Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

code_archeologist t1_jasv37d wrote

Ha! Now let's watch as those states start trampling the first amendment because potential humans are more important to them than actual living women.

590

sickofthisshit t1_jaswfcd wrote

They don't care about the potential humans, really, they just want to oppress, subjugate, and punish women and girls.

258

zombiepete t1_jatk2lh wrote

The poor, really. Women who have access to money and power will get whatever kind of care they need or want regardless of the law.

97

sickofthisshit t1_jatrxh7 wrote

They also want to subjugate and control rich women, but the rich women are better suited to evade their control.

55

bilbo_swagginz_boi t1_jat4mit wrote

You can tell that by the fact they don’t care that China has aborted hundreds of millions of babies yet don’t put it on the same pedestal as killing live humans.

They clearly don’t view fetuses as people

53

Mundane-Ad-3142 t1_jaswt9v wrote

The opinion you expressed is something I see quite often. A lot of people share this view. My question to you is, why do 'they' want to punish, oppress, etc women? What do they gain from that?

It's never made sense to me but then again I haven't looked into it.

−69

sickofthisshit t1_jasyori wrote

For some reason, conservatives are generally dedicated to a power structure which puts some people over others: this usually includes patriarchy. A woman or girl in this view exists only to obey rules subjugating them to men, and their reproductive rights are limited to what men want from them.

A woman or girl who gets pregnant, in their mind, is now bound to incubate and raise the child in service of the patriarchy. If she was raped? Well, doesn't matter, a man was taking what belongs to him, the woman doesn't have the right to refuse.

The pregnancy is ectopic? Who cares, she's barely human, some other woman or girl will have to take her place after she dies in agony. As she is dying, she can take some pleasure in thinking of the children she bore and will leave behind, which will make her slightly more memorable to her widower.

Women have been dying in childbirth for millions of years; in a conservative's mind, that is how God ordered the world. Giving them modern medical care is a luxury, better spent giving the patriarch treatment for ED or whatever else he needs to keep himself alive and fertilizing brood mares.

89

DankyMcDankface420 t1_jat6m7d wrote

To add, they're often hypocritical. If it's their own loved ones or a member of their in-group the abortion is acceptable/moral. Ya know, The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion. Even worse, the hypocrisy is pretty much a feature due to in-group loyalty (and purity/sanctity to a lesser extent) being a significant moral foundation. They will see themselves (or their in-group) as good righteous people who need an abortion while others/out-groups are bad people who use abortion as "birth control".

42

CloudsOntheBrain t1_jat03h7 wrote

Well, I asked my aunt, who is religious and staunchly anti-abortion (despite having gotten one herself in her younger years), if she felt that women with unwanted pregnancies should be "punished" by being refused abortions.

She said yes. It's a consequence for having sex. If you didn't want to be pregnant, you shouldn't have had sex (or been raped, apparently). So there are people out there who really do feel this way, even if all they get out of it is a sense of "justice" for punishing a perceived sin.

In my aunt's defense, she also believes the unborn fetus is the same as a child, and I think she feels guilt over aborting her own pregnancy in the past. So her beliefs are at least nuanced in that way. But I couldn't get her to understand that saddling a child with the weight of being unwanted, and a punishment to their parents of all things, is unbelievably cruel. And she didn't care to hear about how high the abuse rate is in homes with unwanted children, or in foster homes. Or how overburdened the adoption system is.

39

Standard_Gauge t1_jat2e96 wrote

> if she felt that women with unwanted pregnancies should be "punished" by being refused abortions.

> She said yes. It's a consequence for having sex. If you didn't want to be pregnant, you shouldn't have had sex.

Your aunt, like many anti-choice zealots, seems to believe that the only women who seek abortions are "loose" single women who have casual sex with multiple men. I wish someone would bonk these people over the head with the FACT that a very large percentage of women seeking pregnancy termination are in long term monogamous relationships, many in fact married, and most have children at home. Do these people really believe that married couples should stop having sex after the two (or whatever) children that they can afford are born???

53

Blighted_Smile t1_jat9q9q wrote

Your aunt wants to deprive women of a right that she had and used. Her guilt does not excuse that. She wants women punished for the exact thing she did. True "the only moral abortion is my abortion." Sorry, but at least in this she's an awful person.

37

CloudsOntheBrain t1_jata8bh wrote

Oh, she's for sure a hypocrite, and I agree entirely. I just think there's some cognitive dissonance between what she thinks she's advocating for and the reality of her stance.

14

nevertoomuchthought t1_jat18ft wrote

I don't know your aunt but I'd bet dollars to donuts she's an unfuckable hag who nobody worth a damn would ever want to impregnate intentionally.

−33

Bovolt t1_jaujccc wrote

Psh. And they say only conservatives hate women!

10

pinetreesgreen t1_jasxddo wrote

Makes them feel powerful. Same reason why anyone wants power over anyone else. If they are in change of what women are doing they can make them do what they want, like stay home, be indebted to husbands, stay under their control. See "keep sweet" movement.

13

mrm00r3 t1_jat3y88 wrote

There’s two groups in modern conservatism, one is motivated by money and the other is motivated by money and religious extremism. To these ends, maintaining a large enough unemployed population that is reinforced by low-income births helps suppress the cost of labor, and if they have to let the religious people marry a middle schooler here and there to guarantee the vote, so be it.

In the end, the thing that they presume to gain from the heinous shit they do is money 90% of the time, stupidity, error, and religious fervor account for the rest.

Fascists aren’t obliged to make sense to an outside observer.

3

Sovrin1 t1_jaxfq1s wrote

They like how it makes their emotions feel.

1

[deleted] t1_jat740y wrote

[deleted]

−12

sickofthisshit t1_jatssdw wrote

The problem is that people can inform themselves in many ways other than posting comments on Reddit threads. It's a basic civic responsibility to inform yourself, not just lazily ask Redditors to do it for you.

It's borderline trolling, because lots of disingenuous trolls do the "just asking questions" routine over and over without any interest in actually learning or forming an opinion.

10

Mundane-Ad-3142 t1_jat8ply wrote

This is the Reddit way! I'd say give my post more time before seeing the upvote increase. Thanks for being the first!

−14

Rage_Like_Nic_Cage t1_jaszz2v wrote

> Now let's watch as those states start trampling the first amendment

that’s exactly what they’re going to do and they don’t care that they’re being hypocritical. They’ve already banning books and school courses, so this isn’t going to slow them down at all.

155

wolfie379 t1_jau7mel wrote

I’ve read about Texas introducing legislation requiring ISPs to block access to sites that provide information about getting an abortion.

65

fffirey t1_javp9mw wrote

What the FUCK. Like, it'll be easy to get around that, and they can't block everything, but thats still so dystopian. Jfc.

27

underpants-gnome t1_jaw9t4t wrote

Also sounds eerily similar to state internet censorship policies you hear about out of naughty countries that republicans describe as socialist or fascist or both. I'm sure their collective senses of hypocrisy and shame will kick in any day now...

21

wolfie379 t1_jawco1v wrote

Haven’t kicked in over another hypocrisy - American law prohibits companies from participating in the boycott of Israel (Arabs want to buy equipment but insist on no Israeli content, American company is required to report this to the government and reject the deal) but requires them to boycott Cuba.

Corrupt dictator (Batista) is overthrown, America is pissed that the new government voids contracts he signed. Corrupt dictator (Saran Hussein) is overthrown, American government demands that the new government void contracts he signed.

4

teenagesadist t1_jaus4fy wrote

They want another civil war.

First it was, you can't stop us from owning slaves, and you have to follow our rules about returning them! The north were protecting their rights under the constitution. Didn't matter to the south.

Now that toothpaste is out of the tube, but they've still got abortion. No abortion in this state! And none anywhere because God!

27

Spicy_Lobster_Roll t1_jauym2x wrote

They think they want another civil war but I’d wager they’d regret one as soon as the local Walmarts run out of stock and all their bank cards become useless plastic.

38

T-Wrex_13 t1_jav4r56 wrote

Yeah... also the prospect of losing another entire generation again puts a damper on it as well

6

GlacierWolf8Bit t1_jav0a8p wrote

It's always Christian nationalists that seem so keen on killing and oppressing as many people as possible, isn't it?

27

SmashBusters t1_jaxv1qn wrote

>They want another civil war.

No they don't. No one does.

They're just bitter because they thought the world was timeless because they live in Bumblefuck towns that are timeless.

However, we all get access to new movies and TV shows when they come out. Those are not timeless. There are too many browns and too many gays for the Bumblefolk of Bumblefuck.

Their incoherent anger over that leads them to want revenge against liberals for...being part of the free market and thus voting with their wallets on what TV shows and movies should be like.

Pay them no more heed than you would a toddler throwing a temper tantrum. Just make sure they don't get their hands on anything that could cause damage.

AND VOTE AGAINST REPUBLICANS IN EVERY ELECTION.

11

rikki-tikki-deadly t1_jasyacm wrote

Can't wait for the libertarians to meekly express their disapproval of such a policy while continuing to vote for the Republican politicans that enact such policies.

67

sickofthisshit t1_jasyuul wrote

Libertarians generally don't care about the liberty of women and girls.

73

mrm00r3 t1_jat49z8 wrote

Yeah but they’ll come out of the woodwork to tell you how age of consent laws abridge their freedom.

46

code_archeologist t1_jaszazh wrote

> Yeah, sure, maybe tens of thousands of women lost their liberty by being forced to carry unwanted children to term, had their health damaged by dangerous pregnancies, or lost their lives... But at least my taxes have gone down.

  • Typical libertarian
36

VerticalYea t1_jav5xns wrote

Wait a minute... these children now require food stamps, child care, schooling, medical services, housing benefits... why are my taxes suddenly going up?!?!

17

Friar_Monke t1_jatm2l1 wrote

My state has a law against boycotting Israel. The corrupt bastards in charge give zero concern over 1A.

16

[deleted] t1_jatna3q wrote

[removed]

6

Friar_Monke t1_jatziw8 wrote

Yes, but in 2020 the Missouri government signed an anti-BDS law. Both the state and federal laws are unconstitutional and immoral given the Israeli government's activities in Palestinian territories.

18

wolfie379 t1_jaua8d4 wrote

State owned oil company in Jihadistan contracts to buy drilling equipment. One line in the contract specifies the equipment is F.O.B. City of Mohammed, Jihadistan.

“F.O.B.” is a term meaning that supplier is responsible for shipping and customs duties to the specified point, customer is responsible for shipping and customs duties from that point onward. Jihadistan law requires that any entity importing goods must provide a certificate stating that none of the material, equipment, or labour used to produce the goods was obtained from the jews illegally occupying Palestine (term in Jihadistan law for what the rest of the world calls “Israel”). Pretty hard for an American company to sell the equipment while being in compliance with the law prohibiting boycott of Israel.

Also, a ban on boycotting Israel is hypocritical considering the mandatory boycott of Cuba. I believe it was in the 1980s that Ford of Canada had signed a deal to sell trucks to Cuba when Washington leaned on head office in Detroit to order Ford of Canada to tear up the deal.

−4

InappropriateTA t1_javm5ib wrote

You’ve been duped into believing the bullshit that Republican politics/‘values’ are actually meant to benefit “potential humans.” It would be amusing if it weren’t so tragic.

They don’t want people to have bodily autonomy. Women are the easy target for the GOP because there are already biases against women politically, socially, and culturally.

8

Vermillion_Crescent t1_jawfo6e wrote

they dont care about the potential humans, they care about their potential free ticket upstairs

1

-RadarRanger- t1_jb0jxyh wrote

Didja see what's going on in Florida?

>A bill proposed this week by a Republican state senator in Florida would require bloggers who write about Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.), his Cabinet officers and members of the Florida legislature to register with the state.

1