Zone1 Does anyone object to the use of abortion pills to terminate pregnancies before 10 weeks?

[Leo123]

In most animals, only the very strongest of the males get to even have sex - and they don't even have masturbation; they just have aching balls.

Yet, in humans, women argue to defend their right to have sex with weakling, pussy, beta males with whom they would never consider making a commitment to raising a child. That's just bizarre.

Really; American women are fighting for their right to have sex with this guy:

View attachment 668669

Bigfoot sighting at WalMart!!!!

 

[woodwork201]

I call that garbage. We have a massive surplus of births. People cannot afford more. Plus more young people are making the valiant and courageous choice not to have kids. They should be rewarded. It's not their duty to have them.

Yes, there are those who should be rewarded for not reproducing. You're right that for some, perhaps you, perhaps it should have been so for some people's mothers, certainly for AOC and her mother, their duty is to NOT reproduce. If we have to create a rewards system to make that happen, then so be it.

 

[Leo123]

Yes, there are those who should be rewarded for not reproducing. You're right that for some, perhaps you, perhaps it should have been so for some people's mothers, certainly for AOC and her mother, their duty is to NOT reproduce. If we have to create a rewards system to make that happen, then so be it.

Ahhh.....Eugenics, Margaret Sanger would be proud. We could turn Women's Health Abortion clinics into sterilization facilities!!!

 

[woodwork201]

Those who want to stop women from aborting their pregnancies, even in the first few weeks of gestation, are for the most part people who hate women who are having premarital or promiscuous sex. It's out of spite, and disdain that these people do everything they can to make things unnecessarily difficult for women who are "fornicating" in order to punish them. They hide behind a false facade of concern for the life of embryos in the wombs of these "harlots", to teach these women a lesson on "the negative consequences of fornication". Unwanted pregnancy is the negative consequence of choosing to "do the nasty" before marriage, so too bad for you. The pregnant woman might say:

"I can't be a mother now, I'm a poor college student living in the dorms on an allowance from my parents. I just don't have the means or the ability to be a mother"

And the "pro-life" holy-roller that doesn't really care about single mothers because he or she is a registered Republican who is constantly voting for politicians that defund social programs that help single mothers with healthcare, housing, food, job training, daycare, school lunches..etc, self-righteously lectures that young pregnant woman saying:

" Well too bad young lady, you should've kept those legs closed. You're now pregnant with an actual human being and you're obligated in every way imaginable, to carry that human being in your body for nine months, bearing all of the hazards and expenses of pregnancy and childbirth. Sure you might lose a few semesters, perhaps even the opportunity to continue studying at that prestigious, excellent school, and your parents might have to incur the cost of you missing school, but too bad young lady, those are the consequences of behaving like a sizzling, twerking harlot."

That would be a pregnant young woman from an upper-middle-class family whose parents have a combined income of at least 200K yearly. Forget about a young woman in the inner-city that is struggling to survive and already has two kids. These self-appointed cherubs of divine justice and morality could care less about that woman in the inner-city losing her job and being forced into a homeless shelter with her two kids because she can't afford to support herself and her children when she's pregnant and unemployed. The father of her children is in prison, he can't help her and her mother is a violent alcoholic living in the projects who hasn't talked to her in three years, and she can't turn to her father either, because she's never met him.

These "pro-life" Evangelicals and Roman Catholics, help create the conditions in society that increase the likelihood of young women getting pregnant out of wedlock by eliminating government programs that provide contraception to women (and men), that make resources available to women (and males) that would help them get out of poverty, stay off drugs and out of jail ( and the life-debilitating stigma that comes with a criminal record), get job training, and education, adequate housing, public transit..etc. The war on drugs is a war on the people of this country, but that's another post (that's a Christian-supported war that contributes to unwanted pregnancies and more abortions). These holly-rollers have no moral high-ground upon which to stand and point their crooked fecullent fingers at pregnant women that decide to end their pregnancies, especially when they continue to advance a political ideology that undermines the public good, particularly the health of women. They have no moral grounds upon which to judge and condemn anyone.

These "righteous folks" are the champions of fetuses. They care a lot about fetuses, in women's wombs, but their politics, their actions demonstrate that they don't care much for life outside of the womb. Human life that has actualized itself into a breathing, conscious member of society, are not their main concern. Actual human beings receive their "righteous" contempt, scorn, condemnation, indifference, flippant disregard and dismissal, while fetuses get all of their concern and attention. It's nothing more than hypocrisy. These "born-again", "holy rollers" who pretend to be the salt of the earth, the disciples of Jesus Christ, couldn't be further from being that which they pretend to be. They're more
like the disciples of the devil than the disciples of God. They're the worse of hypocrites.

View attachment 668377​

You're proposing extortion, really: either pay her to raise the product of her choices or let her kill the product of her choice.

I guess my question out of all that crap you wrote is, why do I have to pay for their recreational choices? If someone else's recreational preference is snow skiing, do I have to pay for their skis and their trip?
I believe women should have all the freedom that anyone else has in choosing her recreational activities but she shouldn't be permitted to murder a child to prevent living with the consequences of her choice and she shouldn't expect me to pay for the costs associated with her recreational choices.

By the way, I always wanted to ski but I could never afford the trips and training and equipment so I don't ski. Know what I mean, jellybean?

 

[Red Front]

You're proposing extortion, really: either pay her to raise the product of her choices or let her kill the product of her choice.

I guess my question out of all that crap you wrote is, why do I have to pay for their recreational choices? If someone else's recreational preference is snow skiing, do I have to pay for their skis and their trip?
I believe women should have all the freedom that anyone else has in choosing her recreational activities but she shouldn't be permitted to murder a child to prevent living with the consequences of her choice and she shouldn't expect me to pay for the costs associated with her recreational choices.

By the way, I always wanted to ski but I could never afford the trips and training and equipment so I don't ski. Know what I mean, jellybean?

Woodwork201 writes:

You're proposing extortion, really: either pay her to raise the product of her choices or let her kill the product of her choice.

Response:

What's being "proposed" is the fact that women have the right to end their pregnancies, whether you holy-rollers like it or not. Stripping women of that right actually costs more than allowing them to choose whether they want to remain pregnant or not. Are you aware that 80% of our prison population is comprised of people born in poverty to single mothers or raised in foster care? Abortion actually saves lives and money. Women (and men) that don't want to be parents, shouldn't have sex, but the problem is that we don't live in heaven. Sorry Bubba, we live down here on Earth. In your perfect, ideal world, women would only get pregnant when they're ready to be mothers. Unfortunately, we don't live in that world.

Woodwork201 writes:

I guess my question out of all that crap you wrote...

Response:

Why are you even wasting your time responding to crap? Because you're full of shit. You have turd in the brain.

Woodwork201 writes:

Why do I have to pay for their recreational choices?

Response:

You're going to pay more if you don't allow her to abort. Morever, medicine doesn't have to be so expensive. Do you know how much a CT scan costs in the UK and Australia? About $200. Do you know how much it costs here in America? More than ten times that. That's because of your right-wing shit politics and economics.

Allowing women to abort their unwanted pregnancies actually saves you and me, a lot of money.


Woodwork201 writes:

If someone else's recreational preference is snow skiing, do I have to pay for their skis and their trip?

Response:

You're comparing a needed medical procedure to end an unwanted pregnancy to someone demanding to go on a skiing trip? That's so dumb. Talk about "crap", you're truly full of it. If not allowing people to go on their skiing trip would result in horrible consequences for society, perhaps it would be in our best interest to pay people to go skiing. Your analogy however is completely moronic and unapplicable.

Woodwork201 writes:

I believe women should have all the freedom that anyone else has in choosing her recreational activities but she shouldn't be permitted to murder a child to prevent living with the consequences of her choice and she shouldn't expect me to pay for the costs associated with her recreational choices.

Response:

First of all, your opinion that a zygote, embryo or fetus is a human being, is just that, your mere opinion. Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. As far as I'm concerned and everyone else that agrees with me, the woman is the actual human being. What is in her womb is a potential human being and member of our society. It's not that yet. The interests and needs of the woman take precedence over the supposed needs and interests of a mass of cells attached to her uterus. If you want to be the champion of fetuses, be the champion of your own fetus, and stay out of other people's wombs. It's none of your fucking business what a woman (an actual human being) does with her pregnancy. She's the one that has to bear the hazards, pain, and suffering of pregnancy, not you. If society decides she has the right to end her pregnancy, then so be it.

Are you going to support her when she loses her job due to her pregnancy? You're whining about having to pay for abortions due to the cost while ignoring the much greater cost of forcing women to remain pregnant when they don't want to or can't due to whatever reason. So you aren't too smart, are you? Crying about cost, when what actually costs more is forcing women to remain pregnant and give birth to unwanted people, who will cost society, more money, pain, and suffering, even death. You pretend to care about human life, but you don't give a shit about anyone but yourself.


Woodwork201 writes:

By the way, I always wanted to ski but I could never afford the trips and training and equipment so I don't ski. Know what I mean, jellybean?


Response:

More reason for you to be in favor of abortion jellybrain.

 

[Red Front]

Can you stop shitting our your mouth? It's disgusting.

Your mother is disgusting for shitting you out of her filthy vagina. She should've aborted you.

 

[Leo123]

Your mother is disgusting for shitting you out of her filthy vagina. She should've aborted you.

I'm finished with your mom. She'll be home soon.

 

[Red Front]

I'm finished with your mom. She'll be home soon.

You fuck skeletons? You fucking perverted necrophiliac. My mom has been dead for over twenty years you stupid sick motherfucker.

 

[Resnic]

I'm not a parent, nor will I ever be one and I am not a woman so I have no dog in this fight.

I'd be happy if people would just be willing to admit "yes I want to kill my baby" just say what you want to do and be realistic about it and honest. You can't have an abortion if you aren't pregnant and you can't be pregnant without a baby.

Doesn't matter if it's 30 minutes after conception, 2 years or 15 years. Once that egg is fertilized then it starts a 18 to 20 year evolution into a mature adult. Just because it doesn't have a heartbeat doesn't mean it's not a baby, if you simply leave it alone it will be a baby.

 

[Red Front]

I'm not a parent, nor will I ever be one and I am not a woman so I have no dog in this fight.

I'd be happy if people would just be willing to admit "yes I want to kill my baby" just say what you want to do and be realistic about it and honest. You can't have an abortion if you aren't pregnant and you can't be pregnant without a baby.

Doesn't matter if it's 30 minutes after conception, 2 years or 15 years. Once that egg is fertilized then it starts a 18 to 20 year evolution into a mature adult. Just because it doesn't have a heartbeat doesn't mean it's not a baby, if you simply leave it alone it will be a baby.

Hey if you want to believe that a zygote, embryo or fetus attached and drawing its life from a woman's uterus has equivalent rights to the woman, that's your prerogative. Maybe you'll convince most people in this society that it's moral to force women to remain pregnant for nine months and give birth to unwanted children. Supposedly that's "pro-life". From the perspective of Marxists like myself, the woman is the actual human being not what is developing in her womb, attached to her uterus. It's the health, interests, wellbeing of the woman that takes precedence over what we consider a potential human being. An actual human being has rights and is a member of the community, a potential human being does not have rights, much less the right to remain attached to an actual human being. We believe it's immoral, to force women to remain pregnant when we have the technology to easily abort that pregnancy and avoid all of the problems that come with giving birth to unwanted children, that a woman was forced to carry for nine months and give birth to.

Will the pro-life holy-rollers support a woman financially who loses her job due to her pregnancy and is unable to support herself and her two children that are already born and breathing? No. Why does society have to incur the much more expensive cost of forcing women to remain pregnant and give birth to unwanted children? Our prisons are filled to the brim with children born to single mothers, that shouldn't have been mothers. How many people were killed by these criminals? You're pro-life? You're not pro-life, you're pro-death, you're pro-stupidity. These women should be afforded the means to end their unwanted pregnancies. If you don't like the fact that men and women are having premarital sex or what you consider to be promiscuous sex, that's fine. Other adults' sexual lives are none of your business.

 

[woodwork201]

If you don't like the fact that men and women are having premarital sex or what you consider to be promiscuous sex, that's fine. Other adults' sexual lives are none of your business.

I don't care a bit if people have premarital or promiscuous sex. And many unborn babies are killed at the behest of their married mothers who only had sex with their fathers. It has nothing to do with premarital or promiscuous sex.

But you're right. The sex lives of other consenting adults is not my business and they should keep it that way. As soon as they reach into my pocketbook to pay for the outcome of their sexual activities then they made it my business. When they seek to kill the innocent and defenseless, then they make it everyone's business.