they are correct in their observations, but this they are making them in bad faith.
soualexandrerocha on
If that’s a libertarian writing, I am King Charles III.
everythingbeeps on
Hey guys, if you like owning things, you would have been pro-slavery.
mercutio48 on
No, she’s right, conservatives do apply the same attributes to women and girls today as they did to slaves back then.
allisjow on
Guys, are Black people working as slaves the same as fetuses gestating inside women’s bodies?
phthalo-azure on
What she’s really saying is that she’s pro-slavery because *the state is allowed to own women and their reproductive organs*.
RandomUserName24680 on
I am so sick of this argument. No one is “pro abortion”, that’s not a thing. Pro choice literally leaves a woman’s decision on what to do with her OWN BODY up to the woman and her physician.
Pro abortion literally means you don’t care if the woman wants to carry to term, you must terminate the pregnancy at any cost.
This is a stupid argument and the government should stay out of people’s private lives.
masterwad on
“States’ rights” to buy & sell & enslave people to work without pay, and “states’ rights” to force 10-year-girls to give birth to rape babies (enslaving her body to be an unwilling incubator) both strip people of their bodily autonomy, as if the state government owns their bodies (and both kinds of laws benefit rapists over rape victims).
State boundaries are completely arbitrary and artificial, effectively make-believe, unlike the physical boundaries of the human body. So human rights should rely on your humanity, not which state your body lives in. If you have no rights over your own real body, why would an artificial man-made state have any rights over your body? “In the U.S., [24 states](https://ballotpedia.org/States_without_initiative_or_referendum)do not provide for statewide citizen-initiated ballot measures”, so even “leaving it up to the states” is a lie.
Abortion is a human right that always should be legal (no matter what state you live in) because there is no human right to live inside someone else’s body without their consent, without their permission.
Abortion bans invent a new “right” out of thin air: now there is a right to live inside someone else’s body without their consent. But you can’t just cut someone else open & start living inside them.
Do I have a right to drug a man, and implant a uterus and fetus inside his body, without his consent? No, there is no human right to live inside someone else’s body without their consent. Do I have a right to drug someone, and cut out & remove a kidney, if I will die without a kidney transplant? No, there is no human right to use someone else’s body without their permission, even if you would die otherwise.
A person’s body belongs to themself, your body doesn’t belong to the state. A uterus is not government property. As long as umbilical cords exist, a fetus is an extension of a pregnant female’s body, like branches from a tree, and the government and politicians without medical degrees have no right to control her body.
And for the “Christians” who oppose abortion, Jesus made no children. Even Catholicism, which is anti-abortion, can’t point to Jesus saying abortion is a sin (because Jesus never condemned abortion, because Jews like Jesus believe life begins after birth when God fills a baby’s lungs with the breath of life, based on chapter 1 of Genesis). Yet The Pope remains childless. Before Jesus was tortured to death by crucifixion, Luke 23:28–29 (NIV) says “28 Jesus turned and said to them, ‘Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children. 29 For the time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the childless women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’”
in_animate_objects on
They never acknowledge that the reason slavery was abolished (bodily autonomy) is the very same reason abortion access needs to be legal as well.
davejjj on
If you are pro-abortion in 2024 then you believe that women are not property and should decide on their own whether to bear children. If you were pro-slavery in 1860 then you are at least 164 years old.
NoLow9281 on
Poor dear. Cant comprehend two concepts at one time.
DrChimRichaulds on
“While we’re comparing abortion to slavery”
…no…nobody’s doing that.
PaddyDelmar on
WTF? People used the bible to argue for slavery. People use the bible to argue against abortion. That is a more apt comparison.
Expensive-Layer7183 on
Libertarians are some of the craziest people you will ever meet. On the lighter side of crazy they are conservatives with a land ownership fetish on the crazier side they are sovereign citizens. Also for any of them to compare anything to being pro slave is nuts because back to the land owner love they really believe the only people that should be allowed to vote are those who own land and definitely would be some of the first to encourage bringing back slavery.
djinnisequoia on
That argument is ridiculous attempted sophistry. First of all, of course it’s human — it’s a human *zygote.* It has neither heart nor brain nor awareness. It’s a blank.
Slavery stole the precious human right of self-determination from *living, sovereign individual human beings.*
The two are not remotely analogous. Why am I not surprised? No conservative understands analogies.
Expensive-Budget-271 on
“Libertarian” that doesn’t believe in liberty. 😂😂😂
mormagils on
Lol, history major here. Just to be clear, slave owners pretty much always acknowledged that their slaves were human beings, they just justified owning them as a generally acceptable situation because of various moral, sociological, and economic factors. This doesn’t even accurately represent how slave owners thought of slavery, much less how pro-choice thinks about abortion.
Suspicious-Ad-1864 on
Woke is so tiring sometimes, don’t you think?
robilar on
To a modern day conservative there is no difference between me pointing to an apple and saying “that’s an apple” and them pointing to a doorknob and saying “that’s an apple”. Accuracy of statements doesn’t even figure in for them because they don’t care about sourcing or evidence anyway.
Sc1p10africanus on
is there a multi-verse where i can reach over and slap some sense to this dumb bish? just for the slippery slope and false equivalence logical fallacies?
21 Comments
they are correct in their observations, but this they are making them in bad faith.
If that’s a libertarian writing, I am King Charles III.
Hey guys, if you like owning things, you would have been pro-slavery.
No, she’s right, conservatives do apply the same attributes to women and girls today as they did to slaves back then.
Guys, are Black people working as slaves the same as fetuses gestating inside women’s bodies?
What she’s really saying is that she’s pro-slavery because *the state is allowed to own women and their reproductive organs*.
I am so sick of this argument. No one is “pro abortion”, that’s not a thing. Pro choice literally leaves a woman’s decision on what to do with her OWN BODY up to the woman and her physician.
Pro abortion literally means you don’t care if the woman wants to carry to term, you must terminate the pregnancy at any cost.
This is a stupid argument and the government should stay out of people’s private lives.
“States’ rights” to buy & sell & enslave people to work without pay, and “states’ rights” to force 10-year-girls to give birth to rape babies (enslaving her body to be an unwilling incubator) both strip people of their bodily autonomy, as if the state government owns their bodies (and both kinds of laws benefit rapists over rape victims).
State boundaries are completely arbitrary and artificial, effectively make-believe, unlike the physical boundaries of the human body. So human rights should rely on your humanity, not which state your body lives in. If you have no rights over your own real body, why would an artificial man-made state have any rights over your body? “In the U.S., [24 states](https://ballotpedia.org/States_without_initiative_or_referendum)do not provide for statewide citizen-initiated ballot measures”, so even “leaving it up to the states” is a lie.
Abortion is a human right that always should be legal (no matter what state you live in) because there is no human right to live inside someone else’s body without their consent, without their permission.
Abortion bans invent a new “right” out of thin air: now there is a right to live inside someone else’s body without their consent. But you can’t just cut someone else open & start living inside them.
Do I have a right to drug a man, and implant a uterus and fetus inside his body, without his consent? No, there is no human right to live inside someone else’s body without their consent. Do I have a right to drug someone, and cut out & remove a kidney, if I will die without a kidney transplant? No, there is no human right to use someone else’s body without their permission, even if you would die otherwise.
A person’s body belongs to themself, your body doesn’t belong to the state. A uterus is not government property. As long as umbilical cords exist, a fetus is an extension of a pregnant female’s body, like branches from a tree, and the government and politicians without medical degrees have no right to control her body.
And for the “Christians” who oppose abortion, Jesus made no children. Even Catholicism, which is anti-abortion, can’t point to Jesus saying abortion is a sin (because Jesus never condemned abortion, because Jews like Jesus believe life begins after birth when God fills a baby’s lungs with the breath of life, based on chapter 1 of Genesis). Yet The Pope remains childless. Before Jesus was tortured to death by crucifixion, Luke 23:28–29 (NIV) says “28 Jesus turned and said to them, ‘Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children. 29 For the time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the childless women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’”
They never acknowledge that the reason slavery was abolished (bodily autonomy) is the very same reason abortion access needs to be legal as well.
If you are pro-abortion in 2024 then you believe that women are not property and should decide on their own whether to bear children. If you were pro-slavery in 1860 then you are at least 164 years old.
Poor dear. Cant comprehend two concepts at one time.
“While we’re comparing abortion to slavery”
…no…nobody’s doing that.
WTF? People used the bible to argue for slavery. People use the bible to argue against abortion. That is a more apt comparison.
Libertarians are some of the craziest people you will ever meet. On the lighter side of crazy they are conservatives with a land ownership fetish on the crazier side they are sovereign citizens. Also for any of them to compare anything to being pro slave is nuts because back to the land owner love they really believe the only people that should be allowed to vote are those who own land and definitely would be some of the first to encourage bringing back slavery.
That argument is ridiculous attempted sophistry. First of all, of course it’s human — it’s a human *zygote.* It has neither heart nor brain nor awareness. It’s a blank.
Slavery stole the precious human right of self-determination from *living, sovereign individual human beings.*
The two are not remotely analogous. Why am I not surprised? No conservative understands analogies.
“Libertarian” that doesn’t believe in liberty. 😂😂😂
Lol, history major here. Just to be clear, slave owners pretty much always acknowledged that their slaves were human beings, they just justified owning them as a generally acceptable situation because of various moral, sociological, and economic factors. This doesn’t even accurately represent how slave owners thought of slavery, much less how pro-choice thinks about abortion.
Woke is so tiring sometimes, don’t you think?
To a modern day conservative there is no difference between me pointing to an apple and saying “that’s an apple” and them pointing to a doorknob and saying “that’s an apple”. Accuracy of statements doesn’t even figure in for them because they don’t care about sourcing or evidence anyway.
is there a multi-verse where i can reach over and slap some sense to this dumb bish? just for the slippery slope and false equivalence logical fallacies?
Stupid logic with no basis in reality whatsoever.