Tired of the pro-choice lie

[Honesting]

I keep seeing people bring this up again, especially after Charlie Kirk’s assassination, that he once said if his 10-year-old daughter became pregnant through rape he’d insist she carry the baby. People call it misogynistic and vile. To be clear, that’s not my view and I’m not here to argue the pro-life case.

I actually have mixed feelings about abortion. I'm okay with the MAP and not okay with abortion up to the point of delivery. Where to draw the line is something I haven't decided yet.

What I do want to say is that it’s dishonest to pretend CK's position comes from hatred of women. The pro-life stance is very consistent and, internally, very coherent. If you genuinely believe an unborn child is a human being with rights, then ending its life is always wrong, no matter how it was conceived. We’d never allow a raped woman to kill her newborn, even if it was the product of rape. So if you see the foetus as having equal rights, then by that same logic, it shouldn’t matter whether conception was through rape.

I know the other side, and I understand it. I’m not dismissing the complexities. But the idea that the pro life argument is born of misogyny is simply false. It comes from a clear and reasonable moral framework: once human life begins, it carries human rights.

Do we have any properly documented cases of people being protected because a family member had a gun?

It's far more likely that someone who lives in the household will be harmed by the gun - suicides, accidents and mistaken identity. Having guns at home increases rather than reduces the risk to the occupants.

I have absolutely no idea. I hate guns myself

That’s the really terrifying thing about this. There’s no solace or reassurance in “it would never happen “ or even “it won’t happen here”. Because it did happen. In a modern, western country where no one thought it would either.

This whole thread is a tried-and-trusted judo throw used by traditionalists.

The first move is to open up a conflict of interest between women and unborn children, and to pin feminism to the pro-choice side.

Having done that, it’s simple work to misrepresent feminism as a force that opposes women against children throughout all of life. Anti-family, anti-home, anti-motherhood.

Once that’s in place, the narrative displays the trad family as a comforting kind of refuge. The actual chaos that traditional values can contain - impoverishment of mothers, entrapment in violence, forced abortions (I notice that hamster bum had no response to that one), sheer loneliness - is gently ignored.

Young women are easy marks for this kind of candyfloss. As this thread shows however, experienced adults see right through it.

You must be American to believe that - or I hope you are!

So what do you want to happen with these 269,280 abortions? do you want more than a quarter of million unwanted babies to be born every year? who will raise them? women who didn't want to do this? so at least half a million per year damaged individuals? because it's both unwanted child and a woman who's forced to have this child? do you think this phycological trauma is good for society?

To repeat my question earlier - what if some proportion (20%? more?) of these pregnant women who can't get abortions anymore decide to give up their newborns? who will care for 50k orphan newborns every year?

That’s what t he y said about repealing Roe v Wade.

All the rich, charitable, Christians will.

Just look at how many children Trump, Musk, Carlson, Loomer, Vance, MTG, RFK, Bannon, Levitt etc have fostered and adopted over the years.

To repeat my question earlier - what if some proportion (20%? more?) of these pregnant women who can't get abortions anymore decide to give up their newborns? who will care for 50k orphan newborns every year?

That worked out really well in Romania during their abortion ban...

Of course you wouldn't allow her to kill the baby - but you wouldn't force her to keep it either. The baby could be taken into care and put up for adoption. That's the fucking huge difference you seem to be missing.

No one can take the rapists foetus out of the woman's body and grow and look after it, the woman would be forced to do that. And that's why it's completely misogynistic because it's forcing women to do something against their will where there are no other options available to them. No man would ever be forced to do that, hell many, many men can't even be forced to look after their children that are already here.

And the idea that this asshole would force his 10 year old to carry a rapists baby is beyond the pale. That 'situation' would be quickly and quietly sorted out behind closed doors. It's one rule for everyone else and a different one for them when it suits. It's really depressing that you can't see that.

If you really want to know what I think, here goes:

I think most women are frightened when they get pregnant, whether you are in an ideal situation of not, it is still frightening. But things don't stay static, feelings change and the vast majority of those women would figure it out, and nature has designed it so you bond with your child. It is what women have done for millenia, pre contraception and abortion.

To label fear, anxiety, and I don't know a better way to put it, but inconvenience as 'trauma' is truly immoral to me. And just not nice

But sure, some may need to give them up for adoption, fine, but I don't think it is anywhere near 20%. People figure things out, and generally love their children, even when they are what we used to call 'an accident'.

I still maintain that people are so flippant about all of this. Your post sees no value in doing things that might be hard, need some sacrifice.

And yes, I also believe things could be better culturally in supporting women to have the children - maternity and working contracts, two parent families, tax incentives etc.

@hamstersarse

To label fear, anxiety, and I don't know a better way to put it, but inconvenience as 'trauma' is truly immoral to me. And just not nice

Being forced to have an unwanted child is inconvenience???? OMG!

Women used to figure it out - no, they weren't, they didn't have any choice. They do now, they learned that choice is available. It's the same as it was almost unheard of for woman to be childfree by choice. There are plenty of them now. People haven't changed, it's just modern society allows them to live their lives as they wish. You want to take this freedom away.

So your answer is just hope that a woman forced to continue with unwanted pregnancy will eventually love the child. You are unable to give the answer as to what if not.

And most important - what for? what will you personally sacrifice to support these unwanted babies if they are still given up for adoption or whatever?
if you care so much about children being killed - how exactly did you support Ukraine? or Gaza?

Holy fuck. I am speechless:

To label fear, anxiety and I don’t know a better way to put it, but inconvenience as 'trauma' is truly immoral to me. And just not nice

so you’d make me carry and birth the baby of the man who violently raped, strangled and sexually assaulted me.

you are appalling.

Nope - we had already taken out from the conversation rape, incest and health threat cases. It is the majority of abortions we were talking about where inconvenience is certainly a reason - do you not think it is?

No I don’t. And you and others like you wouldn’t believe people
lkke me would you? How would I have to prove I was raped? How?

your attitude is appalling.

I don't think you are following

Fucking hell.🤦‍♀️

no. You’re not following. And you’re not understanding what it means to be raped.

your attitude to this is appalling.

@hamstersarse

inconvenience is certainly a reason

It certainly IS a reason, as good as any other reason. Raising a child (doing it properly) is a very hard effort and no woman should go for it until she wants it with every fiber of her soul. I'd go as far as saying that some people should not have children at all, but that's a different conversation.

I'd recommend you reading "We need to talk about Kevin"

I don't know why you think you know anything about me, but anyway, try and be reasonable and read the OG post in the thread where it says under 1% of abortion cases are for rape, and what about the rest - that is what the post was about. Not rape cases - that is fairly clear cut, as I have stated on many posts.

When it comes to rape, I’m never “reasonable”.

I can tell.

But please do read what I said. I am not and have never disputed rape cases.

I am a victim of a violent rape and sexual assault. I have described it before on here and really would prefer not to have to do so again.

for me to be asked to be reasonable about rape - for ANY woman to be asked to be reasonable about rape has genuinely rendered me speechless and I am right on the edge of a full blown meltdown.

The author of that book, Lionel Shriver, has said: “ever since that Supreme Court decision, you've seen a lot of Democrats not simply arguing for abortion access but advocating abortion, celebrating it… trying to completely reverse the previous stigma.”

I have stated that also - flippancy is really not a good thing and I count 'incovenience' as one of those things.