Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
“Sending migrants away, not allowing them to grow, not letting them have life is something wrong; it is cruelty. Sending a child away from the womb of the mother is murder because there is life. And we must speak clearly about these things.”
Trump = cruel, but Harris = LITERALLY MURDERING BABIES!!!
I’m this formulation it sounds like he’s talking about government mandated abortion - it’s like it’s happening against the will of the owner of the womb.
Clearly that’s not what he’s talking about, but in a narrow charitable interpretation, he would be correct that the government has no fucking business controlling whatever is going on inside women’s wombs.
Yeah, it’s not what he’s saying. But the formulation - sending a child away from the womb of it’s mother" - is fundamentally fucked up because it completely removes the mother from the equation. It doesn’t even bother to explicitly deprive her of the control over her body - it simply doesn’t recognise her existence at all.
I think, more than anything, that’s why this line of talking is fucked up. It kind of assumes totalitarianism where no matter what, it’s at least not the choice of the individual women/owners of the wombs.
What moderate Catholics will use as a defence is, I guess, the use of the word “child”. No reasonable person would consider a lump of 30 cells a “child”. But we all know the pope thinks it’s a child as soon as the sperm hits the egg, so fuck that as well.
“Sending migrants away, not allowing them to grow, not letting them have life is something wrong; it is cruelty. Sending a child away from the womb of the mother is murder because there is life. And we must speak clearly about these things.”
Trump = cruel, but Harris = LITERALLY MURDERING BABIES!!!
Definitely subtle.
I’m this formulation it sounds like he’s talking about government mandated abortion - it’s like it’s happening against the will of the owner of the womb.
Clearly that’s not what he’s talking about, but in a narrow charitable interpretation, he would be correct that the government has no fucking business controlling whatever is going on inside women’s wombs.
That’s not what it sounds like to me
Yeah, it’s not what he’s saying. But the formulation - sending a child away from the womb of it’s mother" - is fundamentally fucked up because it completely removes the mother from the equation. It doesn’t even bother to explicitly deprive her of the control over her body - it simply doesn’t recognise her existence at all.
I think, more than anything, that’s why this line of talking is fucked up. It kind of assumes totalitarianism where no matter what, it’s at least not the choice of the individual women/owners of the wombs.
What moderate Catholics will use as a defence is, I guess, the use of the word “child”. No reasonable person would consider a lump of 30 cells a “child”. But we all know the pope thinks it’s a child as soon as the sperm hits the egg, so fuck that as well.
Hmm, fair. I agree