• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Forced pregnancy is enslavement.[W:607]

Status
Not open for further replies.
minnie616

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
25,748
Reaction score
29,813
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
From a blog:
Forced pregnancy is enslavement. We often speak of it in the polite terminology of “choice” but that apparently doesn't help the pro-Life community to understand the passion in reverse. They seem only to be able to imagine some bloodthirsty passion for killing little babies and so they see the argument as one-sided. But there is another side, a side involving a very personal choice that is simply not the business of lawmakers to do anything other than unconditionally support in the name of personal liberty.
Click to expand...

http://open.salon.com/blog/kent_pitman/2009/12/08/i_am_not_pro-slavery_are_you
 
Re: I'm not pro-slavery. Are You?

Unless a woman was raped it is disingenuous to call anything a forced pregnancy.
 
Forced pregnancy is enslavement.

From a blog:
Forced pregnancy is enslavement. We often speak of it in the polite terminology of “choice” but that apparently doesn't help the pro-Life community to understand the passion in reverse. They seem only to be able to imagine some bloodthirsty passion for killing little babies and so they see the argument as one-sided. But there is another side, a side involving a very personal choice that is simply not the business of lawmakers to do anything other than unconditionally support in the name of personal liberty.
Click to expand...
 
minnie616 said:
From a blog:
Click to expand...

This blogger is a complete moron.

Not being allowed to kill other humans in aggression is not slavery.

Furthermore, killing other humans in aggression is not something that should be discussed in terms of personal choice or liberty. Freedom of choice is relevant when the choice is personal and only affects you; as this is not the case in abortion, freedom of choice has never been a relevant consideration in this abortion issue and never will be.
 
Re: I'm not pro-slavery. Are You?

Crovax said:
Unless a woman was raped it is disingenuous to call anything a forced pregnancy.
Click to expand...

I disagree.

To deny access to abortion is to force pregnancy
 
Re: I'm not pro-slavery. Are You?

You just made a thread about the same topic two minutes ago, to repeat an argument from a thread that was just locked.

You have already spammed this stupid article into virtually every thread in this subforum anyway. It does not warrant its own thread.

* * *

Kent Pitman is a liar. He is pro-abortion, so he is pro-slavery. You are pro-slavery.

The "right" to abortion is predicated on denying personhood from human beings and treating them as their mother's property to be killed and disposed of on a whim.

The system in which human beings are denied personhood and treated as another human's property... yeah, that was called slavery.
 
JayDubya said:
Not being allowed to kill other humans in aggression is not slavery.

Furthermore, killing other humans in aggression is not something that should be discussed in terms of personal choice or liberty. Freedom of choice is relevant when the choice is personal and only affects you; as this is not the case in abortion, freedom of choice has never been a relevant consideration in this abortion issue and never will be.
Click to expand...
I take it, then, that you would leave yourself tethered to the violinist?
 
Re: I'm not pro-slavery. Are You?

minnie616 said:
I disagree.

To deny access to abortion is to force pregnancy
Click to expand...

so being "forced" to deal with the consequences of your actions is slavery to you? So then you must agree that paying child support is a form of economic slavery, a "forced" parenthood
 
iangb said:
I take it, then, that you would leave yourself tethered to the violinist?
Click to expand...

Not clicking the link, but I recall the argument; Judith whatever-her-name is likewise a complete moron.

The situation she describes is completely irrelevant to the topic of abortion.

I would rip myself free and shoot the home invading violin society dead, and be justified in doing so.

I didn't create the violinist. I am not his parent and he is not my offspring. I have no obligation towards him.
 
Last edited:
JayDubya said:
Not clicking the link, but I recall the argument; Judith whatever-her-name is likewise a complete moron.

The situation she describes is completely irrelevant to the topic of abortion.

I would rip myself free and shoot the home invading violin society dead, and be justified in doing so.

I didn't create the violinist. I am not his parent and he is not my offspring. I have no obligation towards him.
Click to expand...

That was not the claim you made. You said, and I quote

"Not being allowed to kill other humans in aggression is not slavery.

...

Furthermore, killing other humans in aggression is not something that should be discussed in terms of personal choice or liberty."

Here, on the other hand, you have stated that you are perfectly happy to kill the violinist in aggression.

The two do not add up.
 
iangb said:
That was not the claim you made. You said, and I quote

"Not being allowed to kill other humans in aggression is not slavery."
Click to expand...

Precisely.

Here, on the other hand, you have stated that you are perfectly happy to kill the violinist in aggression.
Click to expand...

Bull****.

Neither shooting the fanboys nor removing myself from the contraption is killing anyone in aggression. None of them have any right to be on my property, nor to have abducted me. As I recall, the scenario just describes waking up this way.

Edit:

I did not cause the violinist to exist, nor did I put him in this dependent state. He is not my offspring and I have no obligation to him. If he dies from removing myself from the contraption, that is so completely not my problem, and it is not in any way me killing him, let alone in aggression.

Him dying from whatever medical deficiency he suffers is his problem, and his death will be entirely from natural causes; to whatever extent the contraption may accelerate his death, then the fanboy society should be criminally culpable.


Comparing that to deliberately paying someone to kill a third party, tearing their body apart with shearing force or impaling their head with scissors and vacuuming out their brains...

... well, that's more than a little intellectually dishonest.
 
Last edited:
What happened to the Joy of Motherhood?

What a sick twisted bunch of so-called humans the pro-abortion crowd has become.
 
Pregnancy isn't a natural consequence of having sex; it's a punishment, and its perpetrator must be killed.
 
JayDubya said:
Neither shooting the fanboys nor removing myself from the contraption is killing anyone in aggression. None of them have any right to be on my property, nor to have abducted me. As I recall, the scenario just describes waking up this way.
Click to expand...
Removing yourself from the contraption is killing the violinist. You have already defined aggression in previous posts as 'the initiation of force' - and you will need force in order to remove yourself. As such, you are killing the violinist in aggression, by initiating a force which causes their death.

Edit:

I did not cause the violinist to exist, nor did I put him in this dependent state. He is not my offspring and I have no obligation to him. If he dies from removing myself from the contraption, that is so completely not my problem, and it is not in any way me killing him, let alone in aggression.
Click to expand...
If you had not acted, he would not have died. This means that your actions directly caused his death - you will have killed him. Whether you are responsible for his dependence or not is irrelevant.


Comparing that to deliberately paying someone to kill a third party, tearing their body apart with shearing force or impaling their head with scissors and vacuuming out their brains...

... well, that's more than a little intellectually dishonest.
Click to expand...
No more dishonest than implying that standard abortions involve practices you have described here.
 
nota bene said:
Pregnancy isn't a natural consequence of having sex; it's a punishment, and its perpetrator must be killed.
Click to expand...

Having sex is not consent to gestating and giving birth.

But to deny access to abortion is to force pregnancy.

Having sex is not consent to have a baby any more than driving is consent to be killed in a car accident.
Whatever fiction the Religious Right may want to spin, there is more sex being had in the world than for the purpose of procreating—even by Christians.

Nor is getting pregant proof of lack of birth control. Even if it were, to suggest that the penalty for such a simple mistake should be months or years of servitude is disproportionate.

Birth control methods fail. Abstenance would avoid birth control, but again it's out of the bounds of appropriateness to be telling people they should abstain just because other birth control methods are not perfect. The Pope's proscription of the use of “artificial” birth control notwithstanding, it is essential that people be allowed and even encouraged use birth control. There's a population explosion ongoing, if you didn't know. Even married people need birth control to keep from having babies at a time they're not prepared for, to keep from bankrupting their families, and to keep our finite world from being overpopulated. But birth control fails and the penalty must not be slavery.

So let's sum up, shall we? Sex is a human need. Having sex, even with birth control, risks pregnancy but is not consent to have a child. And yet some would insist women carry even unwanted pregnancies againt their will.
Click to expand...

I am not Pro-Slavery. Are you? - Kent Pitman - Open Salon
 
nota bene said:
Pregnancy isn't a natural consequence of having sex; it's a punishment, and its perpetrator must be killed.
Click to expand...

Yes, of course. It is known.
 
Last edited:
JayDubya said:
Not being allowed to kill other humans in aggression is not slavery.

Furthermore, killing other humans in aggression is not something that should be discussed in terms of personal choice or liberty. Freedom of choice is relevant when the choice is personal and only affects you; as this is not the case in abortion, freedom of choice has never been a relevant consideration in this abortion issue and never will be.
Click to expand...

wrong thread, the topic is abortion and forced pregnancy
you post has nothing to do with either of those things
 
Re: I'm not pro-slavery. Are You?

Crovax said:
so being "forced" to deal with the consequences of your actions is slavery to you? So then you must agree that paying child support is a form of economic slavery, a "forced" parenthood
Click to expand...

Yep.. it is part of the contract you sign when you dip your wick. If you aren't married, and you don't want to pay child support, find out what your partner's attitude is about giving birth and abortion before you get her pregnant. Birth control isn't just a concern for the women too. And, in 2017, it is expected that Vasagel will be passed by the FDA, which is basically a reversable vasectomy, by putting plugs in place. Take time to makes you got that, rather than have to worry about 'servitude'.
 
Re: I'm not pro-slavery. Are You?

Crovax said:
Unless a woman was raped it is disingenuous to call anything a forced pregnancy.
Click to expand...

accept when there is force :shrug:
then by defintion it would be factually incorrect to call it anything else
 
WCH said:
What happened to the Joy of Motherhood?

What a sick twisted bunch of so-called humans the pro-abortion crowd has become.
Click to expand...

Just think about the wonderful joy of poverty, and being with an abusive partner.. WEEE.
 
Re: I'm not pro-slavery. Are You?

AGENT J said:
accept when there is force :shrug:
then by defintion it would be factually incorrect to call it anything else
Click to expand...

So you also agree that being forced to pay child support is slavery?
 
Re: I'm not pro-slavery. Are You?

Crovax said:
1.)so being "forced" to deal with the consequences of your actions is slavery to you?
2.) So then you must agree that paying child support is a form of economic slavery, a "forced" parenthood
Click to expand...

1.) key word is force
2.) yes, like abortion laws there should also be a time frame when the man has to decide if he wants to claim his parental rights. I have said the law needs adjusted in this area many times

again I can only go by the defintions of words i cant just make them up
 
Re: I'm not pro-slavery. Are You?

Crovax said:
So you also agree that being forced to pay child support is slavery?
Click to expand...

yes it is a type of slavery and in cases entrapment, i already answered this and have spoke to this topic many times before
 
iangb said:
Removing yourself from the contraption is killing the violinist.
Click to expand...

Bull****.

His medical deficiencies are killing him. Those are not my responsibility in the slightest.

To whatever extent the machine itself is set up such that removing it suddenly kills the violinist, that is the criminal responsibility of his fanboy society.

You have already defined aggression in previous posts as 'the initiation of force' - and you will need force in order to remove yourself.
Click to expand...

The Violinist society initiated force against me. Using force against them and removing myself from the machine is not aggressive in any way and completely justifiable.

If you had not acted, he would not have died.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. I have no obligation to provide him with anything. He is not my offspring, I am not his parent, I did not create him nor did I put him in the dependent state in which he finds himself.

Removing myself is not killing him, period.

Whether you are responsible for his dependence or not is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Bull****. It is centrally important.

He cannot survive without the machine. If I am responsible for making him such that he cannot live without this machine, that is a significant moral factor. Of course, I am not, which is equally significant.

No more dishonest than implying that standard abortions involve practices you have described here.
Click to expand...

Actually, I described the most common practice there as well as a more exotic one. Unless you think that shearing forces are not typically involved, in which case you'd be hilariously wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom