u/Altruistic-Job-391

If you’ve ever been called “pro-birth” and asked about what you’ve done for children after they’re born—

sure, you can talk about all the pro-life crisis pregnancy centers and how the majority of families who foster/adopt are pro-life, but be sure to also hit them with the, “what have YOU done for women who choose life?”

the evidence points to pro-choice doing very little to support mothers. If they do not really provide support to women who choose life and only support women choosing abortion, that supports the premise that they are not pro-choice because they are only supporting one choice.

this train of thought leads to the conclusion that they’re not pro-choice, they’re pro-abortion.

A friend invited me and my baby (4 months, M) to a pool party in a couple of weeks. She said the baby would love to swim, but I thought I'd heard it's best to wait til at least 6 months for swimming.

When did you take yours swimming?

for me: my older sibling, who was into MBTI long before I was, clocked me as an ENFP YEARSSS ago. I got ENFP on 16personalities, then it still resonated when I learned about the cognitive functions (and then I got ENFP on every cognitive function test thereafter lol).

so not a very exciting typing journey lol. I’d have my occasional bout of doubt where I was like “maybe I’m an INFP cuz I can be kinda introverted” or “maybe I’m an E/INFJ with ADHD” but I think that’s just Ne naturally making me consider every stinkin possibility.

what about you???

If the main idea of the pro-choice position is that bodily autonomy rights come first, then why would you not support it at any time, for any reason?

In other words, why should there be a restriction around sentience, viability, etc. if restricting abortion at any point would violate bodily autonomy?

I know this sub is an alternative to r/pregnancy and was curious if there's a PL alternative for r/beyondthebump as well. I don't think they go about banning pro-lifers like the former sub does, but the rules do say they're strictly pro-choice, so I feel a little uncomfortable posting and interacting there.

Based on this timeline, so excluding the reboot: https://www.reddit.com/r/Totaldrama/comments/bliuw4/timeline_for_the_main_universe/

• Aleheather: at least a couple of weeks. Presumably gets together after Alejandro's elimination in AS and is still together in the season's finale
• Crimsennui: over three years—met in high school according to FreshTV, likely in 9th grade
• Derrie: unknown—gets together in late 2009
• Duncney: a couple months–half a year. Got together late June 2007 but was pretty on and off again in TDA + shown broken up in the TDA special (which takes place right before TWDT in Jan/Feb 2008)
• Gidgette: over two and a half years. Got together in July 2007, still together through RR in late 2009
• Gwent: a few days–a couple weeks. Got together late July 2007, broke up shortly after TDA began.
• Gwuncan: about a year and a quarter. Got together around March 2008, stayed together until summer 2009.
• Jashawn: unknown—gets together at the end of summer 2009
• Lesharold: a few weeks—from their kiss midway through Island to the season's bonus episode. (idk if they were technically together though, and if their future "thing" could be considered on-and-off)
• Lyler: on and off for over a year, given Lindsay keeps forgetting who he is. I don't think there's much mention of him in AS, so I'm unsure if they're still together by then. If they are (most likely), they'd have been together for around 2 years.
• Nemma: over a few weeks (from their first kiss to the finale, at minimum).
• Ozzy: kind of on and off for a little under a year—July 2007 (their first kiss) to Izzy's accident in WT (likely March 2008)
• Ryphanie: on and off for about 4 months? Assuming RR takes place over the course of around 2 months, and they started dating 2 months before competing.
• Samkota: over a year. Got together in summer 2008, still together in summer 2009 as mentioned by Sam.
• Scottney: a few days. Relationship only spans across 2-3 episodes.
• Zoke: over a year. Get together late summer 2008, stay together through AS in summer 2009.

I found this SO interesting. What do you think?

What do you think are some of the worst arguments from both sides?

Pro-choice: I wish more people argued thoughtfully instead of with talking points. Some I've heard that are just plain bad:

• We don't force people to donate their organs, so why force them to donate their body to a fetus? You really have to jump through hoops to make organ donation even slightly comparable to pregnancy. It would be more comparable to say, "this person needs my organ, but I don't want to donate, so let's kill them." Very different to let someone die than to actively kill them.
• How many kids have you adopted? Apparently you cannot have an opinion on a topic unless you are actively helping people affected by it. (Yet nobody wants to talk about how pregnancy centers are majority pro-life.)
• No uterus, no opinion. Likewise, apparently you cannot have an opinion on a topic unless you are directly affected by it.
• A fetus isn't a person. Philosophical, subjective definitions should not define objective laws. Even so, personhood doesn't define who is worthy of life.
• Abortions should be legal until viability. Viability is also subjective as it varies from case to case. But this shouldn't be a cutoff point anyway because a human is still a human before it is able to exist outside of the womb.
• The fetus is just a parasite. Sorry, did my direct actions put the parasite into my body and force it to depend on me?
• This is what pregnancy actually looks like *insert pregnancy tissue photos here*. Misinformed and easily refutable, but still wild to see people thoroughly convinced that human development is just tissue until it magically becomes a human.

Pro-life: It stinks, but there are some that I do cringe at when I see. even if it's coming from good faith, it's still hard to read. Imo, my least favorites are:

• "Fetus" means "little baby." I feel like this one just takes away from the actual point. Is a fetus a baby? Maybe yes, maybe no, it depends on what lens you're looking through--but is that actually relevant to the discussion? Does a fetus have to be a baby for it to have worth?
• If abortion isn't murder, how come murder of a pregnant woman is legally considered a double homicide? I just don't think this one helps our cause. Abortion isn't legally murder because the law doesn't treat it like other murders, so this claim doesn't do much to affirm that abortion is, definitionally, murder. It really just points to how inconsistent the legal view of the unborn is, and that something should be changed, which is what we're fighting for... but I don't think it serves as anything more than an attempt at a "gotcha."
• Consent to sex = consent to pregnancy. Just because of how "consent" is used. When I perform an action with risks, and the risk happens, then I should be responsible for dealing with the consequences--but I don't think that's technically the same thing as consenting to it.
• We're all clumps of cells. This one just doesn't address the point they're trying to make, which I think is that the embryo does not have discernable human features and therefore isn't a human life. I think a better response to the "clump of cells" question would acknowledge that despite not yet looking like a human, the child is still alive and still has unique human DNA, i.e. still a human.

What are your thoughts?

Pro-choice, I feel like it's not hard. It's an inherently selfish perspective. To put it tamely, abortion is terminating a pregnancy to better the woman's own life. To put it less tamely, it's child sacrifice so that the woman can do whatever she wants without repercussions. No matter how you spin it, it's easy to view it as a really malicious perspective.

But the pro-life perspective, there's really no way to spin it as we're bad people. Like, if you ask them, "what makes my stance selfish/bad" then I feel like the worst they can possibly say is "you just want to control women's bodies." But then from there, if you ask "okay... and how does controlling women's bodies benefit me? What would I get out of that?" then that shuts it all down. They either have to assume we're stupid for prioritizing a "clump of cells" over a living woman, or they have to acknowledge that we're actually fighting for something of value. (normally it's the former, but just a twinge of critical thinking could point to the latter and maybe help them understand our side better)