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.
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?
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.
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
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?
I think those are literally their talking points in many cases though. I don’t think that would work like you think it would.
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.