GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently May 26 19, 9:48 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 199 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 20  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Georgia abortion law
PostPosted: May 15 19, 1:58 pm 
Offline
Sucking on the Rally Nipple
User avatar

Joined: April 16 06, 6:03 pm
Posts: 21229
Location: Chicago


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Georgia abortion law
PostPosted: May 15 19, 2:11 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: April 25 06, 6:43 pm
Posts: 11361
Location: Austin
G. Keenan wrote:
I've never understood ... the yearn for punishment. [T]his drive to punish women for their dirty nasty women bodies is not healthy adult behavior.

Super telling anecdote from the Alabama statehouse debate:



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Georgia abortion law
PostPosted: May 15 19, 7:04 pm 
Offline
Sucking on the Rally Nipple
User avatar

Joined: April 16 06, 6:03 pm
Posts: 21229
Location: Chicago
Arthur Dent wrote:
G. Keenan wrote:
I've never understood ... the yearn for punishment. [T]his drive to punish women for their dirty nasty women bodies is not healthy adult behavior.

Super telling anecdote from the Alabama statehouse debate:



The whole "God's will" argument is strong with some people. If I try to understand the issue from their perspective and assume their motives/feelings are not malicious, this is the best I've got: God/nature made women to bear children. A pregnancy is God's will, and therefore a woman does not have authority to terminate a pregnancy inside her. The womb/embryo are not really part of her biology, they are like God's embassy inside her body, sovereign territory that doesn't really belong to her. She does not have a say in the matter. It it is what it is, no matter how the baby got there.

If that's basically their argument, then doesn't that mean that God is a rapist? If a woman is raped and not allowed to terminate her pregnancy because of the above logic, doesn't it follow that is was God's will for her to be raped and become pregnant? If she is molested by her uncle and impregnated, was it not God's will for her uncle to molest her and impregnate her? No, rape and incest are not God's will, they may say, they are the product of man's free will. So what is the baby then, a sick joke? A blessing in disguise like some Lifetime movie? Or, the punishment she deserves for being a slut, for getting herself raped in the first place, for forgetting her birth control. God likes to punish the wicked, right?

Is it God's will for a young woman's birth control to fail and force a baby to be born into poverty and violence and drug addiction -- sometimes women just can't support a child in their life circumstances -- does God want babies born into tragic life circumstances? Why should we believe that God cares about unborn babies at all? He allows plenty of babies to die, to starve to death, to be bombed, murdered, malnourished, begotten by rape, incest, carelessness, accident. Is God doing a very good job at taking care of his children? Why is it not God's will when a baby in Sudan starves to death, but it is God's will for an 11 year old girl in Ohio to become pregnant as a result of rape?

It's funny how God's will just looks a lot like men's will. Your womb doesn't belong to you, lady, it belongs to me, and I can do whatever I want with it. If I want to put a baby in it, I will, whether you want that or not. It's not for you to say. If we have sex and I don't want to wear a condom, I won't, and if you get pregnant it's your fault, not mine. You're dumb. You're a slut. You deserve it. That's what you get. You'll have as many children as I decide you should have. I make the rules, and you assume all the risk.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Georgia abortion law
PostPosted: May 15 19, 9:48 pm 
Offline
Seeking a Zubaz seamstress

Joined: September 4 07, 1:48 pm
Posts: 23553
Location: St. Louis
Missouri GOP asswipes gettin after it too. A lunatic gold rush. Insane times we live in, even if we aren't personally affected.

I am not personally affect by abortion restrictions. Am one of 8 kids. My mom also had a miscarriage FWIW. . I married a single mom with a kid years ago, never been anywhere near an abortion, and I love babies. The unexpected 2nd kid we had...can't really put into words how great having them in our lives/being their parents is.

Still am not so [expletive] stupid to deny the need for safe legal abortions. Especially at 6 weeks. We love our daughter, but we had no idea at 6 weeks. It is [expletive] dumb, beyond comprehension.


...It has to be largely a Male insecurity thing, right? This push by MAGA pusssies for abortion restrictions, right? Look- Our leader is a reality TV show loser who bangs porns stars while his wife has a new born. You know he has had abortion in his equation, or is at best, an impotent [expletive] wad.

Our male role as physical dominant breadwinner has diminished. Jobs don't fall in our laps. All that is left in MAGA puss world is provide sperm/ to get women pregnant. Is it any [expletive] wonder that Male dominant legislatures full of GOP pussies want to keep that one thing?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Georgia abortion law
PostPosted: May 16 19, 6:48 am 
Offline
99% conan clips
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 5:14 pm
Posts: 54544


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Georgia abortion law
PostPosted: May 16 19, 8:34 am 
Offline
Official GRB Sponsor of Larry Bigbie

Joined: April 17 06, 9:16 pm
Posts: 27028
Location: No. 16 on the Cards Top 15 Prospect List
Quote:
The whole "God's will" argument is strong with some people. If I try to understand the issue from their perspective and assume their motives/feelings are not malicious, this is the best I've got: God/nature made women to bear children. A pregnancy is God's will, and therefore a woman does not have authority to terminate a pregnancy inside her. The womb/embryo are not really part of her biology, they are like God's embassy inside her body, sovereign territory that doesn't really belong to her. She does not have a say in the matter. It it is what it is, no matter how the baby got there.


I'll just quote this section as it's the most important part of the arguments that you make. There is quite a bit more depth to this issue than what you present here, and that is what is leading to the very logical questions you pose in the rest of your post. There are some -- particularly those from a Reform (Calvinist) background that would emphasize the "God's will" aspect of pregnancy. But, that aspect of it -- a pregnancy is God's will regardless of how conception happened -- is really not an important part of the overall theology/philosophy. It might be talked about in some dominant/loud theological circles, but it's not important in the larger picture. The greater issue is that Christians should (I understand that not all are consistent in this) view all life as sacred. Meaning that all life belongs to self and the self is intended to belong with God. There's a very subtle but vital difference there. One view leads you to conclude that God ordained and approved of rape and that God has full ownership of our person. Every action we take from pre-conception to right now and beyond our death is God-ordained. He made me eat my breakfast bar and type this post instead of working this morning. That doesn't seem to be supported by scripture, reason, or essential theology. The other view leads you to see the creation of life as a consequence of human action, which God makes sacred through his love for all things, even broken things. In this deeper and more essential view, God is not approving of the tragedy of something like pregnancy through rape. He, instead, is doing what he has always intended to do -- redeeming life from the devastating and universal affects of the Fall and restoring life to its originally intended hope and potential.

So, Christians believe that life -- whenever it is that life becomes life; this is a very difficult question to answer theologically -- belongs to the SELF. And that life should have the sacred opportunity to express itself. The fact that this life exists within a woman's body makes this way more complicated, but that's the underlying theology that you're searching for, GK.


Determinism -- everything is "God's will" -- is a very immature theological concept, in my opinion. It views all events through the lens of human time, and then accidentally places God under time's control. If something happens in the present or future, it is because God determined it would be so in the past. In my theological opinion, that's pure silliness. God created time. God exists above time. God can conceive of all of time the way we might look at a room or the Grand Canyon from an airplane. Time is a dimension within God's greater universe. The story of scripture and history should demonstrate to us that God spends most of his time face palming over our own often idiotic choices and calling us toward the restoration of what he originally intended. It was our own choice that cast us into the cascade, the avalanche, of suffering and death in which we currently live. And it is God's choice to bring redemption and restoration, while maintaining the freedom of self-determination and will. But... that's probably a minority view in today's evangelical Christian world. I am not convinced that many Reformed believers have thought through their own theologies or attempted to put the whole picture together adequately.


Last edited by Fat Strat on May 16 19, 8:44 am, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Georgia abortion law
PostPosted: May 16 19, 8:40 am 
Offline
tl;dr

Joined: May 21 09, 12:41 pm
Posts: 4389
If everything is God's will, maybe a woman deciding to have an abortion is because God decided that was what should happen in that particular case?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Georgia abortion law
PostPosted: May 16 19, 9:19 am 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 9:40 pm
Posts: 24049
This was already mystifying to me, but in light of these laws being passed it's inexcusable if you're purporting to be the pro-choice party




I don't understand WHY. What does anyone in leadership get out of supporting Lipinski? It's a safe Democrat district and there is literally nothing to lose by supporting a better Democrat. Also makes clear why the DCCC's vendor blacklist is inexcusable.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Georgia abortion law
PostPosted: May 16 19, 9:53 am 
Offline
Perennial All-Star
User avatar

Joined: April 20 06, 8:43 pm
Posts: 8396
Location: Please use blue font for the sarcasm impaired.
[Georgia and Alabama clink beer mugs and drink]
[Missouri enters]: Hey yall!! Is this a party?? I want in!
[Georgia hands Missouri a beer, all three chug]
[Missouri]: Thanks! Now I'm a cool kid too!
[Alabama burps and farts simultaneously]
[Georgia picks nose, spits and scratches nutsack]




This has been a screenplay by GeddyWrox.

Thank you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Georgia abortion law
PostPosted: May 16 19, 9:53 am 
Offline
Sucking on the Rally Nipple
User avatar

Joined: April 16 06, 6:03 pm
Posts: 21229
Location: Chicago
Fat Strat wrote:
Quote:
The whole "God's will" argument is strong with some people. If I try to understand the issue from their perspective and assume their motives/feelings are not malicious, this is the best I've got: God/nature made women to bear children. A pregnancy is God's will, and therefore a woman does not have authority to terminate a pregnancy inside her. The womb/embryo are not really part of her biology, they are like God's embassy inside her body, sovereign territory that doesn't really belong to her. She does not have a say in the matter. It it is what it is, no matter how the baby got there.


I'll just quote this section as it's the most important part of the arguments that you make. There is quite a bit more depth to this issue than what you present here, and that is what is leading to the very logical questions you pose in the rest of your post. There are some -- particularly those from a Reform (Calvinist) background that would emphasize the "God's will" aspect of pregnancy. But, that aspect of it -- a pregnancy is God's will regardless of how conception happened -- is really not an important part of the overall theology/philosophy. It might be talked about in some dominant/loud theological circles, but it's not important in the larger picture. The greater issue is that Christians should (I understand that not all are consistent in this) view all life as sacred. Meaning that all life belongs to self and the self is intended to belong with God. There's a very subtle but vital difference there. One view leads you to conclude that God ordained and approved of rape and that God has full ownership of our person. Every action we take from pre-conception to right now and beyond our death is God-ordained. He made me eat my breakfast bar and type this post instead of working this morning. That doesn't seem to be supported by scripture, reason, or essential theology. The other view leads you to see the creation of life as a consequence of human action, which God makes sacred through his love for all things, even broken things. In this deeper and more essential view, God is not approving of the tragedy of something like pregnancy through rape. He, instead, is doing what he has always intended to do -- redeeming life from the devastating and universal affects of the Fall and restoring life to its originally intended hope and potential.

So, Christians believe that life -- whenever it is that life becomes life; this is a very difficult question to answer theologically -- belongs to the SELF. And that life should have the sacred opportunity to express itself. The fact that this life exists within a woman's body makes this way more complicated, but that's the underlying theology that you're searching for, GK.


Determinism -- everything is "God's will" -- is a very immature theological concept, in my opinion. It views all events through the lens of human time, and then accidentally places God under time's control. If something happens in the present or future, it is because God determined it would be so in the past. In my theological opinion, that's pure silliness. God created time. God exists above time. God can conceive of all of time the way we might look at a room or the Grand Canyon from an airplane. Time is a dimension within God's greater universe. The story of scripture and history should demonstrate to us that God spends most of his time face palming over our own often idiotic choices and calling us toward the restoration of what he originally intended. It was our own choice that cast us into the cascade, the avalanche, of suffering and death in which we currently live. And it is God's choice to bring redemption and restoration, while maintaining the freedom of self-determination and will. But... that's probably a minority view in today's evangelical Christian world. I am not convinced that many Reformed believers have thought through their own theologies or attempted to put the whole picture together adequately.


Thank you as always for your perspective. Unfortunately, I don't think the men and women driving these restrictive abortion laws are approaching the matter with anything close to the subtlety we are trying to. They do however use crude religious arguments and platitudes about the sanctity of human life to justify their position, which I perceive as little more than an argument for maintaining good ol' fashioned old time religion patriarchy, and those are the specific religious arguments I am attacking. That the latest round of these laws makes no exception for rape and incest reveals them to be all the more disingenuous.

Quote:
Meaning that all life belongs to self and the self is intended to belong with God. There's a very subtle but vital difference there.


What is the self? Does an embryo at 8 weeks have a self? Does it have self awareness? Because that's what differentiates us from the other animals, right? Self-awareness. If it is wrong to terminate an embryo at 6 or 8 weeks because it is life and life belongs to itself, is it also not morally wrong to kill a pig for your dinner? As you say, life belongs to the self and the self is intended to belong with God. Who created the pig? God did. Who is to say that the pig does not have a self, men?

All life is sacred, as the Christian's say. Obviously these same people must also oppose the death penalty, oppose war under all circumstances, and so on. They do not of course, but doesn't that all proceed from this same assumption about the sacred self? So why the furious concern for the sacred life of unborn babies, but the utter disregard for babies after birth? The utter disregard for the life of people in far flung places we bomb for nothing more than our vaguest "interests." These same people cheer for that. It gets their blood up. They joke about shooting asylum seekers and all have a good laugh together.

Let's get back to the fetus though, which abortion banners consider to be equally a "person" to the mother who carries it. Until a certain point in the pregnancy, the baby cannot exist without the mother. The mother eats for it, she breaths for it, her own organs sustain and grow it. It is, quite literally, a part of her own bodily functions. It's very DNA is her own DNA. Under what earthly authority is she to be told what she can do with her own body? Hence, Roe. v Wade.

But a certain type of religious conservative cannot accept that reasoning; they must interject their religious beliefs into secular law because they believe in a higher power who knows better. This same reasoning has been used in our country to defend slavery, to defend segregation, to defend traditional marriage -- to defend power structures created by and for the sole benefit of men, mostly white men. God is a white man, after all. Every church I have ever entered in my life anywhere in the world (and that is many) has a white Jesus on the cross.

I digress,
Quote:
The other view leads you to see the creation of life as a consequence of human action, which God makes sacred through his love for all things, even broken things. In this deeper and more essential view, God is not approving of the tragedy of something like pregnancy through rape. He, instead, is doing what he has always intended to do -- redeeming life from the devastating and universal affects of the Fall and restoring life to its originally intended hope and potential.


That is poetic, but sometimes poetry is just pretty words. How is a child, impregnated via rape, an example of God "restoring life to its originally intended hope and potential." Is it that, or is it just a random event in a sea of randomness, onto which we project our desire for order and hidden meaning?

There may well be a God, but what are the chances that the people lucky enough to have perceived the truth of a being so vast and powerful to have created space, time, the universe, the mind itself and its own ability to even perceive divinity in the first place -- what are the chances that of all the people on earth, the ones who understand God correctly are American conservative Christians? Because that's certainly how they think of themselves. Otherwise, under what authority would they presume to tell a woman what she can do with her own body? The authority of God? Or the authority of patriarchy, born of men's historic domination of women's bodies, and enforced by punishment and violence?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 199 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 20  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group