#Sexstrike

Topic's posts
Posts in total: 270
--> @Alec
Also, I don't think you support a "woman's right to choose"....
Your like to play dumb mind games so I  I will keep repeating.

Read My Lips/Text Keep you Friggin Nose Out of pregnants womens bodily  business unless they give you there consent to stick your snotty nose in their bodily business. 

Do you understand the words/text coming out of my mouth/finger tips?

--> @mustardness
You got passed!

--> @mustardness
Keep you Friggin Nose Out of pregnants womens bodily

Yeah the baby would be saying-"Mommy I'm sorry you opened your legs!"
--> @mustardness
Dropping all the point(s) I had laid out.

Read My Lips/Text Keep you Friggin Nose Out of pregnants womens bodily  business unless they give you there consent to stick your snotty nose in their bodily business.  

Do you understand the words/text coming out of my mouth/finger tips?
I understand them, but I think they are stupid and not founded on logic or morality, but merely your feelings.
--> @Dr.Franklin
So now you're claiming to be a democrat.
--> @Dr.Franklin
Just look at the puerile school yard language these children use, they know absolutely nothing about sexual intercourse only what they've heard in the playground and they think that's true. Why are children allowed on this forum?
--> @Alec
This wisdom is brought to you by Alec's school yard sex education.
--> @Alec
More school yard education.
--> @Ramshutu
So; here’s the problem. They’re not really different things in any meaningful context.

In both cases a “life” is being ended by the action or inaction of another. Simply repeatedly processing that they are different things doesn’t make it
true.
Congrats, you literally explained to yourself why they're separate scenarios and an absolutely illogical comparison.

An unborn fetus is neither a baby, nor a person, it’s different from a born human, and so causing it to be removed, or removing it from the mother is not murder at all, and any comparison is a false analogy. See it’s easy to just assert your case. 

The issues are very similar; it’s bodily autonomy, a woman has the right not to control her body, and thus decide not to be pregnant, and do so in a way that is least harmful to her. 

That an organ recipient is dying anyway, and an unborn child is removed is largely an irrelevant distinction when you put the focus on the value of the life they entail. You put your own bodily autonomy rights over other people’s all the times, and in this case women are putting their bodily autonomy rights over a life does not have the sufficient properties to deserve specifics rights.
It's irrelevant because it's convenient for you to draw two ENTIRELY different scenarios of murder and an inaction as the precise same thing. Bodily autonomy is put over another's life because they are ALREADY dying, and because it isn't under the definition of murder. 
--> @triangle.128k
Congrats, you literally explained to yourself why they're separate scenarios and an absolutely illogical comparison.
They’re only different scenarios if your draw arbitrary ethical distinctions. The end result in both cases is you do something that directly leads to an additional death in the world. Simply asserting that they’re different, then sticking your fingers in your ears isn’t particularly helpful to anyone.

It's irrelevant because it's convenient for you to draw two ENTIRELY different scenarios of murder and an inaction as the precise same thing. Bodily autonomy is put over another's life because they are ALREADY dying, and because it isn't under the definition of murder. 
They are not precisely the same thing, they are broadly the same thing. They are not entirely different scenarios, they are variations of scenarios where an individual agency of one brings about a death of another.

Like I said; i can do exactly the same thing and arbitrarily assert any number of differences. An unborn fetus is not a person, and is simply an organism being grown by the mother that will end up human, but isn’t now - so it isn’t murder.





--> @Ramshutu
They’re only different scenarios if your draw arbitrary ethical distinctions. The end result in both cases is you do something that directly leads to an additional death in the world. Simply asserting that they’re different, then sticking your fingers in your ears isn’t particularly helpful to anyone.
They are only arbitrary according to you given that they are the fundamental distinctions that show why this is a faulty comparison. 

They are not precisely the same thing, they are broadly the same thing. They are not entirely different scenarios, they are variations of scenarios where an individual agency of one brings about a death of another.

Like I said; i can do exactly the same thing and arbitrarily assert any number of differences. An unborn fetus is not a person, and is simply an organism being grown by the mother that will end up human, but isn’t now - so it isn’t murder.
You don't bring about the death of somebody by an inaction. An inaction isn't murder. An action is murder. Refusing to save a dying person for your organs does not fall under the definition of murder. 

And nice mental gymnastics and incoherency. "Oh they're the same scenario so abortion is justified." But wait no, "nevermind it isn't life anyways so yeah my point stands." Make up your mind.


--> @triangle.128k
Almost every definition of murder requires the death to be illegal. So by that definition, abortion isn’t murder at all anywhere where it is legal. It’s just the usage of emotive language to try and appeal to emotion.

I would additionally state, again: that it need not be illegal either as an unborn fetus is a non-person being grown in the body of another. There is no reason to believe that a human being grown in this way warrants rights, or personhood; again its an appeal to emotion that largely ignores all the differences - something you seem to be picking and chosinf


The issue here is that you’re trying to manufacture some absolute line : there’s is no such line. Letting someone die, bringing about the death of another, intentionally with the purpose of killing, intentionally knowing that the death will occur, and all variations therein are all graduations of ethical or unethical conduct.

There is no line that makes one okay and one not. It’s just people like you arbitrarily asserting that there is some magical line.



Let’s be clear there is no pro life, and pro choice: just two groups of people with marginally different criteria for when it’s okay to end a human life or not.






--> @triangle.128k, @Ramshutu
The issue here is that you’re trying to manufacture some absolute line : there’s is no such line......There is no line that makes one okay and one not. It’s just people like you arbitrarily asserting that there is some magical line.
Consulting adults line

Conception i.e. fertilization of the egg line

Heartbeat line

Active brain nervous system line

Inside the woman or outside the woman

Breathing on own or respriatory

Umbilicahord still attached or not.

(*(i)*)  have a natural right to life, but not  birth, as my pregnant-woman-vessel  for my birth,  has the inherent right to terminate my non-breathing life, as it is attached to her in a most intimately physical way and (*(i)*) have to say, that, if she intends to terminate me, I prefer to be sooner rather than later.
This pregnant woman speaks for me  because I am ONE with her and I have no voice ----in fact I dont breath air--   and barely know what a brain, heart, feet function is.

To breathe INward is become IN-spirited....( * (i) * ) i-breathe { ( o ) } initially IN then OUT ergo, I am somebody, with individual status and now that I am free, I choose to feed off the nearest breasts { (.)(.) } that I can get my lips around.

......(* (i) *)........bilateral
.....(  . )( )......bosom buddies
.........( . )........umbilicus connection point
........\*Y*/.........sex internalized or externalized
......../......\.........leg, fin or side arm
....._/........\_......leg, fin or tail fluke { cetacean }

--> @Polytheist-Witch
Now I am a leftist? Maybe you need to quit telling women what to do with their own bodies and sex life. Bigot.
The closest the right comes to saying how a woman should use her body is requesting they don't murder babies with them, but we also equest that males don't murder babies as well, so we are pretty consistent at applying the principle no matter what genitalia you have.

--> @Polytheist-Witch
Now I am a leftist? Maybe you need to quit telling women what to do with their own bodies and sex life. Bigot.
The closest the right comes to saying how a woman should use her body is requesting they don't murder babies with them, but we also equest that males don't murder babies as well, so we are pretty consistent at applying the principle no matter what genitalia you have.

--> @Wylted
...they don't murder babies....
Are you on or off some prescribed medication?  A conceptualized egg or any term of fetus/baby is not and independent invidudal that breaths and conntected to woman via umbilichord and floating in womb of liquied.

Your obviously not playing with a full deck on this issue.  When you want grasp reality and play fair, please share.  We wont hold our breath waiting for any rational, logical common sense from you. 

--> @mustardness
Your an idiot, baby's are dependant on a mother whether they are in the womb or not and a baby 5 minutes after being born is really no different than one 5 minutes prior to being born. 

The fact you think it is okay to murder children makes you evil. 

--> @mustardness
 A conceptualized egg or any term of fetus/baby is not and independent invidudal that breaths and conntected to woman via umbilichord and floating in womb of liquied.
Alabama's heartbeat bill only banned abortions after 6 weeks.  The bill does not protect zygotes.  It protects when the fetus has brainwaves, about 6 weeks into pregnancy.

I don't think I got an answer from you but when do you want abortion to be legal up to?  20 weeks?  Viability?  Birth?
--> @Alec
I don't think I got an answer from you but when do you want abortion to be legal up to? 
i want you and Wylted brain to keep your friggin noses out of pregnant womans bodily business unless she gives you permisison to stick your noses there.  Read my lips/text and stop your friggin immoral attack on pregnant women. 

You need to go back to immoral backwooded-dessert -slands from which you came and stay there til you can learn to read my lips/text and begin to grasp what moral integrity is. Please
@ragweed
Who will you be asking permission from to have any growth removed from your body. Your brain is safe.
--> @mustardness, @disgusted
When do you support abortion rights up until?
--> @Alec
I support every woman's right to bodily autonomy. Who will you submit permission to if you need any medical procedure? You don't understand what the abortion question is you keep mentioning babies and babies are not even a part of the question. Anti abortionists always avoid the real question.
--> @Alec
When do you support abortion rights up until?
Seriously. Are you and Wylted brain both on or off prescription medications?

Read my lips/text. Get you friggin nose out of a womans bodily business unless she gives gives your her consent to stick your nose in her bodily  business.

What part of those comments do you not grasp? 

PLease, have somehuman decency and

Keep your friggin nose

Out of a womans

Bodily business

Unless she gives you

Her consent, to allow you to

Stick your nose

Into her bodily business.


This above is simple to grasp, unless a human as mental issues and has been repeated for your problematic brains and lack of moral integrity.

Several people have made this clear, in many different ways, to your immoral, infantile brains. Now, STOP IT!







--> @disgusted
you keep mentioning babies and babies are not even a part of the question.
Science confirms that a fetus is a human being at 6 weeks.  Babies are part of the question.

Anti abortionists always avoid the real question.
What's the real question?
--> @mustardness
I'll assume that you support abortion rights up until birth.  If this is wrong, you can deny it and state an alternative position.

Get you friggin nose out of a womans bodily business
A woman cannot be trusted with a fetus.  The government needs to prevent women from having abortions.  Women don't deserve the right to kill a fetus especially since science confirms that a fetus is a human being.  A 6 week old fetus has a different blood type and different DNA then the mother.

PLease, have somehuman decency
Your being a hypocrite by just yelling at anyone who disagrees with you.

 Now, STOP IT!
Maybe when women stop having abortions then I don't have to tell them what to do.  Abortion is evil and it must be stopped.  Just say no to premarital sex.  It has no long term benefits and it produces only misery for one party or another.  It leads to STD spreading and unintended pregnancies.  It must be punishable with a fine.

Several people have made this clear, in many different ways, to your immoral, infantile brains
The only SJWs on this site are you and mustardness, this doesn't count as several.  Just because you guys don't value the sanctity of life doesn't mean that pro lifers do.  Maybe the dye that you put in your hair is messing up your brain.