I can’t really think of a reason for that as Reddit is hated somewhat equally by “both” sides of the spectrum. It’s just something I find interesting.

  • Skanky@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Would you mind clarifying your standpoint on what should be done in case a woman is raped and becomes pregnant? You kind of glossed over that part of it. I understand that you want to prevent the number of pregnancies due to rape, but what exactly do you propose when that happens? Same for pregnancies due to incest.

    It seems you already know most of what will actually help this issue, and it does include social programs. Does this make you a leftist? No, it makes you a realist. That is, unless you ask this question to most conservatives who will instantly label you as one. How dare you actually suggest something progressive!

    • Piers@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Does this make you a leftist? No, it makes you a realist. That is, unless you ask this question to most conservatives who will instantly label you as one.

      Reality has a left-wing bias.

    • Your Huckleberry@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      A person’s body is their own. From the skin in, it’s yours to do with as you please. You can’t make somebody wreck their body or risk their lives to satisfy your morality. I’m willing to debate this issue with someone who has done everything I’m their power to mitigate the risk of unwanted pregnancy. If not, I assume they’re just trying to control women’s bodies in order to secure their place in heaven, because the rest of christianity is hard.

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      In that case, as well as the medical one, abortion counts as self-defence.

      Now you might be saying “but the baby isn’t at fault, self-defence is only valid against the assailant” but, well:

      Assume you and some other guy are kidnapped by a psychopath, who puts you two into a contraption that forces the both of you to either kill the other to survive, or both die after say half a day. Is morally and legally justified to kill that random stranger who did you no wrong to save your own life?

      See it’s much easier in that case where the stakes are higher and, yes, in any (sane) legal system self-defence is valid also against people who did you no wrong: You do not have to tolerate suffering an (any) injustice just because the assailant is being creative. If you want to convict someone of homicide in that case how about the rapist.