It doesn't claim to. It shows the Japanese perspective and how their society deals with the issue (as stated in the video). The Japanese also tend to accept the laws that are delt to them - a big cultural difference.
One thing you have to remember, is that Japan only utilizes abortion as long as a doctor stated it was necessary for the physical or mental health of the woman involved.
They still force you to keep the baby if you're being a ho-bag. That's a big difference from the ideas the American Left hold today.
BPS makes a good point though - our system allows us to break up the laws between 50 states. Shouldn't that be sufficient for our difference in thought?
But it isn't, because we've been duped into tribalism. Just like owning guns, couples will find ways around the law to get abortions.
I'm not here to feed echo chambers. As a matter of fact, I abhor them.
Dont be duped into an echo chamber. Theres a silent minority among the women within in the MAGA movement that want choice on this issue. If the sound of that inflames you, take it up with them, not me. These girls certainly open up about this when you give them the space. Think about that. It should remind you of the political climate in 2016 being a Trump supporter.
For the record, I dont want any babies dying, but I know thats unfortunately not realistic. 😔
Very convenient that all your wild claims of "silent majorities" are pushed off onto others. Your comment is very nicely constructed so you don't have to provide a lick of evidence for any of your claims. "Oh I can't prove it or give an example of one of these people because they're silent! But trust me they exist and are the majority!". Instead we all have to go on some potential wild goose chase looking for these mythical people you claim exist.
Also, your argument is basically "criminals will still commit crimes so why make anything illegal!". I guess murder should be legal too. People will circumvent the law so why bother!
Breaking it up between 50 states IS sufficient for many here from what I've seen as they heavily favor states rights. But at least for myself I see no reasonable argument for making murdering babies a state decision but murdering adults a federal one. Plenty or even most things are/should be state decisions, deciding on the legality of murder isn't one of them.
Your defeatist attitude helps no one. Least of all the babies you say you don't want dying, but aren't willing to make the hard decisions to try and save as many of them as possible. It'll never be fully fixed or perfect but that isn't the point. The point is to try and do as much as we can to preserve life and do the right thing.
You are so blinded by rage, that you didnt actually read what I wrote. Slow down and read:
But trust me they exist and are the majority!
I called them a minority. You didn't read.
Breaking it up between 50 states IS sufficient
I agree. BPS agrees. Again, you are reading what you want to see. We've been duped into tribalism as a country. That's why the 50 state solution isn't sufficient. Not that it isn't sufficient on its merit. It's not sufficient because of how disfunctional we act as a whole.
Also, your argument is basically "criminals will still commit crimes so why make anything illegal!"
I didn't say anything like that! 👆🤣🤣🤣
Your defeatist attitude helps no one.
I'm not defeated. I know that there are acceptable times for couples to abort. If they even take that route its going to be a decision they make - whether it be by legal or illegal means.
Again, if a 50 state solution works, why cant my state hold this opinion, while your state holds a different one? Can't have your cake and eat mine too, you know.
You're really good at telling other people what they think and how they feel. "Muh rage" is laughable and my eyes are wide open. And while I did misread that one precise word in your post it hardly changes my point. You've constructed and phrased your claim in such a way that it can't be disproved without going out and probing dozens of MAGA women for their thoughts on abortion. You've simply claimed they exist and used their claimed existence to push your point, as if it even matters what a minority of people think in regards to protecting the life of the unborn.
Now it seems you're misreading what I'm saying. Read the whole sentence. You said people don't find that sufficient, I'm saying they do. Not that you don't. Again, I've read exactly what you've said save for one word as previously explained.
It's not "tribalism", it's understanding that murder is wrong and shouldn't be up to a state to decide to make it legal or not. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Every child has an inherent right to life. Killing them deprives them of this. No state, doctor, or person has the right to do this. It only looks like "tribalism" because one side has been brainwashed into a belief that babies can be discarded on a whim. They've moved so far away from reason on the topic that the reasonable people can't discuss the intricacies of what the rules should be without some crazy coming in and screeching that there shouldn't be any rules at all.
You said "Just like owning guns, couples will find ways around the law to get abortions.". Usually people say this as a reason why making the thing illegal is pointless. The logical extreme of this is to make nothing illegal. Now, I'd certainly agree guns shouldn't be made illegal and that one of the reasons is that it won't stop anyone from getting guns, but that's certainly not the primary reason. In the case of abortion it's much closer to (read: the same as) murder. It doesn't matter that people are still going to do it, it should be illegal. But maybe none of this was your intention, maybe you were just pointing out this reality as if people don't already understand this being that it's simple logic and observation of reality. In that case you do you I guess and I suppose I was incorrect on my interpretation there as well. But you also aren't telling anyone anything they didn't already know.
And it sounded to me that "For the record, I dont want any babies dying, but I know thats unfortunately not realistic." meant that you'd agree in an ideal world that abortion would never happen/be illegal. We obviously don't live in an ideal world but that doesn't mean we can't move to try and make it a better place and protect the lives of everyone, including the unborn. This is why I thought your reasoning sounded defeatist. Like "oh this is bad/wrong/shouldn't happen but what can we do".
Finally, there is no acceptable time to murder an unborn baby. And before you proclaim tribalism again, I'd point out that it seems the majority of people DO support abortion to a limited degree. Every conservative voice I listen(ed) to that lead me to where I am now would agree there should be cases where it's allowed. Yet I don't. I don't because I came to my own conclusion, not because of tribalism. I disagree with a large part of "my tribe" on this topic it seems.
And while I did misread that one precise word in your post it hardly changes my point.
Well, yes it does. The words majority vs minority are opposites.
You've constructed and phrased your claim in such a way that it can't be disproved without going out and probing dozens of MAGA women for their thoughts on abortion
Im only telling you what I see. Its up to you to verify for yourself until a preferred source comes around. It's even here on this forum if you give women the chance to speak.
I guarantee after reading this conversation, they won't give you the time of day.
You've simply claimed they exist and used their claimed existence to push your point, as if it even matters what a minority of people think in regards to protecting the life of the unborn
Caught you in a slur of emotion though didn't I? 🤣🤣🤣 Lay off the pot.
You said people don't find that sufficient, I'm saying they do. Again, I've read exactly what you've said save for one word as previously explained.
I'm not even sure what you're talking about. Why dont you use the quotes feature on this forum to be more accurate?
The logical extreme of this is to make nothing illegal.
Yes, but you're the one who jumped onto that one. Not me.
This is why I thought your reasoning sounded defeatist.
I honestly dont care what you think. To be frankly honest, I think you're a mess. 🙂
I'd point out that it seems the majority of people DO support abortion to a limited degree.
Ok so what are you even fighting about again?
Did you just indirectly show there is truth to my claim of a silent minority?
as if it even matters what a minority of people think in regards to protecting the life of the unborn.
I'd point out that it seems the majority of people DO support abortion to a limited degree.
Ok, you're just an ass at this point. 😑
If you go off on another tirade of text, Im not reading it.
It's already broken up between states. What is considered a Justified Homicide in one state can be considered first, second, or third degree Murder in others without things such as stand your ground laws.
A murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a natural person.
A natural person is defined as someone that was born naturally as opposed to a legally created person such as a corporation.
At the time of this nations founding many people did not think the fetus was infused with the human soul until the quickening. Even then abortion wasn't considered more than a heinous misdemeanor. If you actually read the earliest laws they were to punish incompetent doctors for the death of a woman, not for performing an abortion...
What isn't justified in any state? Walking up to some random, innocent guy in a shop and shooting him in the head for no reason whatsoever. This is illegal everywhere and if it somehow isn't it should be.
The benefit of living in the present is that we can take what we have now and what we had in the past and mesh them together into something altogether better, to get the best of both. Just because a law or way of thinking/viewing things is older doesn't mean it's better. Conversely just because something is newer it isn't necessarily better either.
"we can take what we have now and what we had in the past and mesh them together into something altogether better"
That's the problem though. The left wants post birth abortions and I the right treats the morning after pill as murder. People are galvanized in untenable positions.
"and shooting him in the head for no reason whatsoever."
It doesn't claim to. It shows the Japanese perspective and how their society deals with the issue (as stated in the video). The Japanese also tend to accept the laws that are delt to them - a big cultural difference.
One thing you have to remember, is that Japan only utilizes abortion as long as a doctor stated it was necessary for the physical or mental health of the woman involved.
They still force you to keep the baby if you're being a ho-bag. That's a big difference from the ideas the American Left hold today.
BPS makes a good point though - our system allows us to break up the laws between 50 states. Shouldn't that be sufficient for our difference in thought?
But it isn't, because we've been duped into tribalism. Just like owning guns, couples will find ways around the law to get abortions.
I'm not here to feed echo chambers. As a matter of fact, I abhor them.
Dont be duped into an echo chamber. Theres a silent minority among the women within in the MAGA movement that want choice on this issue. If the sound of that inflames you, take it up with them, not me. These girls certainly open up about this when you give them the space. Think about that. It should remind you of the political climate in 2016 being a Trump supporter.
For the record, I dont want any babies dying, but I know thats unfortunately not realistic. 😔
Very convenient that all your wild claims of "silent majorities" are pushed off onto others. Your comment is very nicely constructed so you don't have to provide a lick of evidence for any of your claims. "Oh I can't prove it or give an example of one of these people because they're silent! But trust me they exist and are the majority!". Instead we all have to go on some potential wild goose chase looking for these mythical people you claim exist.
Also, your argument is basically "criminals will still commit crimes so why make anything illegal!". I guess murder should be legal too. People will circumvent the law so why bother!
Breaking it up between 50 states IS sufficient for many here from what I've seen as they heavily favor states rights. But at least for myself I see no reasonable argument for making murdering babies a state decision but murdering adults a federal one. Plenty or even most things are/should be state decisions, deciding on the legality of murder isn't one of them.
Your defeatist attitude helps no one. Least of all the babies you say you don't want dying, but aren't willing to make the hard decisions to try and save as many of them as possible. It'll never be fully fixed or perfect but that isn't the point. The point is to try and do as much as we can to preserve life and do the right thing.
You are so blinded by rage, that you didnt actually read what I wrote. Slow down and read:
I called them a minority. You didn't read.
I agree. BPS agrees. Again, you are reading what you want to see. We've been duped into tribalism as a country. That's why the 50 state solution isn't sufficient. Not that it isn't sufficient on its merit. It's not sufficient because of how disfunctional we act as a whole.
I didn't say anything like that! 👆🤣🤣🤣
I'm not defeated. I know that there are acceptable times for couples to abort. If they even take that route its going to be a decision they make - whether it be by legal or illegal means.
Again, if a 50 state solution works, why cant my state hold this opinion, while your state holds a different one? Can't have your cake and eat mine too, you know.
You're really good at telling other people what they think and how they feel. "Muh rage" is laughable and my eyes are wide open. And while I did misread that one precise word in your post it hardly changes my point. You've constructed and phrased your claim in such a way that it can't be disproved without going out and probing dozens of MAGA women for their thoughts on abortion. You've simply claimed they exist and used their claimed existence to push your point, as if it even matters what a minority of people think in regards to protecting the life of the unborn.
Now it seems you're misreading what I'm saying. Read the whole sentence. You said people don't find that sufficient, I'm saying they do. Not that you don't. Again, I've read exactly what you've said save for one word as previously explained.
It's not "tribalism", it's understanding that murder is wrong and shouldn't be up to a state to decide to make it legal or not. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Every child has an inherent right to life. Killing them deprives them of this. No state, doctor, or person has the right to do this. It only looks like "tribalism" because one side has been brainwashed into a belief that babies can be discarded on a whim. They've moved so far away from reason on the topic that the reasonable people can't discuss the intricacies of what the rules should be without some crazy coming in and screeching that there shouldn't be any rules at all.
You said "Just like owning guns, couples will find ways around the law to get abortions.". Usually people say this as a reason why making the thing illegal is pointless. The logical extreme of this is to make nothing illegal. Now, I'd certainly agree guns shouldn't be made illegal and that one of the reasons is that it won't stop anyone from getting guns, but that's certainly not the primary reason. In the case of abortion it's much closer to (read: the same as) murder. It doesn't matter that people are still going to do it, it should be illegal. But maybe none of this was your intention, maybe you were just pointing out this reality as if people don't already understand this being that it's simple logic and observation of reality. In that case you do you I guess and I suppose I was incorrect on my interpretation there as well. But you also aren't telling anyone anything they didn't already know.
And it sounded to me that "For the record, I dont want any babies dying, but I know thats unfortunately not realistic." meant that you'd agree in an ideal world that abortion would never happen/be illegal. We obviously don't live in an ideal world but that doesn't mean we can't move to try and make it a better place and protect the lives of everyone, including the unborn. This is why I thought your reasoning sounded defeatist. Like "oh this is bad/wrong/shouldn't happen but what can we do".
Finally, there is no acceptable time to murder an unborn baby. And before you proclaim tribalism again, I'd point out that it seems the majority of people DO support abortion to a limited degree. Every conservative voice I listen(ed) to that lead me to where I am now would agree there should be cases where it's allowed. Yet I don't. I don't because I came to my own conclusion, not because of tribalism. I disagree with a large part of "my tribe" on this topic it seems.
Well, yes it does. The words majority vs minority are opposites.
Im only telling you what I see. Its up to you to verify for yourself until a preferred source comes around. It's even here on this forum if you give women the chance to speak.
I guarantee after reading this conversation, they won't give you the time of day.
Caught you in a slur of emotion though didn't I? 🤣🤣🤣 Lay off the pot.
I'm not even sure what you're talking about. Why dont you use the quotes feature on this forum to be more accurate?
Yes, but you're the one who jumped onto that one. Not me.
I honestly dont care what you think. To be frankly honest, I think you're a mess. 🙂
Ok so what are you even fighting about again?
Did you just indirectly show there is truth to my claim of a silent minority?
Ok, you're just an ass at this point. 😑
If you go off on another tirade of text, Im not reading it.
It's already broken up between states. What is considered a Justified Homicide in one state can be considered first, second, or third degree Murder in others without things such as stand your ground laws.
A murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a natural person.
A natural person is defined as someone that was born naturally as opposed to a legally created person such as a corporation.
At the time of this nations founding many people did not think the fetus was infused with the human soul until the quickening. Even then abortion wasn't considered more than a heinous misdemeanor. If you actually read the earliest laws they were to punish incompetent doctors for the death of a woman, not for performing an abortion...
What isn't justified in any state? Walking up to some random, innocent guy in a shop and shooting him in the head for no reason whatsoever. This is illegal everywhere and if it somehow isn't it should be.
The benefit of living in the present is that we can take what we have now and what we had in the past and mesh them together into something altogether better, to get the best of both. Just because a law or way of thinking/viewing things is older doesn't mean it's better. Conversely just because something is newer it isn't necessarily better either.
"we can take what we have now and what we had in the past and mesh them together into something altogether better"
That's the problem though. The left wants post birth abortions and I the right treats the morning after pill as murder. People are galvanized in untenable positions.
"and shooting him in the head for no reason whatsoever."
Case and point. You created a strawman.