4 ms·

> Does anyone think Republicans / conservatives actually give a shit about unborn babies? I don't. What I think they do like is having plenty of workers availab

> Does anyone think Republicans / conservatives actually give a shit about unborn babies? I don't. What I think they do like is having plenty of workers available who have no choice but to accept bad working conditions, low pay, multiple temp jobs without insurance, etc. Yes, definitely. Do you a very homogeneous social group or something? The alternative would be that all pro-lifers are conniving bad faith actors. I shouldn’t have to say more for that to seem very suspicious and certainly incorrect. Pro-choice and pro-life positions are both quite logically consistent, internally. Try and reckon with that.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
lotsofpulp 4y ago
- tmn 4y ago
  That’s fine, but you’re a using a bad faith interpretation. You just admitted as much. The point isn’t that you’re wrong. It’s that they aren’t thinking what you’re projecting them to think.
- DiggyJohnson 4y ago
  It seems like you think you and those that share your positions are not the only one that wants what's best for the world. I assure you that's incorrect. I'm pro-choice, but this side of the debate is easily tempted to oversimplify and assume pro-lifers are evil idiots.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    How am I over simplifying? There is simple, material, demonstrable harm to women from banning healthcare. No one was going around terminating 36 week fetuses for the fun of it. Harming another living person purely for your assumptions (religious beliefs) qualifies as evil intent. This is a highly complex topic that is between highly educated doctors who would know what the consequences are and the women to those consequences are happening.
    - jlawson 4y ago
      Are you really unaware that pro-life people consider the unborn baby/fetus a "living person"?
      - lotsofpulp 4y ago
        I am perfectly aware. It does not change my opinion that sacrificing the life or quality of life of a woman for the fetus is not an acceptable position.
        jlawson 4y ago
        It just seems like you're not even registering what the other side thinks. Like, a total non-awareness or non-acknowledgement of what the disagreement even is. You're simply assuming the conclusion - that the fetus/baby isn't a child in the normal sense the way a born baby is a child. The rest of your arguments flow from the notion of how ridiculous it is to make a woman sacrifice to save a non-child fetus. And from your premises, you are correct. But that's missing the point entirely. Pro-lifers don't think it's a non-child fetus. They think it's a child. For them, it's the same as sacrificing to save the life of a born baby.
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      > How am I over simplifying? You seem to be assuming that your perspective on the issue is the only correct one, and therefore no one can legitimately think differently. In cases like this, that's only tenable by straw-manning or totally ignoring alternate perspectives. Someone can start with different basic assumptions, and proceed to arrive at a totally different yet self-consistent perspective than yours. With the abortion debate, one important different assumption is if fetuses humanized or dehumanized. I think I pretty frequently see errors in understanding that result from people taking their side's assumptions, and then trying to derive the other side's positions from that false starting point.
      - lotsofpulp 4y ago
        I know what the other side’s assumptions are, I even mentioned as such in my comment. They can keep their assumptions to themselves, and use them to make decisions about their life. But I do not see why I should care. If someone’s assumptions lead to harm for my non fetus daughter, wife, sister, or any woman, then that is all that is needed to for me to write off their point of view.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

lotsofpulp 4y ago

tmn 4y ago
That’s fine, but you’re a using a bad faith interpretation. You just admitted as much. The point isn’t that you’re wrong. It’s that they aren’t thinking what you’re projecting them to think.
DiggyJohnson 4y ago
It seems like you think you and those that share your positions are not the only one that wants what's best for the world. I assure you that's incorrect. I'm pro-choice, but this side of the debate is easily tempted to oversimplify and assume pro-lifers are evil idiots.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  How am I over simplifying? There is simple, material, demonstrable harm to women from banning healthcare. No one was going around terminating 36 week fetuses for the fun of it. Harming another living person purely for your assumptions (religious beliefs) qualifies as evil intent. This is a highly complex topic that is between highly educated doctors who would know what the consequences are and the women to those consequences are happening.
  - jlawson 4y ago
    Are you really unaware that pro-life people consider the unborn baby/fetus a "living person"?
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      I am perfectly aware. It does not change my opinion that sacrificing the life or quality of life of a woman for the fetus is not an acceptable position.
      - jlawson 4y ago
        It just seems like you're not even registering what the other side thinks. Like, a total non-awareness or non-acknowledgement of what the disagreement even is. You're simply assuming the conclusion - that the fetus/baby isn't a child in the normal sense the way a born baby is a child. The rest of your arguments flow from the notion of how ridiculous it is to make a woman sacrifice to save a non-child fetus. And from your premises, you are correct. But that's missing the point entirely. Pro-lifers don't think it's a non-child fetus. They think it's a child. For them, it's the same as sacrificing to save the life of a born baby.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > How am I over simplifying? You seem to be assuming that your perspective on the issue is the only correct one, and therefore no one can legitimately think differently. In cases like this, that's only tenable by straw-manning or totally ignoring alternate perspectives. Someone can start with different basic assumptions, and proceed to arrive at a totally different yet self-consistent perspective than yours. With the abortion debate, one important different assumption is if fetuses humanized or dehumanized. I think I pretty frequently see errors in understanding that result from people taking their side's assumptions, and then trying to derive the other side's positions from that false starting point.
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      I know what the other side’s assumptions are, I even mentioned as such in my comment. They can keep their assumptions to themselves, and use them to make decisions about their life. But I do not see why I should care. If someone’s assumptions lead to harm for my non fetus daughter, wife, sister, or any woman, then that is all that is needed to for me to write off their point of view.