docAvid

This has some real "crimson eleven delight petrichor" vibes.

I'm not sure you're talking about the same thing billwashere was talking about, but I'd like to hear more of your thoughts.

Hmm, a quote I quite like myself. Let's see. I have defined two groups. I have not suggested that either group should not be bound by the law, nor that either group should by better protected by the law than the other. In fact, this entire part of the discussion is predicated on the law, which one group has imposed on the other, applying equally.

I remember, so clearly, a conversation, debate, argument, with a relative, at a funeral ffs, in 2016. He was a Trump supporter. I was talking about all the awful, terrifying, heartbreaking things that Trump was indicating he would do. My relative said just that. None of that will happen, you'll see, it will all be fine. Literally every one of those things happened. The indications of much worse things are even stronger this time. Wake up. None of that will happen, if, and only if, we fight like hell to stop it.

Who are the wrong people? Have people similar to them offered significant resistance to past fascist regimes?

Do you think that's a realistic way to keep sufficient modern Internet traffic moving?

It's not just men who support forced birth.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/244709/pro-choice-pro-life-2018-demographic-tables.aspx

I appreciate the intent of your correction. For most abortions, yes, blastocyst. I'm not an expert, but I think that the body will usually safely flush out a failed blastocyst, and as the article said, many of these absolute nightmare scenarios cannot be diagnosed until well past that stage, so in this context, I think fetus is correct.

The only way they will "see the light" is if they look around their states and see no women; see no educated individuals; see no hard working youths; and see no business

I mean, they won't "see no women", women are nearly as likely to support forced birth as men. They don't really care about the rest of that. They'd be quite glad to not have any opposition anymore, and be able to keep all those juicy senate seats and electoral college votes. Since they already have created an extremist Supreme Court, this would guarantee they wouldn't lose the ability to veto or filibuster any attempt to fix it, while said Court continues to impose their views on the rest of the country.

*fetus

The thing is, I don't really care what people "deserve", or what they "don't deserve". How should I know? I'll be a dork and quote Tolkien: "Many that live deserve death. Some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment."

But I do care about who's in the pact. We have an agreement, between us, we decent people. We watch out for each other. We protect each other. Or if we can't, when something terrible is done to somebody, at the very least, we speak out, in protest, in sympathy, in sorrow. And the people covered by this pact, as far as I'm concerned, are the people who follow it - that's it, the sole criteria for membership, about the lowest bar possible.

I'm not going to force somebody to carry a dead fetus because they forced other people to do so, but when the cruel laws they always thought would only apply to other people suddenly apply to them, I don't owe them my sympathy either. They aren't in the pact.

It's important to spay and neuter our pets, but the dogs deserve to have their balls treated more respectfully than that.