Why Are Abortion Proponents So Emotional?

 

Proponents of abortion get quite emotional, many to the point of irrationality. Their reactions to the potential that there might be even the slightest constraints on abortion are way over the top. We have seen quite a bit of hysterics on display the last couple of months.

Why? I can’t think of another issue that generates such a high level of emotion, even supposedly existential issues like “climate change.” The weird sex advocates get emotional and are very persistent, but even they don’t get hysterical in the same way that abortion advocates do.

What is it about abortion that causes such reactions?

For this discussion, I am referring to the extreme activists who put themselves on public display, not the vast muddy middle of people that @susanquinn  addresses below.

[I operate on a theory that the more I understand the other party’s motivations, the more likely I can help either find a workable solution, or convince them that they might be mistaken.]

Published in Culture
Tags:

This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 152 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Matthew Singer (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    I think the Second Wave Feminism answer has a lot of weight to it. It’s a view of motherhood as living hell, of abject slavery in service of men and a tiny tyrant. Imagine you are required by law to take care of Joe Biden – change his diapers, make sure he is minimally embarrassing in public, dress him, watch him like a hawk because his actions are your responsibility. For this, you receive no pay, and you are expected to pay for all of the supplies.

    Motherhood is the one of the most intense responsibilities out there, and is about as far from freedom as possible. I wonder about their childhoods – did their mothers seem that miserable? It’s hard to imagine parenthood without love for the child.

    Sexual freedom is a huge part of this. The Left believes nothing should ever stop people from screwing. Add in how disruptive having kids is to your life plans, and you have a pretty solid reason to want abortion.

    @ henrycastaigne I think gets at why any restriction is treated as an attack. Abortion lets you exercise complete control over your body.

    OK, I’m a sexist and a male chauvinist but motherhood is what women literally exist for. To perpetuate the species as it were. God or Nature it the main purpose. (Donning asbestos armour)

    This is so but men were naturally made to rape and conquer foreigners. Nature sucks. We should try to move beyond our filthy ape nature.

    If men stop raping and conquering, civilization can still continue. Not so if women don’t have children.

    And men weren’t made to rape and conquer. That’s from his perverse understanding of humanity.

    We are pretty close to chimps mate. It ain’t pretty but it’s True.

    You maybe, but not me.

    Religion has a refutation and an explanation for science, but… science also has an explanation for religion, and need not bother with refutation. That said, I agree that HC has mis-stated the case.

    Really? What explanation does science have for religion that isn’t all just concocted musings and imaginings and “sounds good” atheistic theories?

    Saying “it makes sense” built up upon an atheistic bias is not science. Are you talking about the “god particle”, or the “religion center” of the brain, or archeological digs, or just the Just-So-Story “evidences” presented by evolutionary psychology.

    I propose that we just leave it there.  Neither of us will convince the other, and I like you.

    • #121
  2. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    BDB (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Matthew Singer (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    I think the Second Wave Feminism answer has a lot of weight to it. It’s a view of motherhood as living hell, of abject slavery in service of men and a tiny tyrant. Imagine you are required by law to take care of Joe Biden – change his diapers, make sure he is minimally embarrassing in public, dress him, watch him like a hawk because his actions are your responsibility. For this, you receive no pay, and you are expected to pay for all of the supplies.

    Motherhood is the one of the most intense responsibilities out there, and is about as far from freedom as possible. I wonder about their childhoods – did their mothers seem that miserable? It’s hard to imagine parenthood without love for the child.

    Sexual freedom is a huge part of this. The Left believes nothing should ever stop people from screwing. Add in how disruptive having kids is to your life plans, and you have a pretty solid reason to want abortion.

    @ henrycastaigne I think gets at why any restriction is treated as an attack. Abortion lets you exercise complete control over your body.

    OK, I’m a sexist and a male chauvinist but motherhood is what women literally exist for. To perpetuate the species as it were. God or Nature it the main purpose. (Donning asbestos armour)

    This is so but men were naturally made to rape and conquer foreigners. Nature sucks. We should try to move beyond our filthy ape nature.

    If men stop raping and conquering, civilization can still continue. Not so if women don’t have children.

    And men weren’t made to rape and conquer. That’s from his perverse understanding of humanity.

    We are pretty close to chimps mate. It ain’t pretty but it’s True.

    You maybe, but not me.

    Religion has a refutation and an explanation for science, but… science also has an explanation for religion, and need not bother with refutation. That said, I agree that HC has mis-stated the case.

    Really? What explanation does science have for religion that isn’t all just concocted musings and imaginings and “sounds good” atheistic theories?

    Saying “it makes sense” built up upon an atheistic bias is not science. Are you talking about the “god particle”, or the “religion center” of the brain, or archeological digs, or just the Just-So-Story “evidences” presented by evolutionary psychology.

    I propose that we just leave it there. Neither of us will convince the other, and I like you.

    I like you too.  And if you wish.

    • #122
  3. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    BDB (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Matthew Singer (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    I think the Second Wave Feminism answer has a lot of weight to it. It’s a view of motherhood as living hell, of abject slavery in service of men and a tiny tyrant. Imagine you are required by law to take care of Joe Biden – change his diapers, make sure he is minimally embarrassing in public, dress him, watch him like a hawk because his actions are your responsibility. For this, you receive no pay, and you are expected to pay for all of the supplies.

    Motherhood is the one of the most intense responsibilities out there, and is about as far from freedom as possible. I wonder about their childhoods – did their mothers seem that miserable? It’s hard to imagine parenthood without love for the child.

    Sexual freedom is a huge part of this. The Left believes nothing should ever stop people from screwing. Add in how disruptive having kids is to your life plans, and you have a pretty solid reason to want abortion.

    @ henrycastaigne I think gets at why any restriction is treated as an attack. Abortion lets you exercise complete control over your body.

    OK, I’m a sexist and a male chauvinist but motherhood is what women literally exist for. To perpetuate the species as it were. God or Nature it the main purpose. (Donning asbestos armour)

    This is so but men were naturally made to rape and conquer foreigners. Nature sucks. We should try to move beyond our filthy ape nature.

    If men stop raping and conquering, civilization can still continue. Not so if women don’t have children.

    And men weren’t made to rape and conquer. That’s from his perverse understanding of humanity.

    We are pretty close to chimps mate. It ain’t pretty but it’s True.

    You maybe, but not me.

    Religion has a refutation and an explanation for science, but… science also has an explanation for religion, and need not bother with refutation. That said, I agree that HC has mis-stated the case.

    Scientifically, the difference between a chimp and a human is great.  Just look around you.  Can a chimp design a car and build one?  Does a chimp live in a house?  Does a chimp create a bourbon I’m now sipping?  Come on.  You’ve bought into this pseudo science.

    • #123
  4. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Manny (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Matthew Singer (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    I think the Second Wave Feminism answer has a lot of weight to it. It’s a view of motherhood as living hell, of abject slavery in service of men and a tiny tyrant. Imagine you are required by law to take care of Joe Biden – change his diapers, make sure he is minimally embarrassing in public, dress him, watch him like a hawk because his actions are your responsibility. For this, you receive no pay, and you are expected to pay for all of the supplies.

    Motherhood is the one of the most intense responsibilities out there, and is about as far from freedom as possible. I wonder about their childhoods – did their mothers seem that miserable? It’s hard to imagine parenthood without love for the child.

    Sexual freedom is a huge part of this. The Left believes nothing should ever stop people from screwing. Add in how disruptive having kids is to your life plans, and you have a pretty solid reason to want abortion.

    @ henrycastaigne I think gets at why any restriction is treated as an attack. Abortion lets you exercise complete control over your body.

    OK, I’m a sexist and a male chauvinist but motherhood is what women literally exist for. To perpetuate the species as it were. God or Nature it the main purpose. (Donning asbestos armour)

    This is so but men were naturally made to rape and conquer foreigners. Nature sucks. We should try to move beyond our filthy ape nature.

    If men stop raping and conquering, civilization can still continue. Not so if women don’t have children.

    And men weren’t made to rape and conquer. That’s from his perverse understanding of humanity.

    We are pretty close to chimps mate. It ain’t pretty but it’s True.

    You maybe, but not me.

    Religion has a refutation and an explanation for science, but… science also has an explanation for religion, and need not bother with refutation. That said, I agree that HC has mis-stated the case.

    Scientifically, the difference between a chimp and a human is great. Just look around you. Can a chimp design a car and build one? Does a chimp live in a house? Does a chimp create a bourbon I’m now sipping? Come on. You’ve bought into this pseudo science.

    I’m intrigued by chimp bourbon.

    • #124
  5. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    BDB (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Matthew Singer (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    I think the Second Wave Feminism answer has a lot of weight to it. It’s a view of motherhood as living hell, of abject slavery in service of men and a tiny tyrant. Imagine you are required by law to take care of Joe Biden – change his diapers, make sure he is minimally embarrassing in public, dress him, watch him like a hawk because his actions are your responsibility. For this, you receive no pay, and you are expected to pay for all of the supplies.

    Motherhood is the one of the most intense responsibilities out there, and is about as far from freedom as possible. I wonder about their childhoods – did their mothers seem that miserable? It’s hard to imagine parenthood without love for the child.

    Sexual freedom is a huge part of this. The Left believes nothing should ever stop people from screwing. Add in how disruptive having kids is to your life plans, and you have a pretty solid reason to want abortion.

    @ henrycastaigne I think gets at why any restriction is treated as an attack. Abortion lets you exercise complete control over your body.

    OK, I’m a sexist and a male chauvinist but motherhood is what women literally exist for. To perpetuate the species as it were. God or Nature it the main purpose. (Donning asbestos armour)

    This is so but men were naturally made to rape and conquer foreigners. Nature sucks. We should try to move beyond our filthy ape nature.

    If men stop raping and conquering, civilization can still continue. Not so if women don’t have children.

    And men weren’t made to rape and conquer. That’s from his perverse understanding of humanity.

    We are pretty close to chimps mate. It ain’t pretty but it’s True.

    You maybe, but not me.

    Religion has a refutation and an explanation for science, but… science also has an explanation for religion, and need not bother with refutation. That said, I agree that HC has mis-stated the case.

    Scientifically, the difference between a chimp and a human is great. Just look around you. Can a chimp design a car and build one? Does a chimp live in a house? Does a chimp create a bourbon I’m now sipping? Come on. You’ve bought into this pseudo science.

    I’m intrigued by chimp bourbon.

    I have a feeling it would be flavored with poop.

    • #125
  6. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    BDB (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Matthew Singer (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    I think the Second Wave Feminism answer has a lot of weight to it. It’s a view of motherhood as living hell, of abject slavery in service of men and a tiny tyrant. Imagine you are required by law to take care of Joe Biden – change his diapers, make sure he is minimally embarrassing in public, dress him, watch him like a hawk because his actions are your responsibility. For this, you receive no pay, and you are expected to pay for all of the supplies.

    Motherhood is the one of the most intense responsibilities out there, and is about as far from freedom as possible. I wonder about their childhoods – did their mothers seem that miserable? It’s hard to imagine parenthood without love for the child.

    Sexual freedom is a huge part of this. The Left believes nothing should ever stop people from screwing. Add in how disruptive having kids is to your life plans, and you have a pretty solid reason to want abortion.

    @ henrycastaigne I think gets at why any restriction is treated as an attack. Abortion lets you exercise complete control over your body.

    OK, I’m a sexist and a male chauvinist but motherhood is what women literally exist for. To perpetuate the species as it were. God or Nature it the main purpose. (Donning asbestos armour)

    This is so but men were naturally made to rape and conquer foreigners. Nature sucks. We should try to move beyond our filthy ape nature.

    If men stop raping and conquering, civilization can still continue. Not so if women don’t have children.

    And men weren’t made to rape and conquer. That’s from his perverse understanding of humanity.

    We are pretty close to chimps mate. It ain’t pretty but it’s True.

    You maybe, but not me.

    Religion has a refutation and an explanation for science, but… science also has an explanation for religion, and need not bother with refutation. That said, I agree that HC has mis-stated the case.

    Scientifically, the difference between a chimp and a human is great. Just look around you. Can a chimp design a car and build one? Does a chimp live in a house? Does a chimp create a bourbon I’m now sipping? Come on. You’ve bought into this pseudo science.

    I’m intrigued by chimp bourbon.

    It is made with real chimps?

    • #126
  7. JoshuaFinch Coolidge
    JoshuaFinch
    @JoshuaFinch

    • #127
  8. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Having a background in both science and atheism, I find that “debunking religion” (God) with science is a terrible misuse of science and damaging to the credibility of the science-minded. Even my agnostic scientist husband agrees. Science has nothing to say about God or the philosophical/logical premises on which the West has thrived (infinite regression is a logical impossibility, for example). Debunking God is not what science is for! 

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-debunking-atheism

    Now go have a blessed day, dammit! 

    • #128
  9. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Having a background in both science and atheism, I find that “debunking religion” (God) with science is a terrible misuse of science and damaging to the credibility of the science-minded. Even my agnostic scientist husband agrees. Science has nothing to say about God or the philosophical/logical premises on which the West has thrived (infinite regression is a logical impossibility, for example). Debunking God is not what science is for!

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-debunking-atheism

    Now go have a blessed day, dammit!

    You’ve conflated religion with God, which I did mean to avoid in my statement about explanations and refutations.

    • #129
  10. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Having a background in both science and atheism, I find that “debunking religion” (God) with science is a terrible misuse of science and damaging to the credibility of the science-minded. Even my agnostic scientist husband agrees. Science has nothing to say about God or the philosophical/logical premises on which the West has thrived (infinite regression is a logical impossibility, for example). Debunking God is not what science is for!

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-debunking-atheism

    Now go have a blessed day, dammit!

    But you are convinced that we are the incestuous children of Adam and Eve? Right?

    • #130
  11. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Having a background in both science and atheism, I find that “debunking religion” (God) with science is a terrible misuse of science and damaging to the credibility of the science-minded. Even my agnostic scientist husband agrees. Science has nothing to say about God or the philosophical/logical premises on which the West has thrived (infinite regression is a logical impossibility, for example). Debunking God is not what science is for!

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-debunking-atheism

    Now go have a blessed day, dammit!

    But you are convinced that we are the incestuous children of Adam and Eve? Right?

    Nope. Try not to put words in my mouth.

    • #131
  12. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Having a background in both science and atheism, I find that “debunking religion” (God) with science is a terrible misuse of science and damaging to the credibility of the science-minded. Even my agnostic scientist husband agrees. Science has nothing to say about God or the philosophical/logical premises on which the West has thrived (infinite regression is a logical impossibility, for example). Debunking God is not what science is for!

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-debunking-atheism

    Now go have a blessed day, dammit!

    Can you please write about what it means to be an atheist? 

    • #132
  13. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Having a background in both science and atheism, I find that “debunking religion” (God) with science is a terrible misuse of science and damaging to the credibility of the science-minded. Even my agnostic scientist husband agrees. Science has nothing to say about God or the philosophical/logical premises on which the West has thrived (infinite regression is a logical impossibility, for example). Debunking God is not what science is for!

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-debunking-atheism

    Now go have a blessed day, dammit!

    But you are convinced that we are the incestuous children of Adam and Eve? Right?

    Nope. Try not to put words in my mouth.

    So do we descend from apes or not?

    • #133
  14. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Having a background in both science and atheism, I find that “debunking religion” (God) with science is a terrible misuse of science and damaging to the credibility of the science-minded. Even my agnostic scientist husband agrees. Science has nothing to say about God or the philosophical/logical premises on which the West has thrived (infinite regression is a logical impossibility, for example). Debunking God is not what science is for!

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-debunking-atheism

    Now go have a blessed day, dammit!

    But you are convinced that we are the incestuous children of Adam and Eve? Right?

    Nope. Try not to put words in my mouth.

    So do we descend from apes or not?

    We (probably) do, although I think an honest scientist would say there are weaknesses in the theory of evolutionary biology — like “random” mutation — that seem kind of hand-wavey.

    The Bible (the Book of Genesis you’re alluding to) is not a science text book. It is, however, chock full of wisdom about human nature, both male and female. 

    • #134
  15. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Having a background in both science and atheism, I find that “debunking religion” (God) with science is a terrible misuse of science and damaging to the credibility of the science-minded. Even my agnostic scientist husband agrees. Science has nothing to say about God or the philosophical/logical premises on which the West has thrived (infinite regression is a logical impossibility, for example). Debunking God is not what science is for!

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-debunking-atheism

    Now go have a blessed day, dammit!

    But you are convinced that we are the incestuous children of Adam and Eve? Right?

    Nope. Try not to put words in my mouth.

    So do we descend from apes or not?

    We (probably) do, although I think an honest scientist would say there are weaknesses in the theory of evolutionary biology — like “random” mutation — that seem kind of hand-wavey.

    The Bible (the Book of Genesis you’re alluding to) is not a science text book. It is, however, chock full of wisdom about human nature, both male and female.

    Do not avoid the question. Do we come from apes or do we not come from apes?

    • #135
  16. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Having a background in both science and atheism, I find that “debunking religion” (God) with science is a terrible misuse of science and damaging to the credibility of the science-minded. Even my agnostic scientist husband agrees. Science has nothing to say about God or the philosophical/logical premises on which the West has thrived (infinite regression is a logical impossibility, for example). Debunking God is not what science is for!

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-debunking-atheism

    Now go have a blessed day, dammit!

    But you are convinced that we are the incestuous children of Adam and Eve? Right?

    Nope. Try not to put words in my mouth.

    So do we descend from apes or not?

    We (probably) do, although I think an honest scientist would say there are weaknesses in the theory of evolutionary biology — like “random” mutation — that seem kind of hand-wavey.

    The Bible (the Book of Genesis you’re alluding to) is not a science text book. It is, however, chock full of wisdom about human nature, both male and female.

    Do not avoid the question. Do we come from apes or do we not come from apes?

    No call to be unpleasant.  She did answer your question, even as we wander farther from the OP topic.

    • #136
  17. Suspira Member
    Suspira
    @Suspira

    BDB (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Having a background in both science and atheism, I find that “debunking religion” (God) with science is a terrible misuse of science and damaging to the credibility of the science-minded. Even my agnostic scientist husband agrees. Science has nothing to say about God or the philosophical/logical premises on which the West has thrived (infinite regression is a logical impossibility, for example). Debunking God is not what science is for!

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-debunking-atheism

    Now go have a blessed day, dammit!

    But you are convinced that we are the incestuous children of Adam and Eve? Right?

    Nope. Try not to put words in my mouth.

    So do we descend from apes or not?

    We (probably) do, although I think an honest scientist would say there are weaknesses in the theory of evolutionary biology — like “random” mutation — that seem kind of hand-wavey.

    The Bible (the Book of Genesis you’re alluding to) is not a science text book. It is, however, chock full of wisdom about human nature, both male and female.

    Do not avoid the question. Do we come from apes or do we not come from apes?

    No call to be unpleasant. She did answer your question, even as we wander farther from the OP topic.

    Indeed. There’s no need to ape the emotional pro-aborts. (Pun intended. Let’s lighten up, shall we?)

    • #137
  18. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    BDB (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Matthew Singer (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    I think the Second Wave Feminism answer has a lot of weight to it. It’s a view of motherhood as living hell, of abject slavery in service of men and a tiny tyrant. Imagine you are required by law to take care of Joe Biden – change his diapers, make sure he is minimally embarrassing in public, dress him, watch him like a hawk because his actions are your responsibility. For this, you receive no pay, and you are expected to pay for all of the supplies.

    Motherhood is the one of the most intense responsibilities out there, and is about as far from freedom as possible. I wonder about their childhoods – did their mothers seem that miserable? It’s hard to imagine parenthood without love for the child.

    Sexual freedom is a huge part of this. The Left believes nothing should ever stop people from screwing. Add in how disruptive having kids is to your life plans, and you have a pretty solid reason to want abortion.

    @ henrycastaigne I think gets at why any restriction is treated as an attack. Abortion lets you exercise complete control over your body.

    OK, I’m a sexist and a male chauvinist but motherhood is what women literally exist for. To perpetuate the species as it were. God or Nature it the main purpose. (Donning asbestos armour)

    This is so but men were naturally made to rape and conquer foreigners. Nature sucks. We should try to move beyond our filthy ape nature.

    If men stop raping and conquering, civilization can still continue. Not so if women don’t have children.

    And men weren’t made to rape and conquer. That’s from his perverse understanding of humanity.

    We are pretty close to chimps mate. It ain’t pretty but it’s True.

    You maybe, but not me.

    Religion has a refutation and an explanation for science, but… science also has an explanation for religion, and need not bother with refutation. That said, I agree that HC has mis-stated the case.

    Scientifically, the difference between a chimp and a human is great. Just look around you. Can a chimp design a car and build one? Does a chimp live in a house? Does a chimp create a bourbon I’m now sipping? Come on. You’ve bought into this pseudo science.

    I’m intrigued by chimp bourbon.

    LOL. I’m not sure it’s worth trying.  :)

    • #138
  19. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    BDB (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Having a background in both science and atheism, I find that “debunking religion” (God) with science is a terrible misuse of science and damaging to the credibility of the science-minded. Even my agnostic scientist husband agrees. Science has nothing to say about God or the philosophical/logical premises on which the West has thrived (infinite regression is a logical impossibility, for example). Debunking God is not what science is for!

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-debunking-atheism

    Now go have a blessed day, dammit!

    But you are convinced that we are the incestuous children of Adam and Eve? Right?

    Nope. Try not to put words in my mouth.

    So do we descend from apes or not?

    We (probably) do, although I think an honest scientist would say there are weaknesses in the theory of evolutionary biology — like “random” mutation — that seem kind of hand-wavey.

    The Bible (the Book of Genesis you’re alluding to) is not a science text book. It is, however, chock full of wisdom about human nature, both male and female.

    Do not avoid the question. Do we come from apes or do we not come from apes?

    No call to be unpleasant. She did answer your question, even as we wander farther from the OP topic.

    I am sorry if I come as unpleasant but she did not in fact answer my question.

    • #139
  20. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):
    I am sorry if I come as unpleasant but she did not in fact answer my question.

    I think I answered multiple times. I think we evolved in the line of primates we call “apes,” but I don’t know it any more than you or anyone else who makes such truth claims. We share much of our DNA with other primates, but obviously something extraordinary happened along the way (consciousness, language, etc.) that makes us radically different. 

    As Mr. C. likes to explain, science doesn’t operate in absolutes (scientists are skeptics) — it provides the best explanations we have so far, but science works best when it’s open to correction (unlike the “consensus” on climate change, for example). The heresy many dabble in in which science supposedly explains everything is called “scientism.” 

    • #140
  21. Podkayne of Israel Inactive
    Podkayne of Israel
    @PodkayneofIsrael

    How about Baboon Bourbon? 🐵

    • #141
  22. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Podkayne of Israel (View Comment):

    How about Baboon Bourbon? 🐵

    It’s non-alcoholic, but I like my Capuchino. 

    • #142
  23. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Podkayne of Israel (View Comment):

    How about Baboon Bourbon? 🐵

    It’s non-alcoholic, but I like my Capuchino.

    Silverback spirits would be a nice name for an environmentally conscience alcohol company. 

    • #143
  24. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I think that abortion proponents are furious because women were subjugated and brutalized by men throughout history. Women were essentially treated as male property, a form of slavery, until about a century ago. Women were denied the vote, denied education, denied almost all areas of employment, prohibited from holding office and not even allowed to sit on a jury.

    There were some advances in women’s rights in the early 20th Century, with further advances in the 1960s and 1970s. But women were still forced to bear children against their will. The power of the oppressive male hierarchy was so strong that the Supreme Court had to step in to secure a woman’s right to choose whether or not to have a child.

    In short, without abortion rights, women exist in a state of sexual slavery. The other rights that women have won, in areas like education and employment, are jeopardized as well, because women cannot effectively exercise their liberty and individual sovereignty in a regime of forced pregnancy and motherhood.

    So the abortion proponents, it seems to me, recognize that losing the right to abortion means returning to the Dark Ages.

    No wonder they are angry.

    Can we have some middle ground? Women probably got the short end of the stick historically but it wasn’t like it was any great prize to be born a poor dude. Most wives loved their husbands and their husbands loved them but I am sympathetic to the argument that a husband could be a monster to his wife and get away with it.

    Wives could be bad too.

    And women like Anita Hill and Christine Blasey Ford and that white lady that got Emmett Till killed can lie with sociopathic callousness. Good point Kedavis.

    Maybe you guys find the Paglia quote persuasive. For an abortion proponent, she’s the equivalent of a Rick Wilson or a David French.

    I try not to respond to comments that are just being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. But I have a lot of young women in my life, and I’ve touted Camille’s talking points more than once. Not sure I’ve changed any minds (yet) but it gives them pause.

     

    My goal was not to be contrarian for its own sake. It was to present the viewpoint that the more angry abortion proponents hold.

    I’m glad to hear that Paglia gives some of them pause, but it also appears, from your comment, that it’s not ultimately convincing to them. At least not right away.

    Gratitude is a muscle that atrophies quickly. 

    • #144
  25. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Suspira (View Comment):

    I have wondered about this, as well. There are many good answers here, but I think it’s a combination of a lot of them. I’m quite sure people on the left love to be outraged. I guess it makes them feel alive.

    Me too, sadly. 

    And our side offers many opportunities for rage in the way we talk about their side. 

    Mostly correctly, but it remains kind of addictive. 

    • #145
  26. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    Motherhood is the one of the most intense responsibilities out there, and is about as far from freedom as possible. I wonder about their childhoods – did their mothers seem that miserable? It’s hard to imagine parenthood without love for the child.

    I suspect some have contempt for their mothers as loser breeders. 

    • #146
  27. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    TBA (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    Motherhood is the one of the most intense responsibilities out there, and is about as far from freedom as possible. I wonder about their childhoods – did their mothers seem that miserable? It’s hard to imagine parenthood without love for the child.

    I suspect some have contempt for their mothers as loser breeders.

    Brainwashed by their Leftist ideology that new human life is somehow a bad thing, but #SaveTheWhales is good!

    • #147
  28. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Columbo (View Comment):

    TBA (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    Motherhood is the one of the most intense responsibilities out there, and is about as far from freedom as possible. I wonder about their childhoods – did their mothers seem that miserable? It’s hard to imagine parenthood without love for the child.

    I suspect some have contempt for their mothers as loser breeders.

    Brainwashed by their Leftist ideology that new human life is somehow a bad thing, but #SaveTheWhales is good!

    And of course THEIR OWN births and lives are just fine because THEY will #SaveTheWhales.  And what-not.

    • #148
  29. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Matthew Singer (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Why? That is a good question, which I’ve pondered way back when Bill Clinton was triangulating. He could compromise on just about anything when Republicans had that revolutionary retake of Congress in 1994. Even when he was being impeached they stuck by him as long as he was pro-abortion. So why do they hold on to abortion to this level? The only thing I can conclude is that this is a “religious” issue for them. It’s a matter of doctrine, dogma, and “religious” devotion. It is the left’s “sacrament” and Satanic devotion.

    I should add to this. Abortion is the sacrament but the faith is in sexual freedom. Sexual freedom is their spiritual connection with whatever they consider divine. It’s actually quite a pagan outlook.

    Must be a secrament. See “Shout your abortion” along with “Why I Celebrate My Abortion on Mother’s Day”

    It’s not easy to be edging edgy and boring at the same time, but WICMAoMD manages that handily.

    Added: ‘tedious’ is probably a better word.

    • #149
  30. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    TBA (View Comment):

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    Motherhood is the one of the most intense responsibilities out there, and is about as far from freedom as possible. I wonder about their childhoods – did their mothers seem that miserable? It’s hard to imagine parenthood without love for the child.

    I suspect some have contempt for their mothers as loser breeders.

    I do think that people who are mad at G-d and humanity for the crime of existing are attracted to leftism. I’m with Jordan Peterson on this one.

    • #150
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.