this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2023
165 points (74.8% liked)

Asklemmy

43757 readers
1142 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

When I was growing up the internet was a place to be liberated from the world say what you want to say, be whoever you want and form genuine communities with shared interests. Now the internet feels like a tool to enslave the mind with identity echo chambers and any deviation leads you to being banned and blocked shunned and silenced within a void that is inescapable. Novel unique websites coded manually by hobbyists running servers for free in the commons allowing people access to the free flow of information under the banner of "information should be free" has largely gone away with corpratisation. I miss the days when the internet was populated largely by nerds aiming to make a better world not this controlled censored hell hole of profiteering.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So are things like non-viable pregnancies due to the inability to afford a home? How about rape? How about a minor kicked out because their parents don't approve, is their inexperience, immaturity, and lack of support just because they can't afford a house? What if it's a viable pregnancy, but the baby will be brain dead and require constant care; is cost of living the only burden the parents have to be concerned about? What if there's only a chance it's non-viable, but delaying the abortion puts the mother at risk; at what percent chance is a person allowed to terminate the pregnancy and not put their body at risk? 50% chance of living? 10%? Less than 1%?

These aren't exceptions, these are the types of reasons people get abortions. Let me say it again with emphasis: These aren't exceptions, these are the types of reasons people get abortions. It is so God damn ignorant to think the main reason people get abortions is because they're poor and can't afford to have kids. And to plow ahead and support anti-abortion legislation isn't just ignorant, it's dangerously idiotic.

As we are already seeing in states that have banned abortion, even ones that have some half assed medical exemption, doctors just won't perform them. Or they'll wait to perform them until it's much more risky; like when the patient is literally bleeding out. What doctor is going to risk getting constantly sued (and let's just set aside how fucking asinine it is to allow lawsuits from third-parties in no way affected) because some jackass isn't convinced it was REALLY medically necessary?

Here's an idea, how about we leave the decision of abortion up to doctors and their patient's? That way, we don't have to try and legislate around all the very legitimate reasons people get abortions. Do you think it's immoral? Great, no one's forcing you to get one and others having them has literally zero impact on your life.

[โ€“] Foresight@lemmy.ml -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Those are issues yes, however from the information I've looked at the majority of abortions are because of affordability. First off you can't get pregnant just because of getting kicked out of a house, however housing should be allocated for that scenario. You're assuming I would pass laws to ban it, your not seeking out what I intend, the point is to develop the economy and provide for people in abundance so women no longer feel the need to get an abortion because they can't afford to raise a family.

[โ€“] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

So you don't want to ban it, but rather change the circumstances in society and individual people's lives so they don't want to get them in the first place? Congratulations! You're pro-choice.

[โ€“] Foresight@lemmy.ml -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The fact you view politics as a zero sum sports game is the problem in pro or anti, us vs them. You're mistaken I'm against the practice I just go about it a different way.

[โ€“] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can be against abortion and still be pro-choice. No one is pro-abortion. You want to go about it in a way that changes the circumstances in people's lives so they choose not to have an abortion. So you do think the person's choice matters. And you can see circumstances for why someone would choose to abort. But note how you don't want to take actually away their choice, just change the circumstances so they don't make that choice. That's because...

You're pro-choice.

[โ€“] Foresight@lemmy.ml -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No I'm against the practice and I don't believe in the ideology of liberalism I am not pro-choice choice is an illusion presented from the environment.

[โ€“] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You don't want to institute a ban, but would rather influence people's choices. That's pro-choice, dumbass. Anyways you cut it, that's pro-choice.

[โ€“] Foresight@lemmy.ml -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Influence no, a material solution with a planned economy to serve everyone's needs in society so everyone has necessities and luxuries to afford and have a happy and healthy life. My solution goes beyond your simple petty plaster over a gaping wound.

[โ€“] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Please keep going with that train of thought

What is your intended outcome of them having a happy and healthy life? Is it so they... choose... not to have abortions?

[โ€“] Foresight@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The intended outcome is to develop the economy, develop the productive forces to provide for everyone in a planned economy. And hopefully bring the death rate down caused by capitalism.

[โ€“] livus@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Serious question: do you want to ban abortion before you have developed your country's economy to "provide for everyone", or after?

N.B: 45% of the abortions in the world are unsafe. It is a leading cause of maternal mortality and millions of women are hospitalized each year due to complications of unsafe abortions.

[โ€“] Foresight@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I want to provide material abundance so women don't feel the need to have to have them.

@foresight what if my partner and I just don't want kids? Even if we're economically secure? Are we not allowed to fuck because it offends your sensibilities? Because, uh, no. Don't like abortion? Don't have an abortion. I'm all for reducing the number by economic and social improvements, but there are cases where a woman does not for whatever reason want to grow another human inside of her body and that's her right.

[โ€“] Foresight@lemmy.ml -4 points 1 year ago

That they majority doesn't need one because people in a planned economy wouldn't have to the stress of affording a mortgage as housing would be allocated, wouldn't have to worry about work because jobs would be allocated, wouldn't have to worry about utility bills because resources would be allocated for need with the change of the economic calculation and wouldn't worry about inflation causing food prices to fluctuate. Come on it's not that hard to determine the factors.