YES
(media.scored.co)
Comments (54)
sorted by:
... just how low an opinion of women in general does Ellen Kurz have?
I mean, here, she's asserting that women are such sluts that, even if threatened with prosecution for attempting to kill a baby, they are such irredeemable libertines that they'll be unable to resist their most primitives urges, like some kind of animal, and end up pregnant anyway.
That's not what I think - that's what she thinks!
Because she's a feminist.
Their primitive urges would dictate they try and stay safe throughout the pregnancy and raise their child until it’s able to survive on its own.
I was at the doctor's office recently looking at a PSA for contraception chart in the waiting room.
It claimed that 85% of reproductive age women will be pregnant after 12 months with no birth control method.
Seems high.
That sounds utterly insane in a first-world nation. Maybe in the 3rd world I could believe that but not in any developed country.
It's probably like COVID modeling where it assumes coitus at peak fertility every month for a year straight.
It subsequently claimed that the rhythm method cuts it down to 25% and pulling out to something like 20%.
Birth control pills were around 15% and IUDs were around 0.2%.
Come to think of it, maybe the chart was made by an IUD manufacturer.
I know pulling out isn't 100% but the idea that a couple that is consistently pulling out is more likely than not to conceive within a year is ridiculous. e: misread "to" as "by" so this is probably still way to high but it's in the ballpark of believability.
I'm obviously remembering this from memory, but IIRC, they claimed pulling out was only a few percentage points worse than male condoms with "real world use".
They added "With no birth control method", so being in a 1st world country changes nothing.
Pretty sure 85% is a bit low too, most reproductive age women are sexually active these days (yes, kids are starting younger and younger), and without any form of birth control, most would end up pregnant.
It's the worst kind of self-reporting DAE comment.
"DOES ANYONE ELSE INTENTIONALLY GET PREGNANT, SO YOU CAN GET AN ABORTION, AND THEN ASK THE DOCTOR TO KEEP SOUVENIRS, LIKE SEVERED FINGERS?"
"... WHAT THE FUCK! NO!!!"
"What? You don't? Well, I mean, everybody does it."
"NO! NO ONE DOES THAT!"
"uhhhh."
"DO YOU DO THAT?!!!"
"What? Me? Noooooo. No one does that. It was just a question."
The majority of women probably do not ever have an abortion in their life.
It's like divorce rates.
The ones doing it multiple times really skew the statistics.
Where I live, if you're not divorced, you're not normal. There are literally more divorced and reconstituted families than there are traditional families.
I don't doubt that divorce rates IRL are high.
But it was my understanding that the "half of all marriages end in divorce" narrative gets skewed because the people that get divorced once have higher probability of getting divorced a second and third time, etc, which cumulatively get added to this figure.
IE. Four men get married. Three remain happily married, the fourth gets married and divorced thrice.
"50% of marriages end in divorce"
Honestly, might have been true in the 80s and maybe 90s.
But now ? At my work (we're a few hundreds), a minority haven't had a divorce.
On the scale of relativity, Mr Divorce is likely to still be much less happy than guys who are just remaining married regardless.
Post divorces are more than just money. They are a person well out of the game having to re-enter it. And, considering they ended up divorced, their ability to pick a mate is proven to be awful and just as likely to happen again.
You can end up happier on the otherside. You could also end up happier just sticking it out. The time of marriage where its completely impossible to make it work is often the type of person who is never going to make it work, however.
Your parents might have ended up better for it, but that's not a even close to guaranteed.
Once you pop, you just can't stop... because then you have to face the fact that you're a monster, so you keep doing it to hide from the reality of the situation.
According to the Guttmacher Institute, 50% of respondents had had one previous abortion and 25% had had more than two previous abortions.
Would have to see the Sampling on that to see if it's legit stats.
Guttmacher are Pro-Abortion lunatics, so their respondents would also mostly be pro-abortion. That means likely 50% of the women heavily in favor of abortion havent had abortions. Likely to be being disgusting blobs.
I was hoping no one would notice and we could just start locking all of them up.
Be a good Samaritan. If you see something, Say Something!
Stake out nearby clinics in adjacent states. Make a list. Take photos. Make contacts with the police. Arrest These Murderers.
TWRA Take Womens Rights Away.
Whoa whoa whoa, are you trying to save western society or something?
I accept your terms.
I love how this tweet basically shows why that would be a good idea, too. At the very least, this particular woman is way too fucking dumb to vote.
I could list the numerous ways she fucked up in her single sentence tweet, but what really is the point? It is impressive though, just how wrong she is, in such a short time. This is like concentrated wrongness, I'm sure it could be weaponized or turned into a fuel source or something.
Can we ban felons from the internet next?
I am in favor of life.
I am not in favor of criminalizing doctors or women.
We need to find better ground for dealing with unwanted pregnancies than just throwing the issue into the criminal justice system to deal with. That's a crazy approach, it's been done, and it's a disaster that just creates new classes of criminals but doesn't fix any of the bottom-line problems.
Meh, after the Wu Flu pandemic I say toss them in jail.
Most of them are all too happy to ignore side effects and take that sweet sweet government money to push the mrna vax. They're glorified whores, except they get paid to fuck others.
I don't generally get into internet sniping contests, but you're being an ass.
Nothing about my statements were screaming obsessions. I'm making the case that the fix for unwanted pregnancies is not criminal felonious charges. And if you think that turning women and doctors into criminals because they are facing an unwanted pregnancy - that's saying exactly the same as vaccine objectors and their doctors should be criminalized for failing to uphold government edicts.
My stance is that unwanted pregnancies are NOT a government or criminal problem - they are a human problem. The criminal justice system cannot solve human problems.
Why does it matter whether or not a pregnancy is "wanted"?
What case are you making other than "it doesn't work because I said so"?
Something like 90% of abortions are because of social or economic reasons, ie the woman didn't feel like it. That's the percentage of frivolous abortions that could be prevented by placing the minimum amount of repercussions on women.
You think legally forcing a dangerous procedure on people is the same as legally preventing a deadly (be design) procedure? WTF?
And, of course, you don't mention fathers at all. Cause it's not even just a matter of the child being involved in the mother's decision, it's also the child's father.
The current system provides absolutely no recourse to father's to protect their children and allows unscrupulous women (ie the kind who would get an abortion) to blackmail their partners with threats of baby murder. And we wonder why there's a fatherhood crisis.
As far as I can see, removing this special exception for murder is already working: thousands of women are going on "sex strikes" and demanding monogamous marriage, and that's without laws even being enforced.
I agree that states could potentially make bad laws but the point is they can make the laws. If the laws are bad where you are, move. If the laws are ineffective, we'll see that pretty quickly, compared to other states.
As for the "bottom-line problems" you mention (but never outline), those can't even be addressed until abortion is illegal because the practice of killing babies hides those problems.
Abortions are dangerous for women even when done by doctors never mind that Abortion is 99% dangerous for babies
No, it's a 10$ box of condoms.
Not killing a baby.
Its keeping legs closed until marriage.
Or at least using BC and a condom and pulling out. That's less than .01% chance.
Doesn't sound fun? Don't do it then, or at least stop fucking random whores/dudes you don't even like.
"unwanted"
if it was unwanted you should have either abstained or taken every precaution possible and be responsible about how you do it. The facts don't lie, and the facts say if women take their birth control how they should and if men don't bust a fatty inside her, there should be less than 1% chance of pregnancy.
But women don't take their BC on time, they don't even take it regularly, and some men who claim to not want kids are still raw dogging and busting fatties in whores they don't even like enough to have a kid with.
Prosecuting doctors who perform abortions is how Canada got its abortion laws struck down by the Supreme Court and were left with no restrictions whatsoever because politicians were too cowardly to go back in and write legislation that was more permissive to coincide with the Court's ruling.
It also made Henry Morgentaler, the doctor they tried to prosecute, into a martyr and a national icon of sorts.
Long after his death, the abortion clinics here still bear his name.
That's not justification for anything.
Just because "bad people" do bad things to "good people" when they resist, doesn't mean "good people" shouldn't resist. It just means "good people" should try harder. It means "good people" should rise up and crush the "bad people" and put in place a government that does good.
Actually, the court stuck down the law because it failed to define when life started. Failures of Conservatives refused to redraft the law with a definition for start of life. They could have easily gone with "Fetal heartbeat" or "Conception" or anything else. But they just left it up in the air, and now Canada has abortion up to the point where the baby is half out of the vagina.
Law enforcement is not "criminalizing", which is a fake word subversives have snuck into the vocabulary to further undermine lawful authority.
If there are laws against killing babies then the people who participate in that action are criminals. How else would you describe them?
How's this for subversive statement?
How can I say nothing at all while seeming to hold the moral high ground?
The truth is so simple but they hate the truth, so they need to bend and twist words in order to obfuscate and hide it.
Murderers deserve death.
Maybe we should also let murderers off the hook while we're at it.
That's an upside I hadn't considered. The news just keeps getting better!
Holy based
Women dumb enough to kill their own young should not be able to decide the fate of everyone else.
The kind of woman with such little self control and preparedness as to get pregnant in the first place, AND decides the best thing to do is murder a unique and brand new totally innocent human being in response, is definitely the person that will never vote for anyone worthwhile.
based?
...is this...Is this the best timeline after all?