You only need one argument pro-choice and that is “Her body, her choice”.
I’ve found that a weak ineffective incendiary argument.
Alarming that you say it’s the only argument needed.
An argument I’ve seen be far more effective many times, is “if you disallow abortions, you let rapsists choose the mothers of their children”.
Or another more broad: “Prohibition does not prevent. Prohibition makes the good things bad and the bad things worse.” For the “handing it over to the black market” coat-hangers argument.
Still even while having these discussions, to whichever extent to a side or to nuance one goes, it’s worth reminding ourselves how this is one of those divisive topics used to distract us, to keep us divided and conquered, while we’re all being [pardon the expression] screwed by the man, with usury and genocide and more happening all around out there, encroaching ever more inescapably. So it’s good to take a step back and see it from the level of control or freedom (which then can reunite desperate perspectives, sharing the same principles, and with that shared awareness, can better proceed through figuring out how to better meet those principles (~ certainly better than being at each others’ throats while we’re [again] getting screwed by the man), freeing up our time, attention, energy, for more important vital concerns.
Nah, to those convinced otherwise, that argument reads like “let them kill babies!”, and they don’t like it.
So if that’s the only argument you’ve got… I imagine it’s proving worse than ineffectual to some mindsets, and triggering them to double down harder, dig their heels in deeper, further into groupthink, further towards that terrorised totalitarianised psyche, doubtless joining with others similarly so, perhaps even citing your argument to further bolster their tribal cohesion contrast to those monsters who want to kill babies, strengthening their fervour against the baby killing threat they perceive. … Where any and all atrocities are seen as necessary virtues. … And it only gets worse, unchallenged. And so, challenge it wisely we must. Because merely aggravating them with words they hear differently to how such mantras and mottos sound among your own groupthinking tribe, is not the kind of challenge that helps alleviate them from their mental stupor. Wise to be aware of the psychology, not just for how to approach those in groupthink, but also, to catch ourselves, from becoming opposames, exorcising groupthink from ourselves as soon as we find it lurking. One does not realise when one is in groupthink, but there are still clues.
I’ve found that a weak ineffective incendiary argument.
Alarming that you say it’s the only argument needed.
An argument I’ve seen be far more effective many times, is “if you disallow abortions, you let rapsists choose the mothers of their children”.
Or another more broad: “Prohibition does not prevent. Prohibition makes the good things bad and the bad things worse.” For the “handing it over to the black market” coat-hangers argument.
Still even while having these discussions, to whichever extent to a side or to nuance one goes, it’s worth reminding ourselves how this is one of those divisive topics used to distract us, to keep us divided and conquered, while we’re all being [pardon the expression] screwed by the man, with usury and genocide and more happening all around out there, encroaching ever more inescapably. So it’s good to take a step back and see it from the level of control or freedom (which then can reunite desperate perspectives, sharing the same principles, and with that shared awareness, can better proceed through figuring out how to better meet those principles (~ certainly better than being at each others’ throats while we’re [again] getting screwed by the man), freeing up our time, attention, energy, for more important vital concerns.
Yes, women having bodily autonomy being an “incendiary argument” is definitely one of the many problems of the patriarchy.
Nice strawman. Hah.
Nah, to those convinced otherwise, that argument reads like “let them kill babies!”, and they don’t like it.
So if that’s the only argument you’ve got… I imagine it’s proving worse than ineffectual to some mindsets, and triggering them to double down harder, dig their heels in deeper, further into groupthink, further towards that terrorised totalitarianised psyche, doubtless joining with others similarly so, perhaps even citing your argument to further bolster their tribal cohesion contrast to those monsters who want to kill babies, strengthening their fervour against the baby killing threat they perceive. … Where any and all atrocities are seen as necessary virtues. … And it only gets worse, unchallenged. And so, challenge it wisely we must. Because merely aggravating them with words they hear differently to how such mantras and mottos sound among your own groupthinking tribe, is not the kind of challenge that helps alleviate them from their mental stupor. Wise to be aware of the psychology, not just for how to approach those in groupthink, but also, to catch ourselves, from becoming opposames, exorcising groupthink from ourselves as soon as we find it lurking. One does not realise when one is in groupthink, but there are still clues.