• Carvex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    “it’S uP to tHe stAtEs”

    “When I’m president, I’ll make those states not be able to choose” -Tim Scott, black man for president who thinks his party doesn’t call him that word behind closed doors.

    • RojoSanIchiban@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I know I’m coming at this from something resembling “rationality,” so I could never pose the following question in a real debate with a “pro-lifer,” but the “leave it up to the states” argument absolutely infuriates me with how stupid it is on its face.

      The supposed pro-life argument is that life is precious/sacred and must be protected even if a fetus isn’t [yet] viable. Why the FUCK would that be allowed to be defined differently by state!? Either all life is precious and must be protected nationwide (or worldwide) or their supposed reasoning is bullshit.

      Because of course it’s bullshit, just like the SCOTUS ruling. We either have a national definition of a person and citizen, or we have none. The current system doesn’t make a person until birth when the birth certificate is filled out. States should have absolutely no right to determine differing periods of time to determine whether or not something is a viable, legal “person.”

      If abortion is banned as per evangelical wackos screeching “life begins at conception,” then logically the state has to force itself into every bedroom, issue “life certificates” and apply for social security numbers for every single damn blastocyst, then arrest every parent that miscarries for involuntary manslaughter at least, otherwise the entire argument of life is bullshit.

      But then the entire pro-life argument from any legislator is inherently hypocritical bullshit because it’s nothing other than class warfare.

      /bullshitrant

      • Billiam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re right, but you can make the point even shorter than that:

        If life begins at conception, why are any Republicans suggesting anything less than a total ban on abortions? Does God suddenly start caring about “babies” sixteen weeks after conception, but doesn’t give a fuck before that? Or does his “unconditional” love start at six weeks?

        And why make exceptions for rape? The brand new “baby” that came into existence against the will of its mother is innocent, so why should it be allowed to be aborted?

      • lemmefixdat4u@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Republican stance on abortion would not be so popular among its female supporters if they realize that they could be charged with child endangerment for not getting prenatal care, not eating or sleeping well, or engaging in any risky behaviors - from the moment of conception.

    • gregorum
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Some people simply have no morals or ethics whatsoever, so they align with a party full of like-minded people who find that person to be a useful idiot while simultaneously hating everything about them. It’s that kind of dirty back-room dealing and self-interested politicking that is one of the cornerstones of the GOP. He knows they’re racist, but he helps the party and they’ll help him gain power and cover up his corruption and incompetence.

      And when they all lose, they get to jockey for positions either in congress or on the cable news circuit with Fox, Newsmax, and OANN.