Oops, wrong link.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/02/16/virginia-house-passes-bills-restricting-abortion/

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/02/22/83337/disabled-abortion/

Please don't file all pro-lifers into one lump group as there's a large majority of idiots. I'm pro-life. I support planned parenthood. I support the use of contraceptives. I don't support a forced ultrasound, and Marshall is an idiot.

I do believe in God, but that is not the reason for my pro-choice stance. I believe life does begin at conception, and I believe that abortion should only be used if the mother's life is in danger. I do see the difficulty with rape and incest, and thus, don't know exactly what my stance is on that, though I'm leaning towards saying that should also be allowed. However, if you get pregnant because you didn't use a condom or other types of contraceptives I don't believe you should have the right to terminate the life you created with your stupidity.

*or if the condom or other birth control fails. You took the risk with having sex. If you got pregnant, you should not have the right to terminate the life

I think if you have a penis you should shut the fuck up about it period.

"However, if you get pregnant because you didn't use a condom or other types of contraceptives I don't believe you should have the right to terminate the life you created with your stupidity."

Excuse me how does a woman deserve to get punished for condom non-usage? Things break and sometimes women forget, they don't deserve to be treated like chattel just because you think you're morally superior for never being at risk of being pregnant.

"Please don't file all pro-lifers into one lump group as there's a large majority of idiots. "

I don't have time to discriminate and mollify the feelings of supposed "well-meaning" forced childbirth advocates.

Also birth control can cause blood clots (indeed a good friend of mine had this happen to her), so it's not this easy game of 'personal responsibility' that you make it out to be.

Really, sicarius? Unless I have been quite badly misled I do believe that a penis has a prominent role in such matters, and their owners deserve at least a voice.

"I don't have time to discriminate and mollify the feelings of supposed "well-meaning" forced childbirth advocates."

Yeah I just want to point out that if we treat "forced childbirth advocates" as variable x, you can apply this to everything and completely annihilate any form of reasonable discussion ever.

If you weren't looking for it, aight, that's cool, but let's not keep up pretenses.

"Unless I have been quite badly misled I do believe that a penis has a prominent role in such matter"

Last I checked the consequences of pregnancy do not attach themselves in any way to the body or health of men.

It's like a group project in which only the woman gets an F if it's not done well.

"Yeah I just want to point out that if we treat "forced childbirth advocates" as variable x, you can apply this to everything and completely annihilate any form of reasonable discussion ever."

I don't know what your point here is. Explain.

Was the point of this thread to create a discussion, or just to mock, villify and humiliate "pro-lifers"? Be honest.

Why should I care about not insulting supposed "moderate" anti-choicers when their leaders are imposing the most reactionary kind of anti-women legislation imaginable?

Sure they do, although not in a way that would encourage men to be anti-abortion. What if a man and woman have sex, the man uses a condom 'cause he doesn't want kids, it breaks, and the woman doesn't want to abort? The man's stuck with childcare payments for a child he didn't want and took reasonable precautions to avoid conceiving. Shouldn't a man get a say on that?

The point was to bring attention to mandatory vaginal probes in various states. Naturally the rights of women got lost and all this all-male forum seems to care about is that I act with sufficient respect to the very people supporting a more nightmarish version of A Handmade's Tale.

@ Putin

Sorry, are you actually arguing against your right to argue in your own thread?

"The man's stuck with childcare payments for a child he didn't want and took reasonable precautions to avoid conceiving. Shouldn't a man get a say on that?"

You want men to be able to force women to have abortions to avoid child support payments? No, sorry, you don't get to lord over other people's medical decisions. Women don't get to decide what kind of anal probes men have to endure when they go to a proctology exam.

"I don't know what your point here is. Explain."

My point is that, if you find it acceptable, in the course of a discussion, to accuse all people who do not agree with your position (regardless of the reasons behind their disagreement or the extent of it) of the most extreme possible position that's on their side of the aisle, and refuse to discuss anything but that most absurd extreme, you have indeed made it impossible to have a reasonable discussion.

This would be like if an anti-abortion poster showed up and accused you of having a sadistic desire to smash half-developed human bodies into bits via induced delivery of fetuses prematurely, just because you're anti-abortion. We both know that's absurd, but your "I'm going to paint all anti-abortion people as the most extreme possible version of their position instead of what they are" logic is exactly that in reverse.

And whether the self-appointed leaders of a movement act like idiots or not is beside the point. You're not debating self-appointed "leader" idiots. You're debating people who may well not even agree with them. Attributing these idiots' positions to others who don't even agree with them is ridiculous.

"Sorry, are you actually arguing against your right to argue in your own thread?"

I'm saying anti-choice men are claiming that carrying a fetus to term somehow has equally to do with them when they know it doesn't.

"You want men to be able to force women to have abortions to avoid child support payments? No, sorry, you don't get to lord over other people's medical decisions."

So is it okay for a man in that situation to waive child support payments? If the man took reasonable steps to avoid impregnating a woman and it happened anyway *and* the woman insists on carrying the child to term against the man's wishes I can't see how it's fair for the man to be forced to live with that...

IF you also argue that a woman should be allowed to terminate a pregnancy even if both parents explicitly agreed beforehand that they were trying to get pregnant.

In short, your position seems to be that it's okay for women to choose to escape the problems of unexpected pregnancy, but not men. I think it's absolutely okay for a woman to choose to escape those problems, but I also think it's absolutely okay for a man to make that same choice if we grant a woman that choice.

"Attributing these idiots' positions to others who don't even agree with them is ridiculous."

Anti-choicers need to account for the consequences of their position and their advocating against women's health. There's a reason why these extremists are in power. If they're as opposed as they claim to be then they need to do something to get them out of power. You trying to make me the problem isn't going to work, but I guess it's expected from webdip, hide behind the excuse of "unfair generalizations", I'll remember this next time you Stalin-bait me, President.

In short, your position seems to be that it's okay for women to choose to escape the problems of unexpected pregnancy, but not men. I think it's absolutely okay for a woman to choose to escape those problems, but I also think it's absolutely okay for a man to make that same choice if we grant a woman that choice.

pro lifer above "*or if the condom or other birth control fails. You took the risk with having sex."

"If the man took reasonable steps to avoid impregnating a woman and it happened anyway *and* the woman insists on carrying the child to term against the man's wishes I can't see how it's fair for the man to be forced to live with that..."

Hopefully the man would be a man enough to help with the consequences of this unplanned pregnancy. Why is it so much to ask for a man to help with the costs that a woman is going to be forced to endure? As if that's on par with carrying the fetus to term.

"In short, your position seems to be that it's okay for women to choose to escape the problems of unexpected pregnancy, but not men. "

Women deal with the consequences of unplanned pregnancy, men don't. Most women let men off the hook on child support payments. This isn't the issue. The issue is the total lack of control women have over their own health, the total lack of respect state governments have for women, and the fact that all-male government panels are making these determinations in a lot of cases. You can try and make it seem like men are getting sidelined, but that's horseshit.

Actually, yes, shameless, baseless villainization of the people on the other side of the aisle who want to get rid of the people you don't like that are in power is part of the problem, but I wouldn't expect you to recognize your own fault in anything, so if this doesn't stick I won't hold it against you.

And there's a key difference here, because where you're putting on a nice pretense of wanting an intelligent discussion while absolutely undermining that at every turn, I was never seriously trying to get you to account for Stalin's ridiculousness because I knew you'd never do it if I seriously tried. That was trolling. So unless you're up to admitting you're trolling...

I mean really, this is like the Jon Stewart interview on Crossfire, you're taking your cues for reasoned discussion from an explicit trolling attempt by yours truly?

@ Putin

The woman baring the child is by far the most important person in each case, followed by the child's father. After those two I don't see any difference in the value of any person's opinion, be they man or woman. We all have a stake in our society.

Baseless "villifications"? These are laws and proposed laws. This isn't baseless. This is the consequence of the anti-choice movement. I know it's your shtick to advocate positions without taking any responsibility for their real-life consequences, like how your advocacy of theoretical laissez-faire capitalism somehow has nothing to do with actual real-life consequences of our experiences with actual unregulated capitalism, but sorry anti-choicers are getting left off the hook that easy. They're supposedly all about personal responsibility, well it's long time that they actually took responsibility for the pain and suffering their position is causing millions of women.

*aren't.

I like how none of you men bother discussing the vaginal probe, instead you get all pissy about tonality. Whatever you can think up to distract us from the real problem. It's a damn shame this place is such a sausage-fest. The absurd lack of perspective is really gross.

It's like discussing whether genocide is okay or not. You're the only one here whose moral compass is so corrupted that this could actually be considered 'controversial.' You're not getting discussion on the probe because we all know the probe's retarded. Instead, since there's somehow debate over baseless vilifying (my bad earlier, this is the word I needed) of people on the other side of the aisle, we're debating that. Maybe you should keep up.