3 ms·

We can rule out empathy for most of pro-life folk, by what disturbingly little empathy they have for those same children post-birth.

zackees 4y ago
- rfd4sgmk8u 4y ago
  "We're pro-life." It's like, well what does that make me? You know what I mean? You're so pro-life! You're so pro-life, do me a fucking favor. Don't block med clinics, okay? Lock arms, and block cemeteries. Let's see how fucking committed you are to this premise. "She can't come in." "She's ninety-six, she was hit by a bus!" "There's options!" "What, do we got to have her stuffed? What are you talking about, she's dead!" "We're pro-life, get her out of that casket! Get her out! She's not going, we're pro-life people. There'll be no death on this planet." -- Bill Hicks, 1993
  - leereeves 4y ago
    What are you or Bill Hicks trying to say there? If it were possible to prevent deaths of old age or to resurrect the dead, would you be against it?
    - rfd4sgmk8u 4y ago
      The earlier part is: "Boy, I've never seen an issue so divisive. You ever see it, it's like a civil war, isn't it? Even amongst my friends, who are all very intelligent! They are totally divided on abortion! It's unbelievable! Some of my friends, for instance, think these pro-life people are annoying idiots. Other of my friends think these pro-life people are evil fucks. How are we going to come to a consensus? You ought to hear the arguments around my house; "they're annoying, they're idiots, they're evil, they're fucks!" Brothers, sisters, come together! Can't we once just join hands and think of them as evil annoying idiot fucks?" -- Bill Hicks, 1993
tjs8rj 4y ago
The pro life position is really simple: 1. Baby murder is wrong 2. Abortion is murdering a baby 3. Therefore abortion is wrong That’s it. There is no requirement to meet some perceived bar of empathy beyond that for this to be a good faith argument. “I bet you think shooting innocent people in the head is wrong, but yet you don’t volunteer at the soup kitchen every weekend, so do you ACTUALLY care about innocent people or are you just trying to control others?” Do you see how that’s a ridiculous non-sequitur? That’s the argument you just made against pro life people.
- autoexec 4y ago
  There's a difference between not volunteering at the soup kitchen every weekend even when you don't like innocent people getting shot in the head, and actively fighting to stop staving people from getting food when you say you don't like innocent people getting shot in the head. You can have a deep respect for innocent life and not be willing or able to spend weekends in a soup kitchen. You can't have a deep respect for innocent life while working to keep innocent lives from being able to survive. "Baby murder is wrong" unless it's murder by exposure because the child was homeless, "screw the homeless!" the pro-life say or by starvation because screw the hungry! or by cancer, because screw the sick if they can't afford obscene medical costs! Pro-life people generally, don't care at all about the life of babies. They don't even care about murder. If baby food companies are killing kids by poisoning them with heavy metals they'll still decry any government regulations that would prevent that or hold baby food companies accountable. The Free Market can murder babies all day long. School shootings? No, we can't have sensible gun control laws proven to work in basically every developed nation around the globe! The pro-life say we just have live with those murders, nothing can be done! So tragic! They want to claim the moral high ground but they are buried deep under their own filth.
  - floxy 4y ago
    Just for the non-US persons reading along, below are a few US Federal government programs for poor people. Some states (most?) have additional programs as well for some things, or supplement federal programs. - WIC (https://www.fns.usda.gov/wic) >The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) provides federal grants to states for supplemental foods, health care referrals, and nutrition education for low-income pregnant, breastfeeding, and non-breastfeeding postpartum women, and to infants and children up to age 5 who are found to be at nutritional risk. WIC serves about half of all infants born in the United States. - Food Stamps (SNAP - https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program) - Medicaid (Health care for poor people) https://www.medicaid.gov/ - Section 8 subsidized housing (https://www.benefits.gov/benefit/710)
godshatter 4y ago
I'm not one of the "pro-life folk" (I think it's more a question of where the lines should be drawn), but I'm not seeing a lot of empathy here on this site for the fetus, which if left alone (barring medical problems) will one day become a fully-fledged person with all the rights we now currently possess. Exactly when it stops being a bundle of cells that can be removed without thought or empathy and becomes a "baby about to be born" where it should not be treated so negligently is in my mind the real question here. And don't ask me to tell you where that line is, because I have no idea. I just hate that there is no room for nuance on this topic, no matter which "side" you talk to.
- autoexec 4y ago
  > Exactly when it stops being a bundle of cells that can be removed without thought or empathy and becomes a "baby about to be born" where it should not be treated so negligently is in my mind the real question here. I avoid that issue entirely by leaving it as a matter of viability. As I've said elsewhere: As long as the mother's body is needed to sustain the life of the child, that life is subject to her whims. Her house. Her rules. The moment it can be removed and sustained without her, she should no longer have the right to abort it, only to surrender it. It doesn't matter if it's a baby or just a clump of cells, if it's literally living in and feeding off of another living person that person should have a right to decide to continue or to stop allowing that. The child's right to exist against the wishes of its mother start as soon as it can do so without her.

zackees 4y ago

rfd4sgmk8u 4y ago
"We're pro-life." It's like, well what does that make me? You know what I mean? You're so pro-life! You're so pro-life, do me a fucking favor. Don't block med clinics, okay? Lock arms, and block cemeteries. Let's see how fucking committed you are to this premise. "She can't come in." "She's ninety-six, she was hit by a bus!" "There's options!" "What, do we got to have her stuffed? What are you talking about, she's dead!" "We're pro-life, get her out of that casket! Get her out! She's not going, we're pro-life people. There'll be no death on this planet." -- Bill Hicks, 1993
- leereeves 4y ago
  What are you or Bill Hicks trying to say there? If it were possible to prevent deaths of old age or to resurrect the dead, would you be against it?
  - rfd4sgmk8u 4y ago
    The earlier part is: "Boy, I've never seen an issue so divisive. You ever see it, it's like a civil war, isn't it? Even amongst my friends, who are all very intelligent! They are totally divided on abortion! It's unbelievable! Some of my friends, for instance, think these pro-life people are annoying idiots. Other of my friends think these pro-life people are evil fucks. How are we going to come to a consensus? You ought to hear the arguments around my house; "they're annoying, they're idiots, they're evil, they're fucks!" Brothers, sisters, come together! Can't we once just join hands and think of them as evil annoying idiot fucks?" -- Bill Hicks, 1993

tjs8rj 4y ago

The pro life position is really simple: 1. Baby murder is wrong 2. Abortion is murdering a baby 3. Therefore abortion is wrong That’s it. There is no requirement to meet some perceived bar of empathy beyond that for this to be a good faith argument. “I bet you think shooting innocent people in the head is wrong, but yet you don’t volunteer at the soup kitchen every weekend, so do you ACTUALLY care about innocent people or are you just trying to control others?” Do you see how that’s a ridiculous non-sequitur? That’s the argument you just made against pro life people.

autoexec 4y ago
There's a difference between not volunteering at the soup kitchen every weekend even when you don't like innocent people getting shot in the head, and actively fighting to stop staving people from getting food when you say you don't like innocent people getting shot in the head. You can have a deep respect for innocent life and not be willing or able to spend weekends in a soup kitchen. You can't have a deep respect for innocent life while working to keep innocent lives from being able to survive. "Baby murder is wrong" unless it's murder by exposure because the child was homeless, "screw the homeless!" the pro-life say or by starvation because screw the hungry! or by cancer, because screw the sick if they can't afford obscene medical costs! Pro-life people generally, don't care at all about the life of babies. They don't even care about murder. If baby food companies are killing kids by poisoning them with heavy metals they'll still decry any government regulations that would prevent that or hold baby food companies accountable. The Free Market can murder babies all day long. School shootings? No, we can't have sensible gun control laws proven to work in basically every developed nation around the globe! The pro-life say we just have live with those murders, nothing can be done! So tragic! They want to claim the moral high ground but they are buried deep under their own filth.
- floxy 4y ago
  Just for the non-US persons reading along, below are a few US Federal government programs for poor people. Some states (most?) have additional programs as well for some things, or supplement federal programs. - WIC (https://www.fns.usda.gov/wic) >The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) provides federal grants to states for supplemental foods, health care referrals, and nutrition education for low-income pregnant, breastfeeding, and non-breastfeeding postpartum women, and to infants and children up to age 5 who are found to be at nutritional risk. WIC serves about half of all infants born in the United States. - Food Stamps (SNAP - https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program) - Medicaid (Health care for poor people) https://www.medicaid.gov/ - Section 8 subsidized housing (https://www.benefits.gov/benefit/710)

godshatter 4y ago

I'm not one of the "pro-life folk" (I think it's more a question of where the lines should be drawn), but I'm not seeing a lot of empathy here on this site for the fetus, which if left alone (barring medical problems) will one day become a fully-fledged person with all the rights we now currently possess. Exactly when it stops being a bundle of cells that can be removed without thought or empathy and becomes a "baby about to be born" where it should not be treated so negligently is in my mind the real question here. And don't ask me to tell you where that line is, because I have no idea. I just hate that there is no room for nuance on this topic, no matter which "side" you talk to.

autoexec 4y ago
> Exactly when it stops being a bundle of cells that can be removed without thought or empathy and becomes a "baby about to be born" where it should not be treated so negligently is in my mind the real question here. I avoid that issue entirely by leaving it as a matter of viability. As I've said elsewhere: As long as the mother's body is needed to sustain the life of the child, that life is subject to her whims. Her house. Her rules. The moment it can be removed and sustained without her, she should no longer have the right to abort it, only to surrender it. It doesn't matter if it's a baby or just a clump of cells, if it's literally living in and feeding off of another living person that person should have a right to decide to continue or to stop allowing that. The child's right to exist against the wishes of its mother start as soon as it can do so without her.