The "existence" of gender has only been verbalized for a handful of decades. Pretty much everyone recognizes sex, and many places heavily discriminate based on sex, barely anybody on the planet recognizes gender as something more than sex discrimination.
This is just 100% categorically historically untrue. I mean, hijra as a distinct gender identity are attested in the thirteenth century. And there are countless other ancient & classical examples of people who were biologically one sex but were considered to be the other in "spirit" or the equivalent.
There is a widespread belief that gender and sex are inseparably linked, which is not the same thing as believing one exists and the other doesn't.
The trans position is trying to break gender norms. That's kinda backwards from what you are talking about
Practicing gender norms detached from sex and still calling them gendered is not breaking gender norms.
I actually completely agree. I don't get tradtional people or transpeople in this case
Yeah, bodily autonomy and free choice is key. Want to be the most submissive trad Catholic housewife on the planet? As long as you can make that choice freely and without coercion, fucking go for it. Idiots trying to ban people from being able to keep their own body how they see fit is bullshit
Your story could be made up too....the story about the meowing was literally made up. The TikTok account said so. So, yes?
It's not like laws are different between states or anything
Everywhere that restricts abortion access due to circumstances
I've answered this question a lot and the answer is yes
There's actually a *lot* of writing on this subject
US women are being jailed for having miscarriages
More and more American women are facing prison for allegedly harming their unborn baby by using drugs.www.bbc.com
"Other places ban abortions" is not an argument for banning it. Why should it not be allowed?
I don't know, but the law is written to allow it, why should something be allowed if most everyone thinks it's bad? Why would anyone be against abortions when it's done to keep the mother alive, nobody believes that outside of a very small extreme. What state has made a law that requires a woman to go through a pregnancy if a doctor says it's unsafe or even possibly unsafe (like say a 10% chance because of some warning sign)? The reason I made the entire thread was this would be some hot topic here if this was a normally republican law that does nothing. People here are against the Florida parental rights law when they said it's not even taught at those grades anywhere. So, the law does nothing and you're so against it? If no one has ever had an abortion at 8 months, then this law does nothing. Why get on your soapbox over the Florida law but not this Colorado law? That is my point.
It's what you call a witch hunt
Prove it
Florida's
Not in Colorado, no
19%, according to Pew
www.pewresearch.org
Bullshit. Either you're blatantly lying or you just had a stroke
Spoiler alert, you fail to list one
Yes, that's the bit you seem to miss
Don't care. Logical fallacy to argue for popularity
Don't care, neither of them have the right to use the mother's body as medical equipment, permanently changing it and risking their death in the process
Fetus's minutes before birth aren't killed during an abortion procedure unless something has gone profoundly wrong and it's the only way to save a mother's life. You *really* don't know how this shit works, huh.
You live in a world where GOP politicians have made multiple attempts and arguments to ban abortions in the case of entropic pregnancies. Which are non-viable pregnancies which result in death for the pregnant person
People *do* have abortions at 8 months. People don't have wholly elective lol random murder fetish abortions at 8 months like you imply. Adding in governmental hurdles and time sinks in critical situations, then sending cops around to harass grieving would-be mothers is evil and is what people who want to ban abortions want. In practice if not in theory.
I'm honestly not sure what some of these responses are specifically to. Most of the developed world does have restrictions on abortions, the vast majority of the American public thinks there should be restrictions on abortions. I don't understand how this is like WMDs or witch hunts in any way. What evidence is there is all these EU countries of atrocities happening to women over standard abortion restrictions?
I don't care to prove it. There's usually always an example of something happening somewhere so if disprove yours, I'm sure there's another example; hell, I listed an actual known example myself. You story is just a "he said, she said" at this point until there's more to the story. It's a Schrodinger's cat right now.Prove it
Florida's
Not in Colorado, no
19%, according to Pew
America's Abortion Quandary
A majority of Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, but many are open to restrictions; many opponents of legal abortion say it should be legal in some circumstances.
Bullshit. Either you're blatantly lying or you just had a stroke
Spoiler alert, you fail to list one
Yes, that's the bit you seem to miss
Don't care. Logical fallacy to argue for popularity
Don't care, neither of them have the right to use the mother's body as medical equipment, permanently changing it and risking their death in the process
Fetus's minutes before birth aren't killed during an abortion procedure unless something has gone profoundly wrong and it's the only way to save a mother's life. You *really* don't know how this shit works, huh.
Besides, it's already legal under Colorado law. The new one just says the Federal Government can fuck off if the feds decide on a national ban. Like how weed legalization works. *You* are the one that wants a new law, *you* get to argue why it should happen.
You live in a world where GOP politicians have made multiple attempts and arguments to ban abortions in the case of entropic pregnancies. Which are non-viable pregnancies which result in death for the pregnant person
People *do* have abortions at 8 months. People don't have wholly elective lol random murder fetish abortions at 8 months like you imply. Adding in governmental hurdles and time sinks in critical situations, then sending cops around to harass grieving would-be mothers is evil and is what people who want to ban abortions want. In practice if not in theory.
You're so mad that you posted a factual untruth and got called on it, it's hilarious. Do litter boxes next
is too long to be quoted in a forum post.
So, if a law makes an exception for "health of the mother" for abortion, then there's no actual process for a hospital to determine that? Nothing that takes time for a hospital administrator to work through?
1-in-5 is not a tiny minority. And the majority of the Colorado legislature decided to tell the federal government to pound sand if they made a federal abortion ban, which is also democracy. In your view, interracial marriage would've been illegal until the '90s when it finally nudged over 50% acceptability.
And you've catastrophically misread them. Those laws are being weaponized against people who have miscarriages because the prosecutors want to criminalize abortions.
Not really, you just said that other people have a right to someone else's body for ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ reasons.
Yes. Lots of people can like an illogical thing. You're on a gaming forum, this idea shouldn't be hard to grasp.
Glad to see you actually hate the concept of bodily autonomy. What other major surgery should the government be allowed to force on people who are not you?
Why?
Every pregnancy involves massive changes to the mother's body. You want to force people to go through that.
Not on everything, not necessarily. That's why we have the term "tyranny of the majority". There are usually supposed to be safeguards that prevent the majority overriding and abusing the rights and protections of the minority.
I literally posted a story proving your point but you get mad that I'm not accepting another story proving your point because your story is still unproven?
You don't get points for saying a lie to prove that people lie when you believed the lie, my dude.
If laws were simple, we wouldn't have lawyers
Abortions being illegal, so the hospital has to run potential exceptions past the legal department. And the financial department, just in case they don't have the money to fight the lawsuit in the first place
Because that's what the GOP wants. Pence, among others, have said so out loud
Yes, what in the "abortions are murder" laws would lead to somebody having a miscarriage being arrested for murder. It's a goddamned mystery
Don't care, they're bad laws
And they're bad laws. Defend them or don't.
According to what and why?
That's a bit misleading - the chainsaw you're talking about (essentially a kind of modified wire saw, later versions driven by a handcrank that were sort of proto-bonesaws) was a surgical tool originally used for an alternative to the C-section that had a much higher rate of survival for the mother. The chain saw wasn't created to rip women apart to get at the baby, but as a way to do less damage and risk of slippage than using a knife when cutting through cartilage for this alternative procedure. The procedure was increasingly popular until we started using things like antiseptics and other improvements to medical technique that dramatically reduced the risks of a C-section.
I'm literally agreeing with you that such things happen and you're still fucking arguing...
Do you not know how bureaucracies function? If there's a exception, the hospital has to argue for the exception
Want to try that question again? I've got GOP politicians saying they want a nationwide ban, do they have to actually pass a law before you give a shit?
You said that about Roe
Logical thinking is not your strong suit.
Because they force people to be medical equipment against their will, forcing them to permanently alter their bodies and risk death. Pretty sure I've covered this extensively
At some point you're gonna have to engage with the fact that I do not give a single shit what the law currently is, so you should stop using that logical fallacy as an argument. The only time medical procedures should be banned is when they are happening to unwilling participants
"Simple Deontology" says that a 10 year old rape victim denied an abortion in Ohio is immoral for breaking the rules and getting an abortion in Indiana.
Either copy/paste what you say the law says or shut up about it. Give me facts not something something bureaucracies.
Hospitals waiting on critical care until they become critical enough to be legally viable, increasing risk
Ain't got a lot of choices, champ
Ain't great a lot of the time. Look at who had to die horrifically to get access to abortions over there
I *am*, you weirdo. The fuck are you talking about?
That's not "simple deontology" in the slightest. Simple deontology says killing an innocent person is immoral, no ifs, ands, or buts. So *if* you accept the argument that a fetus is an innocent person *and* you actually subscribe to simple deontology, than that 10 year old rape victim committed an immoral act. Every country makes exceptions because they're run by people who live in reality and not by the edicts of Simple Deontology. That's, at best, Threshold Deontology, and that's subjective as shit.
