Comments by "" (@alanna_weiss) on "Why I Give Abortions | Minutes With | @LADbible TV" video.
-
13
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
You mean like you would in any other country that, you know, makes sense in terms of healthcare? π€£ Yeah, good fkin question. Next time you'll probably ask why can't you just go to the hospital with your health issue without worrying who's gonna pay the bills, and why the healthcare system in the US has more in common with Africa than it does with Europe.
I don't know how much truth is in these accusation, and i definitely know better than to trust you by a word, but do you know that abortion is not synonymous with PP? It's far from being the only abortion provider even in the US, and people in other countries have no idea what it is. Criticizing PP on sanitary standards (no matter if this criticism is justified or not) takes you nowhere in terms of criticizing abortion itself.
As for the word "baby", you know, i haven't worked at PP a day in my life, but after so many conversations with "pro lifers" this word makes me cringe. Every time i hear it i have a feeling that i'm being emotionally manipulated. So i stopped using it.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
β @walterkersting1362 Hahaha. Well first, not exactly the same. I never did anything like that after all. And by making this argument you're obviously expecting me to understand that this is a bad thing to do, celestial daddy or not. Second, for some mysterious reason your celestial daddy didn't stop him, i.e. once again did exactly what "he" would do if "he" didn't exist OR had no problem with things happened that day. Third, i wouldn't be surprised at all if it turned out Paddock considered himself christian and did it to punish sinners or whatever. After all, there are old testament prophets who killed tenfold more people than him for similar reasons. There are acts of genocide directly sanctioned by god. Or even performed by "him" - like nuking two cities for having sex wrong, or that hilarious story where "he" drowned 99% of humanity because it was slightly more convenient to "him" than teaching them to be better, though it's not even mentioned what exactly they did wrong. Life is sacred my ass. And even in the new testament there's no single WORD of condemnation for sla very. Or rape for that matter. Fornication is condemned and even severely punished, but not rape. Point is, if THAT is the one true morality, we're all screwed. And i'm really glad it's not, because it allowed us to grow better than this. Better from our point of view, of course. Ancient romans would say that we're weirdos for abolishing something as natural as sla very. And the only reason you may POSSIBLY think that sla very is wrong and should not exist even for a second while Jesus urged slaves to obey their masters is because Jesus is not the REAL source of your morality. The real source is your feelings. You feel that sla very is wrong. You feel that mass murder is wrong, despite prophet Elisha had 42 children killed just for calling him bald. And most people today feel that too. There's no such thing as objective morality, your feeling of right and wrong belongs to your brain, not to reality, but it's not completely random. Humans are social animals and evolved as such. We have tools in our brain that make peaceful coexistence possible, like empathy or conformity. In some people such tools are broken or poorly calibrated, and that's why we need the police and the courts. But it doesn't mean we need to establish one arbitrary set of morals supposedly introduced by a powerful wizard living on a cloud as the eternal dogma. Because first, it would be terrible in terms of social progress, and second, it wouldn't help anyway. Your dogma would be just as easily discarded as any other arbitrary choice when people's actual feelings tell them otherwise.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@N81999 Patriarchy is when you're denied the right to make even somewhat significant decisions about your own life without man's approval, a man makes all the actual decisions and whether he's going to ask YOU what you want is up to his good will. Because who needs to have a say in anything really when you have "more honorable things", like washing dishes for example, right? And if that man beats the sh. it out of you don't worry because it's not a "true patriarchy". Oh right, what a relief, my broken nose doesn't hurt anymore in this case. But yeah, god will punish him for sure, not now though and not in any way you (or him) would notice until you're dead, so good luck enduring this for the rest of your life because divorce is against god. Patriarchy is when your best bet is to hope for a good master who will choose for you what you'd choose for yourself if you, like, could. That's why women need power. Not to abuse it, i never wanted that. But you know what i want even less than that? Right, to be abused while having absolutely no means to do something about it except waiting for a fkin prince in shining armor who may as well turn out to be another tyrant. We need power to protect ourselves and to shape our own destiny without relying on men's good will. There's not much of it anyway as one can judge by those parts of the worlds where patriarchy is still at its full strength. All this talk about how "different but equal" we are is for the fools too. When someone has the power and someone doesn't it's the opposite of equality. THAT is the sugar coating, and a pretty lazy one. Like, "yeah yeah sure whatever, you're equal n'sh. it, now shut up and do as i say". To hell with it. I don't need a good master, i need freedom. I don't want anyone to die for me, i want control over my own life. I'm a protagonist of my own story, not a fkin "helpmate". I never chose this role.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ok, let's go.
1) Well, go and ask it. Seriously though, when your PERSONAL rights are on the line you don't have to ask anyone's permission, even if they are also affected by your decision. To marry someone you need their consent, but you don't need one to divorse.
2) It doesn't matter if it's alive or human. It only matters if it's an actual person, with unique thoughts, memories and experience. A human child do not posess personhood untill the age of 2 or 3. There's no one single moment of time when it happens, the process is gradual. ANY moment you pick would be conventional, the moment of birth seems like the best choice to me.
3) There are conditions that justify eutanasia even for actual people. Though it's not an essential argument for abortion.
4) You are not preventing the abuse, you're enforcing it. You can't decide for a pregnant person EVEN if you're willing to raise the child. Abortion is more than that.
5) Abortion is not really about "ending life". It's more like eviction. You can't use my body as a source of food without my permission. Period. Pay the rent or gtfo. This way i don't decide for you, i decide for what undeniably belongs to me. You on the other hand have every right to do whatever you want with anything that belongs to YOU, somewhere far away from my uterus. That is even if we talk about an actual person which is not the case.
The only thing that is irreversibly lost upon abortion is the combination of genes. It's not worth the suffering of a real person unless that person specifically WANTS it. What's natural and what's not is irrelevant.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@N81999 What a bunch of BS. Who cares what this latin word meant originally? "Electron" means "amber" in greek, so fkin what? There are tiny pieces of amber inside of the atom now? "Atom" means "uncuttable" btw, and then we learned how to literally cut it in parts. Etymology is not semantics. Who cares about unique DNA? I am not my genes, i am my mind, my thoughts and my memories. Twins are two separate people despite sharing the same genes, and there are people whose body consists of cells with different sets of genes, that's called chimerism. I could claim that a fetus is a part of a pregnant person's body up until birth, and there would be nothing in biology that would contradict it, because the whole notion of a "being a separate organism" is a convention rather than a hard fact. But i don't even need that, because biology itself doesn't have to be connected to ethics. I can as well just accept that a fetus is a "human being", and you still won't be able to prove that abortion is wrong on this basis because that's not how things work.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1