Off Topic Politics Thread

[Onionman]

It's not worth the effort of arguing with him. He'll argue black is white, that words don't mean what they say and that everything is a plot by fake news media, Hunter Biden, Ukraine, the CIA, fiat currency, Jimmy Crankie and the World Economic Forum (though not necessarily in that order).

Best left alone (advice I should follow but I'm one of those old-fashioned unfortunates who think the truth matters).

I'm finally going to put him on ignore.

Vin

 

[Osvaldorama]

It's not worth the effort of arguing with him. He'll argue black is white, that words don't mean what they say and that everything is a plot by fake news media, Hunter Biden, Ukraine, the CIA, fiat currency, Jimmy Crankie and the World Economic Forum (though not necessarily in that order).

Best left alone (advice I should follow but I'm one of those old-fashioned unfortunates who think the truth matters).

I'm finally going to put him on ignore.

Vin

“Oh no, they’re advocating for human embryos to be treated like.. humans! How dare they” - you guys, 2023

 

[ChilcoSaint]

“Oh no, they’re advocating for human embryos to be treated like.. humans! How dare they” - you guys, 2023

“Oh no, those guys on Not606 are arguing that a woman should have the right to choose what happens to her body” - Os, 2023.

 

[Osvaldorama]

“Oh no, those guys on Not606 are arguing that a woman should have the right to choose what happens to her body” - Os, 2023.

At what point does the child have rights?
Complicated question to answer. It could easily be argued that the child should be protected as a new human, because that’s exactly what it is.

Abortion is technically murder. So it isn’t that far fetched to treat it as such. It all comes down to when you personally consider a foetus as a human.

It’s not an absurd notion to have the conversation as it’s a very complex topic. I could also argue that there are huge benefits to society in disincentivising abortion.

(Although for the record I am pro-choice as long as it is very early in the pregnancy.)

 

[EasyBreezer]

Abortion is technically murder.

Wow.

How can you even claim to be remotely pro-choice within half sentence if you believe this nonsense!

 

[Osvaldorama]

Wow.

How can you even claim to be remotely pro-choice within half sentance if you believe this nonsense!

You are quite literally killing a child and ending a life when you have an abortion. It’s not nonsense.

It’s a choice that weighs heavily on you and should be taken with much care; foetuses should be protected where possible and so should the woman involved. It does no good for anyone to go through an abortion, and whilst I don’t think it should be the state’s decision, I do think that abortions are all around terrible for all involved.

 

[EasyBreezer]

You are quite literally killing a child and ending a life when you have an abortion.

What have I said that is nonsense?

How is it the same as killing a child..?

The utter nonsense, on this occasion, is saying that abortion is murder, obviously.

Murder and child have quite commonly known definitions that you are willfully ignoring.

 

[Schad]

At what point does the child have rights?
Complicated question to answer. It could easily be argued that the child should be protected as a new human, because that’s exactly what it is.

It's a clump of cells for a good four months. As to whether fetal tissue is considered a person:

- Are fetuses registered as persons on the census?
- Are pregnant women eligible to collect child benefits for fetuses?
- Can you sue on behalf of a fetus whose mother is jail, for wrongful imprisonment?
- Hell, can you use the carpool lane while pregnant?
-

The answer to all of those has always been no. Fetuses have never been granted personhood, and there is no indication that the states pushing these laws intend to extend those other legal definitions. They want fetuses to be considered persons for the purpose of abortion only, and in no other way. Because this ultimately has nothing to do with fetal rights, and everything to do with controlling women. There's a reason they are going after contraceptives -- the leading preventers of abortion! -- now as well.

 

[Gregm1988]

It's a clump of cells for a good four months. As to whether fetal tissue is considered a person:

- Are fetuses registered as persons on the census?
- Are pregnant women eligible to collect child benefits for fetuses?
- Can you sue on behalf of a fetus whose mother is jail, for wrongful imprisonment?
- Hell, can you use the carpool lane while pregnant?
-

The answer to all of those has always been no. Fetuses have never been granted personhood, and there is no indication that the states pushing these laws intend to extend those other legal definitions. They want fetuses to be considered persons for the purpose of abortion only, and in no other way. Because this ultimately has nothing to do with fetal rights, and everything to do with controlling women. There's a reason they are going after contraceptives -- the leading preventers of abortion! -- now as well.

Isn’t there a challenge to this bizarre logic where an argument is being made that a pregnant woman shouldn’t be imprisoned because it infringes on the freedom of the foetus. Highlighting your point that foetus=person is for abortion only

 

[......loading......]

“Oh no, they’re advocating for human embryos to be treated like.. humans! How dare they” - you guys, 2023

Mate this is a ****ed up comment. Typical right wing patriarchal ****. Cut the ****ing then. Ffs mate.

 

[saintlyhero]

This is mental.

Why is it our problem to solve the rest of the worlds wealth problems?

We have enough problems here.

Of course it’s our collective responsibility to aim to make the whole world safe and prosperous.
If you want to stop people moving in such vast numbers (which is not great for either end of the journey). Then we should either be investing in those nations and building trade alliances, work on peace treaties for those nations ravaged by war.

lets care properly for the people who are alive first before the fetuses.

 

[Archers Road]

Of course it’s our collective responsibility to aim to make the whole world safe and prosperous.
If you want to stop people moving in such vast numbers (which is not great for either end of the journey). Then we should either be investing in those nations and building trade alliances, work on peace treaties for those nations ravaged by war.

lets care properly for the people who are alive first before the fetuses.

To be fair to him, even Posh Boy David Cameron recognised the need for wealthy nations to offer some support to poorer ones, which is why he ring fenced the overseas aid budget.

Unfortunately, his government’s austerity program impoverished millions of his country’s own citizens, and his disastrous Brexit referendum led to a right wing coup in the Conservative party, which is why we are now governed by a toxic mix of English Nationalists and international oligarchs.

 

[Osvaldorama]

How is it the same as killing a child..?

The utter nonsense, on this occasion, is saying that abortion is murder, obviously.

Murder and child have quite commonly known definitions that you are willfully ignoring.

I mean you can manipulate the words to mean whatever definitions you like, but it’s a simple fact that abortion is ending the life of a human.

That is what I would define as murder. I’m not sure why that makes me a patriarchal right winger. It’s just a statement of fact.

To answer the prison thing, no, obviously a child born in prison isn’t made to stay in prison with the mother. So that’s a totally false equivalence.

 

[Osvaldorama]

Of course it’s our collective responsibility to aim to make the whole world safe and prosperous.
If you want to stop people moving in such vast numbers (which is not great for either end of the journey). Then we should either be investing in those nations and building trade alliances, work on peace treaties for those nations ravaged by war.

lets care properly for the people who are alive first before the fetuses.

But not at the expense of ourselves. I agree, when the country was at its peak and things were going well, we have a duty to help others.

But the way we are going, we are slowly becoming a 3rd world country with a banana republic government ourselves. So I think there comes a time where we have to focus back on ourselves and improving the UK.

I would strongly argue that the time for that is now, based on the deteriorating living standards, NHS, and wages for teachers, nurses, doctors etc. not to mention the failing mental health and social care programs.

Maybe others feel like things are going swimmingly for us though?

All I see on here is people complaining at the Tories for ruining the country, whilst at the same time advocating for policies which will continue to make the UK worse.

 

[StJabbo1]

Of course it’s our collective responsibility to aim to make the whole world safe and prosperous.
If you want to stop people moving in such vast numbers (which is not great for either end of the journey). Then we should either be investing in those nations and building trade alliances, work on peace treaties for those nations ravaged by war.

lets care properly for the people who are alive first before the fetuses.

But not at the expense of ourselves. I agree, when the country was at its peak and things were going well, we have a duty to help others.

But the way we are going, we are slowly becoming a 3rd world country with a banana republic government ourselves. So I think there comes a time where we have to focus back on ourselves and improving the UK.

I would strongly argue that the time for that is now, based on the deteriorating living standards, NHS, and wages for teachers, nurses, doctors etc. not to mention the failing mental health and social care programs.

Maybe others feel like things are going swimmingly for us though?

All I see on here is people complaining at the Tories for ruining the country, whilst at the same time advocating for policies which will continue to make the UK worse.

There are a number of international treaties which successive UK governments had an influential part in drawing up that form international law. The current bunch of incompetent arseholes appear to think they can renage on them with impunity or are they pandering to voters with illegal immoral unworkable legislation.

 

[All_Southampton_FC]

You can't be pro choice and say women can't have abortions.
It blurs the lines and makes women second class citizens if these rules are implemented.

It's their body; they should be able to do whatever they want. Unless you're a women then you shouldn't have a say in what they should do with their bodies.
We all come from women, we should respect their choices.

The fact these rules are generally made by men, historically at least, shows how out of touch it is. If you agree with it, you're part of the problem; it does feel like we're going backwards.

OS you should like this; you could think they're trying to make these rules due to population decrease. The war machine needs soldiers, who better to recruit than unwanted offspring!

Anyway, people should respect other people's decisions. We need empathy.

 

[Osvaldorama]

You can't be pro choice and say women can't have abortions.
It blurs the lines and makes women second class citizens if these rules are implemented.

It's their body; they should be able to do whatever they want. Unless you're a women then you shouldn't have a say in what they should do with their bodies.
We all come from women, we should respect their choices.

The fact these rules are generally made by men, historically at least, shows how out of touch it is. If you agree with it, you're part of the problem; it does feel like we're going backwards.

OS you should like this; you could think they're trying to make these rules due to population decrease. The war machine needs soldiers, who better to recruit than unwanted offspring!

Anyway, people should respect other people's decisions. We need empathy.

Where have I said that they can’t have them? I already said, I am begrudgingly pro-choice, as long as it’s very early into the pregnancy.

This is purely because I feel that an unwanted child is likely a worse outcome for the family & for society as a whole. If you can’t afford to raise a kid, or don’t want one, it’s an unbelievable responsibility.

It doesn’t matter if the rule is made by a man or a woman, that is woke nonsense.

What matters is who are the beneficiaries and what is the kindest outcome on all of the individuals concerned.

This is NOT a simple topic. And articles like the one posted that cause more division don’t help anyone

 

[tomw24]

Where have I said that they can’t have them? I already said, I am begrudgingly pro-choice, as long as it’s very early into the pregnancy.

This is purely because I feel that an unwanted child is likely a worse outcome for the family & for society as a whole. If you can’t afford to raise a kid, or don’t want one, it’s an unbelievable responsibility.

It doesn’t matter if the rule is made by a man or a woman, that is woke nonsense.

What matters is who are the beneficiaries and what is the kindest outcome on all of the individuals concerned.

This is NOT a simple topic. And articles like the one posted that cause more division don’t help anyone

This post is exactly why it is ludicrous to treat all abortions like someone has committed a heinous crime. It's not a simple topic and to stick someone in prison for doing what they believe is right is just shocking.

 

[Osvaldorama]

This post is exactly why it is ludicrous to treat all abortions like someone has committed a heinous crime. It's not a simple topic and to stick someone in prison for doing what they believe is right is just shocking.

But no one, even the republicans in your article were saying all abortions should be treated like a heinous crime. Which was my point the whole time. The journalist has extrapolated a provocative nonsense article to cause division, as usual.

 

[Saints_Alive]

Here is one such Republican lawmaker with some reasoned debate on the subject...

You must log in or register to see media