because you agree with it, doesn't mean every single country needs to listen to you and enact policies you agree with. You have mad main character syndrome.

Believe it or, people disagree with some of your opinions, and that doesn't make them 'wrong'

The country as a whole has laws that disagree with it.

The U.S. doesn't permit honor killings, as a country we're against it.

In Iran, it's legal, the country agrees with it.

It's not that hard to understand.

Convince the Christo-fascist terrorists

Yeah, sweden, iceland, netherlands are all christo-fascist countries.

Come on dude.

I don't know the exact scenario, only the facts presented in the article

The woman had 20 weeks to get an abortion, instead she took an abortion pill at 28 weeks and held onto the babies remains.

I'm sure during the 5 months, she could have found a day to drive and get an abortion if it was important to her.

I do believe there should be more abortion clinics available, but have you ever lived in a rural state? The 3 are in the largest cities in the state, where nearly 50% of the population lives.

Putting an abortion clinic in a town of 1,000 people doesn't make sense for clinics. I think your disgust comes from your lack of understanding rural america.

The fact that almost every other western democratic nation has abortion policies more restrictive than most american states.

Almost every single one has the limit under 14 weeks.

Notable exceptions: Netherlands - 24 weeks Iceland - 22 weeks Sweden - 18 weeks

None of these countries would permit an abortion at 28 weeks, let alone let her keep the babies remains.

It should not be.

Okay, well you can convince almost every other progressive country that they're wrong and you're right.

Which is correct.

Which is something you support, doesn't make it 'correct' - your line of thinking is what's causing the modern day division in politics.

And you making the assumption that she’s a “nut case”

My opinion, based on the facts of the story, is that she's a nut case. I'm not assuming anything, the article plainly lays it out, she illegally obtained an abortion pill to kill her 28 Week baby, and held onto the remains.

If you don't think that's what a nutcase would do, that's fine, but I'm not making any assumptions, I'm basing my opinion off the facts presented in the article.

Even as a conservative, Whitmer seems to be doing a lot of good for her voters.

Free lunches, better resources for kids and more funding for ELL.

Although I'm skeptical of too much more spending on public schools, as we spend an absurd amount more per full time student compared to our peer countries, as long as the funds are directed to doing good like this, instead of just the bloat at the administration level, it's agreeable.

If

You gotta make a series of bold assumptions to believe her only option was to get an abortion pill at 28 weeks and hold onto the babies remains.

She had 20 weeks to get an abortion, which is more liberal than almost all progressive european countries.

If

Once again, you have to make a series of bold assumptions to believe that she's in the right here.

It’s a much less bold assumption than to make the claim that she merely didn’t want the baby in her third trimester just because.

She took the abortion pill and held on to the babies remains. It's not a bold assumption that she's just a nut case, it's a more bold assumption that she's 100% innocent.

As for your question, that further implies it’s the second scenario that I listed.

So you would keep the babies remains instead of....disposing of it in some way?