The Term "Pro-Choice" And The Rectification of Names?

This is stated very succinctly
Excellent post

This "Bot" wants to point certain things out here.

Your entire argument is based that we need to say things as they correspond to reality. That means you need to have a correct view on reality. This is already really hard, specially after our last conversation. But hey, let's just look what you are doing in this post, see if you live up to the standard you set yourself:

[quote]It was a belief that lived on into the 20th century in Nazi Germany, Fascist Japan and Communist Russia. [/quote]

Japan wasn't "Fascist".
It wasn an empire, lead by an emperor. The empire of Japan is often compared in political studies as a "Theocratie". Because the emperor (just like the Pharao's in Ancient Egypt) was seen as "God" on earth. Therefore his power was absolute, he opperates in a state-structure that we can only compare to ideas in western-europe that dominated before "the englightenment" and the dominance of the liberal-ideologie. When "Traditionalism" was the dominant hegemony. In western-terms when we put this ideology that runs the state on an axis where "Conservative" ideologies are on the extreme right and "Progressive" ideologies are on the extreme left, "Tradionalist" ideas would be put on the extreme right. But being on the extreme right doesn't make them "Fashist" even tough they share attributes from the "fashist" ideology.


The same goes for your earlier comment in the other post. Where you place National-Socialism in the same framework as socialism. I mean... The ignorance level is way beyond 9000.





Oh, let's talk about "hypocricy" now Abrienda. When we are at it.
You follow your main argument by using correct terminology and telling the "truth" by giving an argument I totally agree with. Like 100%. (except for the incorrect use of fascism) You say:


[quote]The pro-slavery side believed black people were not really human or at best "sub-human" and could be enslaved, becoming their property that slave-owners could do with as they pleased.

It was a belief that lived on into the 20th century in Nazi Germany, Fascist Japan and Communist Russia.
[/quote]

This is an argument you hear often with people that do research to genocide, wars, ... conflicts that are about the total destruction of the enemy. The idea is that if a person considers another individual less then "human", he/she will also act towards this individual as if they are "less then human". That means they dehumanise people and make them into concepts that are seen as extremely negative.

We all know the characterisations of "Jews" during the second world and we know what happened when the new German nation decided that these individuals were "awfull" and "disgusting" and compared to parasites like "lice". You can also see it happening in the Rwanda genocide where a radio broadcasting channel (called: Radio Mille Collines) roared up the Hutu population by saying that the Tutsi-population where "rats", "lice", "parasites", ... and needed to be exterminated.

So you seem to be aware that this is a thing. And when this argument works in your advantage you use it. But [b]when you yourself sin against this rule[/b], it's "A-Okay".


You engage with Pikachu in this threat and in your first reaction you say:

[quote]Tenuous for you because you are being anachronistic.[/quote]

Then you go on by saying he's deluded and pushing him into the NAZI camp (all in the same post btw, the first one in this threat)

[quote]Those are facts and in fact had the Nazi's won the war that would be recieved opinion today. Then as now MILIONS of people [b]like yourself[/b] wish to be [b]deluded[/b] and use words like "pro-choice" because it makes them comfortable.[/quote]

And it goes on:

[quote][b][u]You are obviously an intelligent person[/u] [b]but[/b] its also remarkable the [b]verbal and logical pretzel you must make of yourself in order to support this morally and intellectually bankrupt position[/b]...just as the owners of slaves did once.[/b][/quote]


So... before you even really engaged, and asked questions to allow people to clarify their positions. You place them in the same camp as NAZIes, Slave-Owners, tell them they are out of touch with time, is being deluted, and that his morality is emotionally and intellectually bankrupt. I'm like extremely amazed you consider him an "intelligent person" after all that crap. But yeah.

In the other post, you didn't engage in a conversation at all. You just called me a "bot", totally ripping me of my humanity and reducing me to a script written by a programmer. I ask you? Like honestly... you don't see the hypocricy here? 🤔 You don't see it at all?

Oh yeah, NAZI's weren't "pro choice". They were "pro-removal-of-shit-they-don't-like". Lol, there was no choice. You didn't fit the bill, you had to go.


And this kind of narrative just goes on. Calling people "moraly misserable", "stupid", "ignorant", ... you just call them names because that makes you feel more "human" and you don't want to go into depth with "sub-humans". That's also why it's really hard to keep an actual conversation with you. Because you [b]believe[/b] you are just better then everyone else out there that doesn't share your opinion.

And it's a believe. Most of your arguments are about "feelings" there is verry little factual data that you present to support anny of your arguments. I can give your references on the NAZI-Germany thing and why Japan wasn't Fascist, but we both know that you won't read anny of it because you already made your mind up about me. I'm "sub"-human, just a "bot".



You even support a president that actively uses this same tactic of rhetoric by painting all imigrants (manny manny manny of them) as murderers, rapists, and thieves. All journalism that is "critical" as "fake news" and "idiots".





Honestly... I wonder what Confuscius would think about that.
And I also wonder what the Gelgameks think about this.


But go on now Abrienda... call me a "bot" and "stupid" , just use the same tactics as you do in most of your posts. Just do it Abrienda. Prove me right! 😂

Bit of a tenuous comparison. Blacks are definitely people. They have all the qualities that one would attribute to personhood.

A fetus does not.

yeah I always found the term "pro choice" confusing. Pro baby or anti baby ?

Then by the same token, "pro-life" should be changed to "forced birth advocates" or "fetus fetishists" since most of them are not actually pro-life, as they support warfare and capital punishment.

Pro-life should mean [b]all[/b] human life, not just fetuses.

You are right on target here again. I love how good you write out these good arguments.