LukeAlmighty 🇨🇿 @LukeAlmighty@gameliberty.club

We are reaching based levels previously unseen in this timeline

I used to be pro-choice because I thought it would be inconvenient to be stuck with a baby you didn't really want, but a few things changed my mind.

1. Realizing that as a man, I never had abortion rights. Not only do I not have a choice as to whether a baby I fathered was born, but even if my sperm is stolen, or I'm raped, or I'm taken advantage of as a child by an adult, or in some places even if I'm not the father, I will be held legally responsible for that child until an arbitrary point after that child has become an adult. The law where I live says that until the baby passes through the holy birthing canal it is not alive (which is a highly religious view not backed by science), and afterwards it is not only alive, but sancrosanct and to be protected above all else. Amazing what a couple inches will do!

2. Realizing that as a man living under the above regime, I chose to wait until I was ready and willing to take that responsibility should I impregnate a woman, so it isn't really that big of a deal. I won't ask anyone to do anything I didn't do willingly.

3. Seeing my son on the ultrasound at 13 weeks was the final straw. I saw a human being with arms and legs and a brain and his own blood flowing through his own veins, moving on his own. He was kicking and it wasn't because his mother was kicking. You can't look at such a thing and say "It's just a clump of cells" or similar without it being a purely religious, anti-scientific statement. Yet at that moment, it was legal to murder that innocent defenseless life in all 50 states.

I realized that the idea of saying "just get rid of it, it's inconvenient" is pure evil. You don't just murder people because they're inconvenient, and "Don't worry, they're also completely defenseless which makes it ok" doesn't mitigate that at all. None of us have the right to murder inconvenient people.

Just as all rights must be balanced against each other, you can't just say "no never under any circumstances", but you are required to balance the rights of the innocent defenseless human someone thoughtlessly created against the rights of the woman who houses that human. There are circumstances where a woman is going to die or be critically injured if a baby is born, or worse the woman will die and the baby will die anyway, or the baby will be born just long enough to die horribly.

It changes the character of sex, to be sure, but the character of sex needs to change. You're doing this thing that can potentially create a life, and it should be treated with respect as something wonderful but also potentially life altering in ways you may or may not want. We hold men responsible for those consequences, we should hold women equally responsible.

This court decision is being painted as extreme, but it is not. It's a moderate, middle of the road solution. The previous decision forcibly legalized abortion, creating new law out of whole cloth. All this does is reverse that and return to there being no law where there is no law. A more extreme decision would have taken the opposing stance of deciding a standard.

The congress, the senate, and the executive could potentially create a federal law to deal with this, and they've had 50 years to do so including times that the Democrats controlled everything such as Obama's first term where he had a supermajority, but they never did and they won't now because it's more politically expedient to just kick the can down the road and hope some future court does the hard work for them. No wonder they're upset they don't have the supreme court any longer, now they actually have to do what their constituents sent them to Washington to do and actually make laws instead of just take money from lobbyists.

@dave
Abortion is killing a life and murder your own child is a no no.
Roe vs Wade is a reach that whores like to cope with.
If the hoe wants to kill their own bloodline and continue to be a cum dumpster then move to suitable place like California.

If somebody wants to avoid getting a child then just jack off, why should my taxes go towards skanks and skallywags killing their own kids?

moe ftw hoe btfo
87f3cc182311a12c582b41a437e20c7a750d33219fa861903fd587d0c9ac2dfe.jpg

@dave sure women should have a right to make the decision but the reason they are citing for NEEDING an overreaching abortion law is because SO many women are raped or have children of incest or otherwise was forced on them when in actual fact that's not the case at all and to pretend the needs of the perceived many outweigh the needs of the actual few is pretty dumb and this is why i dont support it. more than 70% are elective. just because you "dont want it" isnt enough justification

@dave

To everyone who wants abortions, "Screw your freedoms!"