My son was born by a caesarean after 32 weeks pregnancy. If it had been the case that he wasnât able to sustain his life outside the womb, Iâm pretty sure that in some strict anti-abortion state, that could have lead to the prosecution of the doctors and parents involved for performing an abortion.
The alternative of not performing the caesarean would have been legal in those states, but I think both my son and my wife would have died.
It has been a while, but I do not know if anyone else remembers the time where a similar topic about âstem cells researchâ was the hot topic a couple of decades ago ⊠do you remember when those people changed their minds? When a stem cell therapy was to help in the health of Ronald Reagan.
I guess it is easy to not care when things happen to other people and easy to change your mind when things happen to you?
Alas there are no other issues anymore in this world. It makes money to create polarity (it generates more clicks) so the marketing of the past decade was extremely focused on generating division (and thus, intolerance) about anything.
Of course you can. Have you heard of ârelativismâ?
Thatâs how the same people can care for human rights in one country, but not in another one.
If you dive into it you will find that mental gymnastics allow for more backflips than the actual olympic gymnastics 
Thatâs, unfortunately, easy ⊠they claim that the guns they are in favour of are strictly for the âgood guys with a gunâ and that banning guns will not affect the outlaws, because they break the law anyway.
This is, of course, a juvenile argument in the face of facts coming from all other countries that do not have that problem because they have reasonable gun laws, but hey, whatever makes some people look righteous and help them sleep at night, eh?
What I know is that I can go out my house, go to the local highschool (the gate will be open), cross the courtyard (noone will be scared), enter the school building (the door is open), get something to eat from the school cantina (also open to the public) and then go to the teachersâ offices ( which are also open) and let them know that they have forgotten to turn the night-lights to summer time (which is true, they light up at 6 oâclock).
I think thatâs FREEDOM and that is a healthy environment to grow up, at least as far as safety is concerned.
If you listen to those âgun enthusiastsâ however they think that âfreedomâ is for the school to have one locked door with an armed guard locked and loaded behind it, with closed windows and electric fences and mental health councilors and God knows what else, in order to deal with the mental pressure caused by the inescapable every day FEAR that they need protection and the school turned into a prison.
Now there is a school I wouldnât want to send my kids to and you can bet your money that the legislators donât send their kids to public schools either. If there was a law that said âyou legislate, you participateâ then maybe a lot of things would have been better in this world 
True, but so far noone has ever been able to pull-off a âmass knifingâ in my best of knowledge.
Yes, but I think that the proper response to people that say âI need an AR-15 in order to hunt animalsâ is âlearn how to aim for GODâs sakeâ
What on earth are they hunting and they need assault-rifles? Dinosaurs??
Well, they are the trend-setters of this modern world, after all. Whatever happens there, eventually trickles down to the societies of the rest of the world ⊠it is the only âtrickle downâ effect that actually works 
This is a very tricky thing to respond to and for an accurate response I am afraid youâd have to watch that lawyerâs video I put earlier.
It depends on the State ⊠turns out the laws and demographics are so different between them that some people can even âconsiderâ them as different countries
Most of them still have BOUNTY HUNTERS for Godâs sake âŠ
I never understood the people that are against this idea, by the way.
You are literally not harming anyone with that decision and it is your life, after all.
Ireland had very strict abortion laws, but a very sad case changed that. In 2012 an Irish hospital refused to remove a miscarrying fetus (17 weeks) from the womb of 31-year old woman, because the fetusâ heart was still beating. The woman died. Courts found the hospital guilty of malpractice and it lead to abortion debates in the Irish parliament.
In 2018, a referendum brought an end to the Irish abortion ban (66.4% in favour).
Personaly, I think these difficult medical decisions should be left to he mother and her doctor(s), without them needing to fear being prosecuted.
Conservative religious people might disagree.
I understand very strict regulations for it, because thereâs lots of people who basically canât wait for people to die in order to inherit, so they could severely abuse situations.
About doctors and their advice on who gets to live:
Kind of related, I donât know how many here know of this horrifying practice
Lots of doctors do it because a-hole husbands ask, but many doctors do it without not even a-hole husbands ask.
I donât really want to get involved in this discussion but I wondered about this point. Itâs not really about âimposingâ something is it? If someone gets pregnant in a society where abortion is legal they can also choose not to have an abortion right?
The imposition seems one sided to me.
I agree, but I think many conservative religious people would disagree. For example, they may feel restricted in their freedom when they are âforcedâ to accept same-gender couples legally walking hand in hand in public, or when they are âforcedâ to accept that a woman can have an abortion with legal impunity.
to restrict others freedom! Right, got it!
In Canada, you canât do this. We have both the fear mentality of the states combined with quite restrictive gun laws. (you need to pass a lengthy background check and an exam to get a license, you canât take a gun that you own to anywhere but the range or a gunsmith, many guns are banned, etc)
I teach grades 7-12 and many of them are afraid of school shootings even though school shootings are as rare here as they are anywhere else thatâs not in the states (Greece, France, Japan, etc).
Responsible gun owners and a history of nearly zero mass shootings donât change public opinion on the matter. I largely attribute this to the news media and politicians. I think Canada has done things mostly right. No automatic weapons and magazines are limited to 5 rounds for non bolt-action rifles. Being in the military, I can understand the fun aspect (although cleaning for hours afterwards makes me not want to shoot guns), but itâs not really justifiable for the public to have access to automatic firearms. Not to mention itâs extremely expensive for not too much âfun timeâ (30 round magazines at 30-50 cents a round are emptied in like 3 seconds). Hunting is traditionally done with a large caliber bolt action or shotgun. The hunters I know prefer to use bolt action even though many of them also own an ar-15 and handguns.
Also, target shooting is a very popular sport here. Itâs a good justification for owning firearms. We do have to deal with bears and wildlife like gophers more than most other countries so most farms and rural places will have a gun.
I personally own some guns (SVT-40, S&W 29-4, a 1911 in 22lr and a 22lr bolt action) that I use for both collection purposes and target shooting with friends. I am not opposed to hunting, but I canât personally do it. I can personally justify shooting humans that are trying to kill me or someone else, but not animals. (well unless those animals are trying to eat me or someone elseâŠ)
EDIT: As for the abortion thing, I suppose Iâll leave my thoughts on it. I am for abortion. I find it very strange that there were no clauses for rape or potential medical issues, which I thought would have been a âreasonableâ clause. I heard roe v. wade was overruled because of âbad legal precendent in the argumentâ (saying it was a constitutional right when abortion isnât mentioned in the constitution, etc). I do not know anything about laws in the USA so I have no comments on this. I have also heard that roe v. wade was overruled to âmake room for a reasonable, correctly argued lawâ, but I have serious doubts about that.
Yeah, but as I said they make no sense on that issue.
Letâs say you try to kill yourself, their standpoint is that it is a sin.
Fine, but Jesus said âlet he who is without sin, toss the first rockâ so the Bible itself acknowledges that there is no way to live a life without ANY sin. So, whatâs their problem? Final sin, you get to God for judgement, as far as they are concerned.
Now, I understand that when you promise paradise, you need to make suicide a greave sin, lest zealots get the wrong idea and think âhey screw this hard life, we are going to God and paradiseâ and who would the churches rule over afterwards, right? Iâd accept that, if they were honest about it and said that ⊠after all lying and dishonesty is also a sin, eh?
Again that would make sense if the law said âyou MUST have a same-gender marriage yourselfâ or âyou MUST have an abortion if this this and this happensâ
But there is no âmustâ and there is no âyouâ on those issues. It is OTHER people that make CHOICES ⊠it is odd that this type of conservatives are in favour of âsmall governmentâ and âless regulationsâ and the âfree market that makes choicesâ, but when they do not like the choices people make, suddenly âtoo much freedom is communismâ 
Maybe we should just accept that all those -isms are now just âbuzzwordsâ and be done with them?
I used to teach final grade students and I am really sorry to hear this. Being afraid to go to school? Sounds horrible to me.
I think that parents sometimes are like flocks of birds ⊠one bird might be afraid and fly away, then all of them panic âŠ
Similar laws exist here. No hunting rifle or shotgun can take more than three rounds before reloading. After that you are considered a âsportsmanâ and the process is more rigorous and strict. E.g. you have to enroll to a âshooting clubâ and participate in at least 4 shooting competitions a year in order to be allowed a hand-gun or a pump-action shotgun. Else, you are forced to sell your gun. Then it is storage laws and so forth.
As you can imagine only very dedicated and extremely focused and serious minded people can keep up with things like that. Most people just have a hunting rifle which is much easier to procure (you still need a licence, background check and the police actually checks the weapon you purchace for âmodificationsâ and attach its info to your licence. If you are ever caught with non-licenced modifications, you are toast) .
I couldnât agree more.
What is worse is they said that it is not part of the tradition and ethos of the country ⊠50 years of legal precedent donât make something part of the countryâs daily life? By that kind of reasoning they should all renounce technology and any other social advancement and go and join the Amish
The thing about patriarchy is that men are also oppressed by aspects of it. If only more men understood that.
We do, we are not stupid 
For example:
Think about the kind of society you can find in old Greek movies from 1950-1960 ⊠it is not even a century ago but back then, in a family that had both male and female children, the male children had to âmarry offâ their sisters, provide money for dowry and you couldnât really marry unless ALL your sisters got married first, else you were shunned by society for abandoning your family and sisters.
Not to mention that you were their actual guardian and the male brothers often forced prospective suitors to marry at gunpoint (that happened a lot around the civil war - too many guns anyway). Not to mention the âproviderâ archetype.
There are some very funny stories from our grand-parents time here about being chased in the woods by the family of women armed with shotguns. Good luck finding farmers, woodsmen and former war guerrila warriors in the woods, but hey ⊠interesting times
That was the custom back then.
Whatâs the situation now?
Gone are all the customs. 
We, as men, now have to do nothing for our sisters.
Any woman we might have a relationship with can have a brother and we do not have to care.
Noone is pointing guns at us just for seen holding hands with a woman in public (let alone having sex)
Noone is hiding in the woods for a month after having sex.
Noone wants us to provide dowries.
We have no responsibility to lead or even have a family and being a âproviderâ is considered âold fashionedâ.
I could go on âŠ
I used to say a lot that âfeminism is the best thing that happened to menâ until I noticed that this seemed to annoy women (I do not know why - the things I mentioned about are objective facts after all), but this might explain why most of us are usually not saying anything about it. Again: We are not stupid.
This is kind of sexist.
Letâs be honest, some of us are. (And before someone thinks Iâm claiming the opposite: yes, stupid women exist too, itâs not one of the male privileges.)
Overall yes, but on that particular topic Iâve never met anyone in this country that said âaaah, remember the good old times, when we had to provide dowry for our sisters and daughters and if we kissed a woman we had to marry her or else they chased us through the woods and the mountains with shotguns? Those were the times, our grandfathers had it goodâ
said noone ever
On more 2022 news, that seems something that we should all worry about:
https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/german-govt-talks-with-uniper-about-support-measures-2022-06-30/
OK, I think things have been a bit different here even at the time of my grandpatents. Must be because we donât have mountains here in northern Germany.
Iron maiden had that part right
Usually they âhideâ abroad where the police cannot find them.
After a certain amount of years (33 years old iirc) you can âbuyoutâ your conscription years out of the army, which is quite the pretty penny (6000 euros). Noone really goes after 30, they usually opt to buyout. That explains the 45 year limit since the army gets money instead of old recruits that way.
Once again youâre missing the point. (predictable tbh)
Many, many, many men say âremember the good old times when women were strictly unpaid labor and didnât talk backâ without realizing that the good old times werenât good for them either.
And, of course, you canât see the other side, you had to pay sisterâs dowry and âprotect the sisterâs honorâ because they were objects, belonging to the men of the family and representative of their place in society, slightly above their donkeys (not always).
But of course, what did I expect, how silly of me.
Once again you are sitting on a high horse and cartwheeling on its back (predictable tbh)
However my point was very clear, you are just not reading it.
NO MAN in this country wants to go back to dowries, arranged marriages and hiding in the mountains after sex. If you doubt that, go out in the streets, ask that exact question, and find me one man that says âyeah, Iâd like thatâ.
Do allow us to have some EXTRA thoughts apart from the rigid stereotypes you believe that we all miraculously adhere to.
So, you wished for that, I said âyeah, we do understandâ, but you didnât like that either?
Nice 
Do they really? And they have no further thoughts, eh? And you can assure us of that because you know better that men are nice and convinient caricatures without any depth, knowledge or dimensions, eh?
When you can stop talking as if everyone adheres to absolute stereotypes and carpet-bombing all of us with them, we can talk about that
Iâll just give you a question to think over ⊠if they were âobjectsâ, why where the brothers HONOR-bound to care for them BEFORE they themselves get married? Hmmm, letâs see if you can think outside of your caricatures.
ÎŁÏ Î”ÎŻÏαÏ.
