The Political Satire/Meme Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Danoff
  • 14,338 comments
  • 1,018,184 views
FYPfnYAXwAIh59y
 
You don't think abortion is wrong?
First & second trimester? No. Third trimester? I'm iffy, but it's shown third trimesters are incredibly rare & the women who undergo an abortion during that time are most likely doing so because something severe has happened & an abortion has to be performed.
My baby nephew was now a toddler, how could somebody have killed him before he was even born?
The same way he would have never known or had any sort of feeling of being aborted. As far as I can find, it's not like people in general have any sort of recollection before birth, let alone remembering much before 2-3 years old.
It turns out now, the Democrats in the house have passed a similar bill to protect contraceptive rights. :lol:
Watch out, the Republicans are coming for your rubbers! Jeez, Gimme a break.:rolleyes:
Again, quoting Thomas:
"In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, & Obergefell,".
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects the liberty of married couples to buy and use contraceptives without government restriction.
 
Because he was required by law to report the rape, and didn't.
She, and she actually did. But it turns out that Trumpers are just the absolute stupidest mother****ers who will believe anything they're told so long as it fits their preferred narrative and any subsequent contradictory information they receive on the matter has an especially high hurdle to clear.
 
You don't think abortion is wrong?
No, and more importantly I know it's not my choice to impose on another person.


When I was seven, in 1972 my aunt gave birth to my cousin. I was stuck waiting in the waiting room with the family for what seemed like eons, but then my uncle came and gave us all blue bubblegum cigars (He was very religious), and I had a new baby cousin. I was seven.

I used to watch the evening news, or anything on tv when I was a kid. I would lay on my stomach on the shag carpet, under the coffee table. It was actually my stepdad watching but I was there.

I remember the Row v. Wade thing very well. The way I understood it at the time, was that women just wanted to have control over their own bodies. And I thought well of course they should. I had no idea what an abortion was at the time, but I was happy that Roe v. Wade passed.

When I first heard what an abortion actually was, I did not believe it. My baby nephew was now a toddler, how could somebody have killed him before he was even born?

From then until now, I have always thought abortion was wrong.
A view you are 100% entitled to hold, as is anyone, that however is irrelevant, as what you are not (and no-one is) is entitled to force that view on anyone else.


But, like I said before, why wasn't she given the morning after pill. All rape and incest victims should be given that medication. It is an over the counter medication that prevents pregnancy. It should be used more.
The people you support are also trying to outlaw it as well, you do understand that state laws that are worded to say that life begins at fertilisation would make plan B, etc. illegal?

I would think you would infer by my questioning the bill, that I did not care what the Senate did, because a law was not needed. I said:
That you think that the bill is not required is utterly irrelevant, as that's not the question I asked, nor does holding that view preclude you from answering the question.

You are simply avoiding it, which is odd given how vocal you have been that modern conservatives now accept all aspects of gay-life and wouldn't vote to undermine such things as same-sex marriage.

So lets try again, this time without avoidance, are you confident that's going to be repeated in the Senate?


It turns out now, the Democrats in the house have passed a similar bill to protect contraceptive rights. :lol:
Watch out, the Republicans are coming for your rubbers! Jeez, Gimme a break.:rolleyes:
Oh I don't know, maybe because they said they were and already are!

On top of Thomas specifically saying it should be targeted by the SCOTUS (quite how you are still ignoring that doozy is beyond me, but you do you), we have..

"Tom Leonard, former state House speaker, state Rep. Ryan Berman and Matthew DePerno, an attorney who has garnered attention after peddling election conspiracies, were asked during a debate Friday in Alpena about the 1965 case Griswold v. Connecticut. All three attacked the ruling, arguing the Supreme Court should not infringe on a state's authority to pass its own laws. "

"Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee has suggested contraceptives should only be available to married couples."

"Blake Masters, a Republican candidate for Senator in Arizona, announced that he would only vote for Supreme Court justices who would overturn cases that protect the right to contraceptives. Masters wants access to contraceptives to be a state-level decision."

"Republican lawmakers in Louisiana are seeking to pass a law that would define life as starting “at fertilization.” Doing so would criminalize forms of birth control including Plan B,"

"Republican Governor Tate Reeves refused to rule out the possibility of banning contraceptives."

"in the fine print of their measure, those Republicans revealed that their ambition wasn’t only to target a familiar abortion foe. They were going after specific forms of birth control as well, notably, emergency contraceptives, often sold under the brand name Plan B, and intrauterine devices, known as IUDs. GOP lawmakers tried to stop Missouri’s Medicaid agency from paying for those forms of contraception."

"Idaho state Rep. Brent Crane, Republican chair of the powerful House State Affairs Committee, said he would hold hearings on legislation banning emergency contraceptives and possibly IUDs as well."

"Wieland and Republican colleagues in the Missouri House this year stopped two measures that women’s reproductive advocates say would have increased access to birth control."





..that took less than five minutes to compile, would you like more? Or are the above and the 195 Republicans who voted against protecting access to contraception enough to demonstrate how ****ing wrong you are?
 
Last edited:
You don't think abortion is wrong?
My cousin carried her foetus nearly to full term when a brain scan revealed no activity and that he would've been a vegetable. She forced herself to make the heartbreaking decision to terminate. When I shared this story with evangelicals on Twitter they called her a murderer. That's my skin in this game, and this is the kind of mindset that supports this.
 
You don't think abortion is wrong?
For abortion to be wrong, it has to harm someone. An unfeeling, unthinking collection of cells has no rights to violate. On the other hand, a living person like a pregnant woman does. Given how dangerous pregnancy is, sometimes it has to be terminated. So not only is abortion not wrong, it's good. It can save lives and also prevent miserable lives.

When I first heard what an abortion actually was, I did not believe it. My baby nephew was now a toddler, how could somebody have killed him before he was even born?
No one wanted to kill anyone, no one outside of your family would even consider your nephew in the abortion debate because they wouldn't know he existed. The point isn't to allow "killing", it's respecting the right to one's own body. Everyone who wants a child can and will still be able to have one. Who is put in danger by abortion?
 
I'm shocked - shocked - that the opinion "how can you kill a baby before it was born" was formed at nine years of age and never changed. It's such a thoughtful, intelligent position that truly gets to all points of the issue.

Incidentally, the morning after pill works to prevent implantation. Once implantation has occurred, it's too late.


@UKMikey's post does show why Republicans are against abortion though. Full-term with no brain activity? Your cousin could have been the mother of the next Boebert/Greene.
 
This is one of the worst things that has been posted on this forum. Ever.
I guess I'd like you to go into more detail on this one for me, because I'm not quite seeing the horrible angle. I fully admit it might be there, it's just not jumping out at me. The question, on the face of it, just looks trivial to answer. The answer is painfully obvious to anyone who takes even a moment to think about the scenario. The answer is it's probably one of these, or something like it:

  • Because she was and it didn't work
  • Because she waited too long to tell anyone she had been raped (so many reasons on this, including fear of further assault or not understanding what happened)
  • Because she couldn't accurately describe the situation enough to allow people to realize it was important
  • Because nobody thought she was old enough to become pregnant
  • Because the rapist prevented her (from telling anyone)
  • Because nobody realized she had been raped until she was pregnant
  • Because she was too traumatized to think (to tell anyone)

I could go on, this is just what springs to mind immediately. I think @Chrunch Houston's comments come off as deeply ignorant and unempathetic, rather than explicitly cruel or evil. @Chrunch Houston regularly shows a sort of stunted imagination or stunted empathy development which routinely prevents him from fully grasping the situation other people are in. It's the kind of thing that leads Ted Cruz to say we should only have 1 door in to a school - just a profound lack of basic understanding of the situation.

Anyway, if I missed what you're getting at, let me know.
 
Last edited:
But forcing a woman to give birth against her will is very, very wrong.
Forcing anyone to avail their body for the benefit of another is wrong. Sure, you can say that a fertilized egg--or anything more developed than that--has rights, but this is the crux of the matter. The government should not be weighing the rights of one favorably against the rights of another.
I guess I'd like you to go into more detail on this one for me, because I'm not quite seeing the horrible angle. I fully admit it might be there, it's just not jumping out at me. The question, on the face of it, just looks trivial to answer. The answer is painfully obvious to anyone who takes even a moment to think about the scenario. The answer is it's probably one of these, or something like it:

  • Because she was and it didn't work
  • Because she waited too long to tell anyone she had been raped (so many reasons on this, including fear of further assault or not understanding what happened)
  • Because she couldn't accurately describe the situation enough to allow people to realize it was important
  • Because nobody thought she was old enough to become pregnant
  • Because the rapist prevented her (from telling anyone)
  • Because nobody realized she had been raped until she was pregnant
  • Because she was too traumatized to think (to tell anyone)

I could go on, this is just what springs to mind immediately. I think @Chrunch Houston's comments come off as deeply ignorant and unempathetic, rather than explicitly cruel or evil. @Chrunch Houston regularly shows a sort of stunted imagination or stunted empathy development which routinely prevents him from fully grasping the situation other people are in. It's the kind of thing that leads Ted Cruz to say we should only have 1 door in to a school - just a profound lack of basic understanding of the situation.

Anyway, if I missed what you're getting at, let me know.
For my part, and I recognize others including at whom you've directed this may view it differently, it's the relentless insistence that medical intervention in the form of an abortion was wrong. Sure, one can explicitly take the position that abortion in this instance wasn't wrong, but that position doesn't actually bear out through one's would'a/could'a/should'a-ing it. One can insist that they don't have a dog in the race but that betting slip is right there in their hand.

It doesn't strike me as too different from right-wing media's goalpost shifting on the subject. They can say that obviously a 10-year-old rape victim should have access to an abortion until they're blue in the face, but they're attacking literally everything else as proxy.

Also, the notion that obviously a 10-year-old rape victim should have access to an abortion isn't actually reflected in law where applicable, and that's a very ****ing serious problem. But as is so often the case with the [even mainstream] right, cruelty is the point.

Abortion simply was the answer here. Full stop. Abortion very frequently is the answer, my own or others' feelings about it notwithstanding.
 
Last edited:
The reaction when this was first shown in beautiful.



This whole thread is way too much fun.

 
Last edited:
I'm missing the context here, but I’m going to assume there are a lot of people trying to leave England for France right now.
We left the EU because people wanted stronger borders, now they are moaning that stronger borders take longer to process people.

Basically idiots voted for something they are now moaning about (as many said they would).

Edited to add. Here's a nice quick explanation

 
Last edited:
We left the EU because people wanted stronger borders, now they are moaning that stronger borders take longer to process people.

Basically idiots voted for something they are now moaning about (as many said they would).
So everyone who voted for the face-eating leopards are now complaining about all the face-eating by leopards. Got it.


To be fair, when the holidays start in Germany and everyone travels south, traffic jams are the norm. There was even a quite popular german movie from the 90s based entirely on a holiday traffic jam, Superstau.
I’m going to have to watch that. It looks like fun.
 
Last edited:
Back