What was really the reason behind the push for abortion in the US?

>immoral, loose women who were already going to murder their child get killed in the process and serve as a warning to others
>consequence free society of sexual libertinism and its attendant defects

Hmmmmmm

Without abortion America would look like Brazil.

>Right-wing should logically be in support of abortion as a mean of population control for minorities and poor people
>Left-wing should normally be firmly against abortion as an obvious violation of the human rights of unborn children

Instead it's exactly the opposite. Wtf America.

I mean, the right-wing now defends free speech while the keft tries to erode it, despite this being objectively anti-liberal.
Some weird shit happening over the last few years.

There is no left and right in America. Just different big business lobbies.

>he doesn't just enjoy being contrarian

That's probably also true for Europe.

>keft
What did he mean by this?

Casual sex and pr*testants forcing their degenerate pro divorce religion

Irresponsible men.

Row v Wade

It was a landmark court case dude, you should know this already

Having unwanted shit babbies is much worse than muh degeneracy or muh deviancy

This. I would rather a woman just abort the FETUS than have postnatal killings and exposure come back. Some very poor women in Brazil let their babies die on purpose because they can't afford it.
It's horrid. All the idiots in this thread are also acting like society never pushed the idea of abortions until now. In the past it was even worse because ACTUALLY NEWBORN BABES, NOT FETUSES were being killed or just exposed which is basically killed(or would to slavery/prostitution if found by some assholes).
If they push abortions now, it's because killing a unborn fetus(not a baby) is better than letting new norms die and suffer. The earlier the abortion the better obviously. Late term abortions are terrible and hardly allowed. Btw, no one really wants abortion, the best thing is birth intelligent, which conservative idiots(mostly repubs desu) are still against being pushed en mass made made available to all women.

Yes let's turn this back to medieval society and have people die as examples. I also vote that all kinds of rapists should all be castrated to act as an example of why rape will not be tolerated=^)
But don't worry, female rapist will undergo FGM to make it fair. Too bad there really aren't many though.
Idiot.

Women wanted it

Men wanted it too. Contrary to popular belief many sexually active young men aren't ready to have babies and rarely want them either. Not that you would know since you're, you know, not.

Honestly, if you're the sort of person that kills infants, you deserve to be dead.

Abortion was in practice during antiquity you dumb fuck, doing it now is not a progress it's a regression.

>Left-wing should normally be firmly against abortion as an obvious violation of the human rights of unborn children
Fetuses are not sentient humans yet so they don't have rights and at that point the rights of the woman is more important.

>Not that you would know since you're, you know, not.
I'm a guy

No, they mostly had post natal though.That's right exposing babies or throwing them off cliffs in the case of Sparta(though that was more eugenics).
Abortions done earlier are ideal before the 3rd trimester, fetuses are hardly human and haven't even developed pain sensation.
Chicks who wait till near 3rd trimesters to have a abortion are dumb cunts though...
Abortions are not birth control however, they are a last resort. If more women had access to actual birth control I'm sure we would hardly every have to do abortions past deformaties, rape, or dangerously complicated pregnancies.

It was stoped at the time because of the high mortality rates but medecine is now better and it's not a problem anymore

Of course you are, you're not sexually active I mean.

Ideal is actually before the 1st trimester* sorry
My mistake.
3rd trimester is near impossible without serious problems/risks.

I bet you think using sewers again is regression too

>you're not sexually active I mean.
What make you think that ?

It was stopped because of abrahamic religions taking over.
Exposing babies was a thing in France even after christianity took over btw, thankfully the Church managed to put an end to it.

Roman did both, but yeah thise degenerates favored killing babies outside the uterus, not that it is any worse that what we do now.

>It was stopped because of abrahamic religions taking over.
So when the world regressed

...

Ford Foundation money.

The roastie revolution of the 70's

Im ok with this, Im not a rapist.

Lol no they could just leave and go fuck some other girls.

Separating the sexual act from procreation.

Modern liberals (in the American sense of the word, someone like Adam Smith would never agree with what I'm going to write here) are hedonists.

They believe that what gives physical pleasure is good, what gives physical pain or stops physical pleasure is bad.

Sex gives pleasure. STDs give pain. So, for them, you should have safe sex with whoever you are attracted to who consents.
Sex gives pleasure. Pregnancies lead to pain, less pleasure and more work. So, you should have safe sex. But then, contraceptives do not work 100% of the time. So, in those cases abortion is the best alternative, since you won't have to be bothered with a pregnancy and the financial costs of raising someone.

Of course, this kind of thinking has plenty of negative consequences. Temperance is a virtue because being a slave to pleasure makes you a shittier person and unhappier. It has also led to broken families and the objectification of people. Men don't think of women as partners for life, but rather as tools for their pleasure. "Why should I buy the cow if I can get the milk for free?" is something I have heard plenty of times. And now, with the Sex Robots, we end up with the logical consequence of this. Following liberal logic, a super pretty sexual robot, who can give you more pleasure than a human and none of the headache... would be great.

Humans have been terminating pregnancies for literally eons. Unwanted pregnancy is nothing new, like, at all. Of course, the religious authorities did not like this. But in the old days, you could easily go to a midwife, "witch", herb lady or what have you.

The only new thing was doing it in clinical settings with forceps and modern drugs, etc.

What the fuck is wrong with castrating rapists? Are you seriously defending rapists?

>implying Adam Smith wasn't a hedonist
The Wealth of Nations was actually about his efficient resource allocation fetish. He was most definitely a libertine.

His argument here is that, regardless of its efficacy, there is a point at which criminal punishment can become overly cruel. Everybody wants bad things to happen less frequently, everybody agrees that the threat of extreme punishment like death is a good deterrent, buy everybody draws the line of what kind of punishment is justifiable for a crime at different places. So, death (or a life spent paying for a single mistake) might be justifiable if the bad thing done was setting off a bomb in a public place, but it would be unjustifiable of the bad thing done was stealing a pencil.

To point out the inhumanity in the logic of the previous poster (unprotected sex is sufficiently bad that the deserved punishment should be raising the child for 18+ years, an incredibly stressful, time-consuming, and expensive thing, done alone if necessary), this poster is proposing a similarly extreme punishment for rape: castration. He is not defending rape as something that should not be punished.

Womens greed

There's a reason it's called the religious right.

It's cruel. Even rapists have rights

Saving the country, as depressing as it may be

I unironically think Abortion should banned and whoever does it should be treated as murders.
>BUD DATS OPPRESSIVE!!!
If not allowing women to kill their children is ''Oppressive'' then i shall proudly oppress the absolute shit out of you and then some. Liberalism and Progressivism be damned.

Some people like being together but just don't want a kid. Not that you would understand that.
Also child support? You don't want to get trapped in into that.
I'm actually on alot of mra's side when it comes to men being able to bring their case to court that they shouldn't have to pay child support if the girl refuses to get an abortion. There is no reason for that .

Fetuses aren't children. Just shut up.
What needs to be done if you care about preventing abortions so much is more available birth control(abortion is NOT birth control but a last resort). This is something feminist push MORE than abortion these days. They just want right to remain since it is none of the state's business.

this. but there should be restrictions on late term abortions to only if the mother's life is at risk or the kid isn't gonna live long after birth do to birth defects

>Roman did both, but yeah thise degenerates favored killing babies outside the uterus, not that it is any worse that what we do now.
Yours kidding? You actually going to compare stopping a fetus from developing to a human to killing an actual human? That can feel pain? They can cry? That has some form of consciousness?
I'm sorry but I really think that is just your pinion not fact and for you to talk down to others to the point of making your opinion law is just b.s
That's why late terms are so looked down upon and hardly done. It just isn't safe and at that point is starting to hurt the fetus now transitioning more and more into a living thing.

Betterment of society. We don't need more single motherhood or parents that have no idea what they are doing and are extremely poor.

It's not like you force them to live a sterile life. You take them outside 20 minutes later and put a bullet in the back of their head.

'warnings' don't do shit

Satanism.

The US has the quite unhealthy goal of destroying any and all forms of law and order.

Eugenics is at the root of the abortion movement, somewhere along the way it became a form of birth control and generally fetishized by left of center types.

>"Why should I buy the cow if I can get the milk for free?" is something I have heard plenty of times.
I doubt anyone you heard say that would be considered a modern american liberal.

>that image
I don't get what feminism has to do with that, if he feels unmanly from a sex act done between two consenting adults I don't understand how that's anyone's problem but his.

Pretty good filter for women.

If you get an abortion and wasn't due to rape that reflects badly on you considerung the 101 safe bc methods we have and more.

a fetus is already a human
>killing a human is not wrong if he can't complain about it lulz

Society impose gender roles on him which reduce his pleasure, feminism fight against that

Natural consequence of individualism, AKA orchestrated Defection.
When you only consider children a burden to your good time, you're a defector.

It happened in Rome, and it happens now

Maybe its because you dont have the proper resources and knowledge to carw for a child

It's like failing to wash your hands when you take a massive shit. There's no way and no excuse you can forget to wash said hands despite the obvious tell tale signs that cargo was dropped into the ocean so to speak.

Unlikely. That may account for most Black abortions, but not those in OP's picture. If you have time to protest, you can raise a baby

Progress

>Just shut up.
No i won't. Get fucked.
>Fetuses aren't children
By what measure?
>They just want right to remain since it is none of the state's business.
Nah it is. Your rights end when they threaten that of others.

>the foundation of your civilization's laws and social interactions is obsolete
>we will lose nothing be removing it