What makes him a bigot?Abortion was already a toxic topic; we don't need bigots like you to feel further emboldened to vilify those you disagree with.
What makes him a bigot?Abortion was already a toxic topic; we don't need bigots like you to feel further emboldened to vilify those you disagree with.
To be honest, the only difference I've found between your behavior, and the sort commonly found over in Whitehall, is your targets; other than that, you're no different from any other regressive leftist. People like you, you do nothing but aggravate an already contentious debate into becoming an all out war of ideology.You keep using that word like your insults don't read as incredibly pathetic. Nobody cares what you think of them.
In this thread specifically? Painting everyone who's pro-choice with the same ideological brush, calling them murderers, that sort of thing. To be honest though, his behavior in this thread isn't the only reason I call him a bigot; he has a history of insulting and deriding people he disagrees with. Quite frankly; I'm sick of it.What makes him a bigot?
Are you asking for him not to call abortion murder or else be branded a bigot? If that is the case, then there can be no debate to be had as one side has been made illegal. If he can claim that abortion is murder without being a bigot, then how?In this thread specifically? Painting everyone who's pro-choice with the same ideological brush, calling them murderers, that sort of thing. To be honest though, his behavior in this thread isn't the only reason I call him a bigot; he has a history of insulting and deriding people he disagrees with. Quite frankly; I'm sick of it.
Its called the culture war. We already are in a war of ideology.To be honest, the only difference I've found between your behavior, and the sort commonly found over in Whitehall, is your targets; other than that, you're no different from any other regressive leftist. People like you, you do nothing but aggravate an already contentious debate into becoming an all out war of ideology.
If Catholics believe abortion is "genocide" then they are simply morons. Not different from SJWs who believe border control is "literally genocide". The fact they believe this bullshit doesn't make it any more true."Saying something you literally believe to be a literal genocide of actual people on the order of tens of millions with an underlying eugenics goal is like the Nazi campaign of extermination is unreasonable"
People will never stop asking catholics to speak in a way inconsistent with their beliefs because it makes them uncomfortable.
What else can we call the systemic slaughter of the unborn than "genocide"? The abortion industry has killed more people than Nazi Germany in WW2. These babies are killed because they are "inconvenient" or because they are boys.If Catholics believe abortion is "genocide" then they are simply morons. Not different from SJWs who believe border control is "literally genocide". The fact they believe this bullshit doesn't make it any more true.
Yeah sure, if most Catholics literally and wholeheartedly believed there was a huge genocide like this going on they would have started an actual civil war.If you’re pro-choice then I assume you don’t believe that a fetus is a human life. In which case what the Pope said is ridiculous. It would be like saying that removing wisdom teeth is genocide.
If, on the other hand, you believe that a fetus is a human life and that an abortion is a murder, then to be logically consistent you must admit that the legalization and acceptance of abortion has lead to the greasiest series of mass murders in the history of humanity - utterly dwarfing deaths caused by fascism, communism, and Islam combined.
If that is what you believe, that a fetus is a full fledged human and killing one is the equivalent of killing an adult human, then you should take a principled stand by that position. In fact, pro-life people acting like abortion is no big deal undermines their position, because they aren’t acting like they really believe that abortion is murder.
Is a fetus a human? If so the USA has killed more than Nazi Germany. If not, then how can we justify outlawing it? Is a fetus something in between a human and a non-human, is that a philosophically tenable position?
Edit:
I made this thread to discuss the topic of the above question.
That is true. Very few pro-life people act like they believe that abortion is really murder. If they did act in such a way, abortion would be much rarer as all abortion clinics would be burned down and all the employees would be assassinated.Yeah sure, if most Catholics literally and wholeheartedly believed there was a huge genocide like this going on they would have started an actual civil war.
Who's benefiting from Plan Parenthood?
No... no they wouldn't.That is true. Very few pro-life people act like they believe that abortion is really murder. If they did act in such a way, abortion would be much rarer as all abortion clinics would be burned down and all the employees would be assassinated.
Being pro-life doesn't mean they are irrational and unable to figure out which strategy is more likely to accomplish their goal. Thus, the pro-life movement has been pursuing their goal using peaceful methods while pursuing setting the stage to overturn Roe at the Supreme Court. Yes, you can make the case that the pro-life position can logically lead to violence being a legitimate tactic, but you do not win a war by using a tactic which has proven ineffective.
They very carefully never mention the March for Life despite the fact that it has happened every year since 1974 no matter the weather (having even marched in more than one blizzard) and grows larger every year. The image of 100,000-600,000 people peacefully marching through DC year after year steals too much from the Left's idealized book to properly scorn so they pretend it doesn't happen. People still don't know what the Covington kids were doing in DC when the whole MAGA hat controversy happened because the media tiptoed around mentioning the event.I’m pretty sure your Western Leftist Media has gotten to the point that even protesting it makes the protestors look like a bunch of crazies or assholes
They very carefully never mention the March for Life despite the fact that it has happened every year since 1974 no matter the weather (having even marched in more than one blizzard) and grows larger every year. The image of 100,000-600,000 people peacefully marching through DC year after year steals too much from the Left's idealized book to properly scorn so they pretend it doesn't happen. People still don't know what the Covington kids were doing in DC when the whole MAGA hat controversy happened because the media tiptoed around mentioning the event.
This seems like the kind of thing that anti-discrimination laws could be used for in a really ironic way to put a stop to this kind of shit.What else can we call the systemic slaughter of the unborn than "genocide"? The abortion industry has killed more people than Nazi Germany in WW2. These babies are killed because they are "inconvenient" or because they are boys.
I live in North Carolina, In my town there are three abortion clinics , and a social security office within two blocks of each other. I got a notice that was being passed out saying that there was a "Abortion Special" where there was a 65% discount on all abortions of boys. The mayor of my town actively campaigned to blacks that she was making abortion cheaper for all "people of color". What am I to think of that?
EDIT: My towns mayor is a white liberal woman if that matters, which for some people it does.
EDIT: I realize that this is anecdotal, but if the other Pro-Life people have similar experiences to me, can you blame us for being a bit worried about the abortion agenda?
That's not a very convincing argument. If there's a fucking GENOCIDE going on, there's no place for a "cost-benefit analysis". It's supposed to elicit a visceral reaction. Imagine if, say, trans people or black people or Jews were rounded up, put into gulags and later shoved into gas showers in modern day US of A. Do you think anyone would even think of a "cost-benefit analysis"? People would be ripping out policemen's throats with their teeth. And you're not living in a dictatorship, where these sentiments can be suppressed via heavy handed secret police and censorship.No... no they wouldn't.
Pro-life people are perfectly capable of performing a simple cost-benefit analysis and determining the most effective way to accomplish their objective. And terrorism, as you're suggesting they should undertaking "if they really believed it" was long ago shown to be INEFFECTIVE at forwarding the actual goal of the pro-life movement.
Bear in mind, in order for terrorist violence to be effective in marginalizing an activity or group you have to have more than numbers and a target on your side, you ALSO have to have sympathetic figures in government who will provide some degree of cover for you but, more importantly, a sympathetic MEDIA environment who will assist in demonizing your target to make it acceptable to society at large to be targeted.
The Pro-Life movement in the US has never operated under these conditions. Politicians in the US tend to look very poorly on right wing violence and the media in the US is downright HOSTILE to the pro-life movement to a degree they are few other things. As such, when there WERE pro-life terrorist attacks in the 80s and 90s instead of marginalizing abortion, it actually pushed the pro-choice position to it's most widely accepted position in the US, the exact opposite effect of what they wanted and further, such actions cost them considerable political sympathy and hindered their efforts for legal counters to abortion, while also getting significant special protections put in place for abortion.
It was only once the more extreme pro-life rhetoric of the 80s and 90s was marginalized and violence as a solution refuted among the pro-life movement that the US pro-life movement really started gaining ground in the US.
Being pro-life doesn't mean they are irrational and unable to figure out which strategy is more likely to accomplish their goal. Thus, the pro-life movement has been pursuing their goal using peaceful methods while pursuing setting the stage to overturn Roe at the Supreme Court. Yes, you can make the case that the pro-life position can logically lead to violence being a legitimate tactic, but you do not win a war by using a tactic which has proven ineffective.
And the best part? I've seen women who were lured to the abortion mill under the false pretence that it's just a clump of cells and not murder turn away and chose life, and every time that happens (and it happens often) the abortionists just get even more unhinged. It's glorious.