deleted by creator
might be preaching to the choir a little bit
Pro-lifers don’t care.
All they care about is the fact that the white population will decrease as no one can afford/wants children, so the best way to remedy that is to force them to.
How else would one mass-produce gullible, uneducated voting cattle to exploit and fleece?
I was confused at first, what you meant by professional-lifer
Which is why republicans and conservatives want it gone: they want you to have children.
They want having children to be a woman’s punishment for unapproved sex, and they want the kid (who had zero responsibility for creating that situation) to suffer through it along with her, with zero help so it’s all as unpleasant as possible, cuz apparently that makes Baby Jesus smile. Fucking lunatics.
At its core it’s about population control. As the birth rate is falling capitalism needs bodies to keep the cogs turning.
To a certain extent, but capitalism always adjusts to changes in birth rates. Reducing payroll has been a trend since the 80s, accelerating with computers, robotics, and now AI.
They want you to have children, and they want you to do it before you’re ready. They want you to be barely surviving so you can’t afford to switch jobs or take time off. They want you too powerless to have any leverage over your
owneremployer.New meat MUST be bred to feed the machine of infinite growth.
You still are a wage slave paying rent to a landed lord.
Better than committing another soul to the same fate.
They know, that’s the point.
you forgot the funny part
Memes don’t have to be jokes
Name another unfunny one so I can back you on that
Memes don’t have to be funny to be a meme.
I’m backing you now.
Memes don’t have to be funny to be a meme.
Yeah, as long as they deliver a message that is politically Democrat, then it belongs here.
Fun is no longer an option for this feed.
One issue (and hear me out, I do support abortions, birth control and bodily autonomy!) is that, once given a choice when and how to reproduce, people don’t do it as much.
Having pleasure of sex without consequences is screwing the natural incentives for reproduction.
Whether we like it or not, there should be something to support fertility if we don’t want to end up in a population crisis, with a few young folks supporting the ever growing army of the elderly.
Now, this should NOT be laws prohibiting abortions, or banning any sort of contraception, but there should be some incentives for people to go, and, well, make babies. This part Republicans got right (wow), they screwed with the suggested methods.
Fixing the financial clusterfuck and letting people live in a bright and predictable world where they know their tomorrow will be good is certainly one way, but I’m afraid it’s not enough. What could be the other options? I’m interested in people’s opinions.
JD, is this you?
Nah, JD is just fine with banning abortions and counts the issue solved
What do you mean by population crisis?
In the world it’s the other way around, the demographics are still booming.
You know what came before having better birth control and lower birth rates in most developed countries, medicine and lower death rate. In most of them now both are pretty close (most because there are exceptions like Japan).
I’m not really sure i see a problem with a slight decrease in population in a place where there is already a lot of people.
Demographics is mostly booming in underdeveloped countries, with some exceptions. It is likely many of them will follow the same path going forward, and UN predictions expect just that, as far as I remember. For developed countries, the fertility rate typically sits somewhere around 1,5-1,7, significantly below 2,1 required to have a stable population. I could of course cite something like South Korea with 0,8, but that’s an obvious outlier. It’s bad enough as it is.
As the world remains divided, this will likely exacerbate the issue for particular countries with lower birth rate. Immigration is one answer, but it doesn’t always cover the population loss, and immigrants are likely to send a lot of their income back home anyway (again, this is absolutely not a case against immigrants, I for one welcome them).
Evening out population growth over time would go a long way to maintain a healthy future.
I’ll start worrying about the “population crisis” when there are no more orphans because they’ve all been adopted.
Those are unrelated, unfortunately.
An orphan, economically speaking, is still a productive member of society.
Of course, from the position of empathy, it is extremely sad people don’t commonly adopt children, and I would welcome everyone to do so - along with having their own. Adoption is important to give everyone a family and save them from the horrors of orphan life. New births are important to keep human population stable and the world continuously running.
As much as I want to only come from the empathetic “adopt first” (and I consider doing so myself in a not-so-distant future), we have to have other considerations as well if we don’t want to live in a dying world where everyone - from kids to seniors - faces insane, never-before-seen economic crisis, destroying life for everyone. It already gets worse, and we only dropped fertility a little. There are objective economic factors to this, not only capitalist greed (which, however, is also present).
Not so funny.
Birth control is nothing more than a form of medical technology. People against birth control and abortion(also medical technology) are Medical Luddites.
They must be afraid of losing their jobs at crisis pregnancy centers, or be afraid they won’t be allowed to shame young single mothers anymore.
Either they are afraid of losing jobs, or afraid of not having hot single moms in their area. Make a pick
Doesn’t not having sex do that a little better tho? Like i totally get the point, but also, having sex gives chance of baby right? So, don’t do it unless you ready? Maybe I’m wrong.
Your suggestion has at least two severe issues:
- It doesn’t scale. The people that can and want to “wait until they’re ready” probably are doing that already. Meanwhile, the large, unwashed majority does whatever they feel like, and why would they want that to change?
- It takes away personal liberty and punishes people who “cannot control themselves,” giving way to social authoritarianism. To me, that’s the exact opposite of what any elected government should do: to make people’s lives better.
Sex is a basic human need. Having a child isn’t. You need to know you are compatible with your partner sexually or it will lead to tons of strife in a relationship. So not having sex unless you are asexual or a version of it isn’t an option.
Sex is a basic human need.
Humans do not die if they don’t have sex.
Humans also do not die when they are shackled and locked in a dark room for years or decades, as long as you feed them. How is you argument sounding now?
Still better than ignoring the millions of people throughout history who haven’t had sex and lived long happy lives.
Almost sounds like it’s fine when people choose, but is a problem when people are forced. Odd
There are people who don’t choose but still are still fine.
If what you’re saying is true Tom Hanks would have died of lack of sex on that island.
Or I’d have died in the six years between going through puberty and having sex. Or the five years later on when I didn’t have sex but wanted to.
“People need sex” is borderline incel shit.
I can tell you’re just going to need some months or years to think it over.
Logically, yes. But humans aren’t purely logical. They’re gonna have sex without access to birth control, even if they don’t want a kid. Not all of them, but a lot of them. So why not just let them have both control?
No, you’re not “maybe wrong”. You’re absolutely and completely wrong seen as abstinence only programs have been shown over and over again to be ineffective. It’s a sad attempt at policing people’s desire for sex
People fuck for various reasons. Taking away people’s access to contraception doesn’t stop that, it merely makes it more likely they’ll have kids.
Abstinence only programs have shown themselves again and again to just produce teen pregnancies and STDs. Contraception, generally, is the best way to keep yourself from producing a child and the people who are against it tend to be the type of people who want the state to get into your bedroom.
I’ve been told by multiple people that if men do not have sex they become fascists.
So, no, not having sex is apparently not an option.
You have the same worldview and understanding of human sexuality of an 8 year old.
Either your ridiculously naive or just straight up an idiot. Possibly both.
Jesus fucking Christ. I’ve never read anything so dumb on the internet. And I saw Trump get elected. Twice.
Isn’t the pill stated to be like 99% effective? Why discourage people from using it that want to plan their futures?
There are only two reasons any post-pubescent human isn’t having sex:
-
They can’t find anyone to fuck them.
-
They’re legitimately asexual. (A rare thing. And no lemmy, just because you’re not getting laid doesn’t make you “asexual”.)
-
deleted by creator
Absolutely. Which is exactly the reason they want to take it away from you.
No need to sound like a political science textbook. Birth control means you don’t have to get pegnorate!
Gregnant?
PREG…PREGANANANT?
Pro-lifers do not care a single bit
