ADVERTISEMENT
返回
  • 浏览过的版块

1
ADVERTISEMENT
Huaren
等级大校
威望22
贴子17028
魅力17450
注册时间@2013-08-09

mtwash

查看全部

直播Texas强迫女人死胎割子宫案:白人中产知识女性也逃不过要被迫强制割掉子宫的命运【更新】德州最高法院判决Kate败诉

50132

341

2023-12-09 23:06:45

好惨!!!


有没有共和党选民出来亮个相,洗个地什么的?

Huaren
等级大校
威望22
贴子17028
魅力17450
注册时间@2013-08-09

mtwash

查看全部

2023-12-09 23:27:26

我去右派的论坛看了两眼,好吧,这地还是洗得下去的:


https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/4202243/posts?page=33


原样搬运一下他们的发言:

1.

disability: a physical or mental handicap, especially one that hinders or prevents a person from performing tasks of daily living, carrying out work or household responsibilities, or engaging in leisure and social activities.

As long as the baby is alive, I don't think it's possible to meet the definition of "disabled" at 20 weeks. If it's alive, it's every bit as able-bodied as the next 20-week-old. The distinctions don't become evident until later, maybe even after birth.


2.

You sound like a murderer who has killed and uses it as an excuse to kill again, “What’s one more?” Right? People with murder in their hearts use any excuse to justify doing it again.


3.

I don’t get why the father of the baby isn’t mentioned-he is involved in this, too. Is he a mute wuss who doesn’t want a say in whether HIS kid gets murdered before birth?


4.

Iceland brags they have an almost 100% abortion rate of Down Syndrome babies.


5.

Precisely. Smells of wanting to overturn Texas’ no abortion law. It would be precedent.


6.

That is why this needs to be shut down-just make this woman go across the state line to NM to kill her unborn kid-they are even advertising with groups like PP that you can get what amounts to a drive-thru abortion there...


7.

That is another matter if you are talking about a child already born-I believe the parents are responsible for their kid, and they should decide on care-not anyone else. That said, they still shouldn’t be able to have the kid killed/euthanized-that is still murder, I don’t care what you call it.



8.



Huaren
等级大校
威望22
贴子17028
魅力17450
注册时间@2013-08-09

mtwash

查看全部

2023-12-10 11:58:39

以前一直觉得美国的法律还是很符合common sense的。要么规范人们行为,要么为选票服务,或者其他反正能自圆其说的目的,但是这个堕胎法案实在是理解不了,感觉不管从哪方面都理解不了。不知道提出、通过和支持的人是怎么想的?没考虑过胚胎不好或者危机孕妇性命的怀孕情况吗?还是他们考虑过但是不在乎?没考虑过的话,说明智障,这帮人是怎么坐到这个位子上的?考虑过但不在乎的话,那他们考虑过在乎的民众会搬离或不进入德州,德州人口减少吗?


关于这个法案没有做过研究,都是看大家评论,感觉很反人类很反智啊,怎么就通过了。有了解背景,前因后果的MM科普一下吗?


le_papillon 发表于 2023-12-10 11:25

争夺权力啊


中世纪的时候,教会的权力和利益范围从神权、王权再到领地权,甚至开办银行的专属利益,哪个都拿手。那个时候教会才不会吃了没事整天喊堕胎如何的。


现在教会还是一样要在政治上寻找自己的权力,但处处受制,那么如何着手呢?当然要避免不容易打赢的战场,而寻找能打赢的战场。


推翻进化论、维护地心说之类就不是一个容易打赢的战场,所以教会采守势,能在话语上自圆上帝造万物的说法就好;


像Lauren Boebert一样去挑战政教分离原则,也很难打赢,教会不会参合;


但堕胎就不一样了,pro life在字面上符合现在社会的价值潮流,在逻辑和话术上是能找到立足之地的。那么就再给它辅以神的意旨来包装,这样教会就有了政治上对民选官员和民选代议士的制约手柄,也有了聚信众的战斗大旗。


说白了,就是教会需要寻找政治存在感,堕胎是最有利的阵地。

初始化编辑器...

到底了