Freddy Figbottom
Was it me?
....and the love of torturing men by killing their babies in front of them....
Why women have abortions
- Thread starter Scott
- Start date
Scott
Verified User
When I see a post that -starts- with those words, I think it's generally best to avoid responding to much if anything in the post. You'd been civilized up until this post, so I decided to at least tell you why I'm not responding to the rest of your post.
Scott
Verified User
yes.I don't believe evil presents anything. I think The American Heritage Dictionary, 5th Edition's first definition of the term is good for the purposes of our discussion here:
**
Morally bad or wrong; wicked.
**
Source:
The question then becomes, who determines what is "morally bad or wrong"? The short answer is that we all do. When it comes to societies, lawmakers tend to make laws that are designed to prevent people from doing things that the believe are morally wrong. Clearly, when it comes to abortion, lawmakers have decided different things in different countries and, in a case like the United States, in different states.
We can certainly agree that the Nazis did a lot of evil things. Eugenics is a bit more complicated. I think that Wikipedia's introduction to the subject is good:
**
Eugenics [a] is a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population. [2][3][4] Historically, eugenicists have attempted to alter the frequency of various human phenotypes by inhibiting the fertility of those considered inferior, or promoting that of those considered superior.[5]
The contemporary history of eugenics began in the late 19th century, when a popular eugenics movement emerged in the United Kingdom,[6] and then spread to many countries, including the United States, Canada, Australia,[7] and most European countries (e.g., Sweden and Germany).
Historically, the idea of eugenics has been used to argue for a broad array of practices ranging from prenatal care for mothers deemed genetically desirable to the forced sterilization and murder of those deemed unfit.[5] To population geneticists, the term has included the avoidance of inbreeding without altering allele frequencies; for example, British-Indian scientist J. B. S. Haldane wrote in 1940 that "the motor bus, by breaking up inbred village communities, was a powerful eugenic agent."[8] Debate as to what qualifies as eugenics continues today.[9]
A progressive social movement promoting eugenics had originated in the 19th century,[10][11][12] with diverse support, but by the mid 20th century the term was closely associated with scientific racism and authoritarian coercion. With modern medical genetics, genetic testing and counseling have become common, and new or liberal eugenics rejects coercive programs in favor of individual parental choice.[13]
**
Source:
Eugenics - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Yes what?
Freddy Figbottom
Was it me?
Scott
Verified User
I don't think you really understand what sloganeering is. From Wordnet 3.0:
**
persuasion by means of empty slogans
**
Source:
sloganeering — definition, examples, related words and more at Wordnik
All the words
www.wordnik.com
The above definition in turn requires an understanding of the word slogan. I think that Wikipedia's introduction to the word is pretty good:
**
A slogan is a memorable motto or phrase used in a clan or a political, commercial, religious, or other context as a repetitive expression of an idea or purpose, with the goal of persuading members of the public or a more defined target group. The Oxford Dictionary of English defines a slogan as "a short and striking or memorable phrase used in advertising". [1] A slogan usually has the attributes of being memorable, very concise and appealing to the audience.[2]
**
Source:
Slogan - Wikipedia
In other words, slogans are generally short phrases that are repeated and appealing to particular audiences. I think short phrases such as "baby murder lover" would definitely qualify. I believe such slogans are used to induce emotions in their target audience while also dampening efforts at actual discussions of controversial issues, such as abortion.
Freddy Figbottom
Was it me?
or we can call it word games of all sorts. which is what sloganeering is.I don't think you really understand what sloganeering is. From Wordnet 3.0:
**
persuasion by means of empty slogans
**
Source:
sloganeering — definition, examples, related words and more at Wordnik
All the words
The above definition in turn requires an understanding of the word slogan. I think that Wikipedia's introduction to the word is pretty good:
**
A slogan is a memorable motto or phrase used in a clan or a political, commercial, religious, or other context as a repetitive expression of an idea or purpose, with the goal of persuading members of the public or a more defined target group. The Oxford Dictionary of English defines a slogan as "a short and striking or memorable phrase used in advertising". [1] A slogan usually has the attributes of being memorable, very concise and appealing to the audience.[2]
**
Source:
Slogan - Wikipedia
In other words, slogans are generally short phrases that are repeated and appealing to particular audiences. I think short phrases such as "baby murder lover" would definitely qualify. I believe such slogans are used to induce emotions in their target audience while also dampening efforts at actual discussions of controversial issues, such as abortion.
and you're still fucking doing it, you mentally vacant retard.
Scott
Verified User
Rubbish.After discussing why women have abortions in another thread whose topic definitely isn't abortions, I decided it would be better to make a thread for the subject instead. Below is an excerpt from an article that lists the different reasons women have abortions:
**
Generally, people use the term “abortion” to refer to the intentional termination of a pregnancy.
The vast majority of abortions take place early in pregnancy. In 2020, 93.1% of abortions in the United States occurred at 13 weeks’ gestation or sooner.
The Turnaway study followed 954 people from across the United States who sought abortions between 2008 and 2010 to learn the reasons for and effects of pursuing pregnancy termination.
The responses fell into several broad themes, with many people reporting that a combination of factors influenced the decision.
Financial circumstances
Around 40% of people mentioned a financial reason for needing an abortion. Most of them had general financial concerns or said they could not afford to support a child.
Around 4% said a lack of employment contributed to their decision, and 0.6% said they terminated their pregnancies because of a lack of insurance or government assistance.
Timing
More than one-third (36%) of study participants cited reasons relating to timing. Some felt they were not emotionally or financially ready to have a baby, while others felt they were too old to have a child.
Partner-related reasons
Almost one-third (31%) of study participants gave reasons relating to their partner.
For example, some said they did not have a good or stable relationship with their partner or that their partner was unsupportive. Around 8% wanted to get married before having children. Others mentioned that they had a partner who was abusive or who did not want the baby.
Other responsibilities
Around 29% of people mentioned they needed to focus on their other children. They said they already felt overextended with their current children and would be overwhelmed by having another. A small percentage of people thought that having a baby would adversely affect their other children and quality of life.
Additionally, about 20% of people reported having an abortion because the timing would interfere with their future opportunities and goals. They felt they could not continue their education or advance their careers while raising a baby.
Emotions and mental health
Around 19% of people in the study expressed that they were emotionally or mentally unprepared for a child. They mentioned not having the mental capacity to have a baby or not feeling mentally stable enough to raise a child.
Other health-related reasons
Approximately 12% of individuals mentioned health-related reasons for having an abortion, such as:
- concerns for their health
- concerns for the health of the fetus
- drug, tobacco, or alcohol use
- non-illegal prescription drug or birth control use
- worsening of existing health issues, such as back pain and diabetes
- mental health concerns
- the effect of medications for existing health conditions on the fetus
Inability to provide for a baby
Some people — around 12% — chose abortion because of their desire for a better life for the child than they could provide. They mentioned feeling inadequate and unable to care for themselves or a child.
Other people said their housing situation was unsuitable for a baby.
Not independent or mature enough for a baby
Just under 7% of people reported a lack of maturity or said they had to rely on other people. Some explained that they felt they were too young for a baby and were unprepared for parenthood.
Influences from family and friends
About 5% of people described influences from family and friends as a reason they chose abortion. They worried that a child would be a strain on their family or that they would experience judgment from others.
Some people had an abortion because they were too scared to tell their parents about their pregnancy, while a small proportion had pressure from family to end their pregnancy.
**
Full article:
The reasons for abortion: Statistics, safety, and access
There are many reasons for abortion, ranging from serious health risks and family planning to financial concerns. Learn more here.www.medicalnewstoday.com
I see no reason to discount the testimonies of actual women having abortions. If you feel there -are- good reasons to discount them, by all means, list them.
Scott
Verified User
Some women, at certain times, with certain people, certainly. In other cases, they don't. In this thread, I've seen a lot of posters talk about women making bad decisions, but I've heard little of the men who had to have been involved. I think we would agree that anyone raping anyone is bad, so we're just talking about consensual sex here. In these cases, both the women -and- the men make the decision to risk the possibility of getting the woman pregnant.
From what I've seen, society as a whole generally tends to look the other way when it comes to mens' role in unwanted pregnancies.
Scott
Verified User
If only your mom had had one - we'd never have had to deal with your moronic bullshit!42% were getting their second or more abortion......that begins to sound like a lifestyle choice.
One in Four US Women Expected to Have an Abortion in Their Lifetime
www.guttmacher.org
Come on Lurch, do you really think your post helped in this discussion about abortion? I also personally think that Hawkeye has had a lot of good posts, particularly on subjects such as the war in Ukraine, as well as many flaws of the United States government.
I did list the reasons. You just think your wish lists obligate everybody to pander to it and take you seriously, is all. Do you not know how babies are made? It is 100% avoidable, except in cases of rape or unforeseen medical issues. Whether that fits your hedonist anarchist ideological fantasies or not is of no interest.
Once you prove you're an idiot his response is entirely appropriate.
I don't doubt a sizable percentage of left wing women do indeed do that. It's marketed to fashion victims as being 'Empowered N Stuff', whatever the fuck that psychobabble is supposed to mean.
Freddy Figbottom
Was it me?
I certainly hope you're joking about his Ukraine posts. According to HE10, Ukraine asked to be invaded, it's infrastructure destroyed, it's women and children kidnapped and raped. So, my friend, if that's YOUR position? We're not gonna agree on much.
Scott
Verified User
Ahhhh, now I get it. You putting "yes" and "you embrace evil and eugenics" on separate lines made me think you were talking about separate things originally, but your repeating the same lines (with the subtraction of evil) in your response to my query for clarification has clarified things now.
Anyway, as I implied in the post that your first "yes." post was in response to, when it comes Eugenics, it's not as black and white as some people seem to think, which is why I quoted the rather lengthy introduction to the term from Wikipedia. I strongly suspect you didn't actually read the complete passage, so I've decided it would be best to just quote the last paragraph in their introduction and then comment on it:
**
A progressive social movement promoting eugenics had originated in the 19th century,[10][11][12] with diverse support, but by the mid 20th century the term was closely associated with scientific racism and authoritarian coercion. With modern medical genetics, genetic testing and counseling have become common, and new or liberal eugenics rejects coercive programs in favor of individual parental choice.[13]
**
Source:
Eugenics - Wikipedia
I've now read the bit about "new or liberal eugenics" and I think it's possible that this might be ok. Quoting from Wikipedia's page on New eugenics:
**
New eugenics, also known as liberal eugenics (a term coined by bioethicist Nicholas Agar), [1] advocates enhancing human characteristics and capacities through the use of reproductive technology and human genetic engineering. Those who advocate for new eugenics generally think selecting or altering embryos should be left to the preferences of parents, rather than forbidden (or left to the preferences of the state). New eugenics purports to distinguish itself from the forms of eugenics practiced and advocated in the 20th century, which fell into disrepute after World War II.[2]
**
Source:
New eugenics - Wikipedia
There's a film that actually gets into this type of eugenics that I thought was quite good, and it didn't just cover this 'new eugenics' in a positive light, far from it. Here's the trailer to the film in question:
Still, the idea of ensuring that children don't suffer from genetic problems is one that I for one would definitely want to spare any children I might have in the future and I know I'm not alone in that. Here's an article on the subject from last year:
The Ethics of Prenatal Genetic Testing
Is more information better when it comes to prenatal screening?
magazine.hms.harvard.edu
Into the Night
Verified User
Belief is irrelevant. Irrelevance fallacy.
Go learn English. Go learn set theory.
Into the Night
Verified User
Apparently you never learned the purpose of sex.
Why do you continue to do this? It is evasion. Your word games won't work. Abortion for convenience is murder.
Into the Night
Verified User
It's also an egregious violation of the child's life.
Into the Night
Verified User
Argument of the Stone fallacy.
Into the Night
Verified User
Irrelevance fallacy.
Abortion is murder.