In the case of abortion, as has been brought up many times, Roe V. Wade was intended to get the abortions out of the back alleys and take the coat hangers out of women's hands.
Roe V. Wade made it possible to regulate the practice of abortion. I'm not saying this is ideal, but that making abortion legal is definitely a better solution than driving it underground which has many unintended consequences.
Again, using falsified Kinsey research. People thought this was common at the time, since kinsey's research looked very credible, was taken very seriously and helped inform all types of ways in which society and sexuality was regarded.
But his research was very biased and intentionally so. I said it before, but I'll say it again, almost half of his female married sample (45%) was prostitutes living with their pimp (not even married). This gave the image that back alley abortions were very common for married americans, when it was only common for a very specific and very sexually active subset of american women.
I want to give people birth control only if you pro-choicers agree to ban the devil media that ENCOURAGES young people to have sex at an early age. How can YOU say it's bad to ban birth control but in the same breath CONDEMN anyone who wants to put a leash on the satanic pedophile media who actively ENCOURAGES abortions through their promotion of sex?
It's a valid point. And it's never foing to happen. That sexually charged media aimed at kids is part of their worldview that is sacrosanct. They'll condemn maybe some of the craziest excesses, like transkids stuff, but they agree with the fundamentally flawed idea that pornography is a form of speech. They'll call it sexuality of course. They'll dress it up a bit, as disney knows how to do like no other.
They simply are never going to be as angry with these type of art expressions:
The value of a video like the couple of bill nye ones, is that when it's done poorly, the agenda is more visible, the machinery laid bare. Whereas in other works, like disney's huncheback of notre dame or frozen, the underlaying agenda's are covered up better and not as visible on the conscious level.
But as I said. They're simply not going to be as angry as they're going to be with people that want to curb the amount of abortions going on. We are evil, in their minds. We are contemptable, woman haters, unable to get even close to getting a woman. How many pages have been filled with that idea? It's like the "have sex" meme. What does it say about their world view that they think that is some sort of solution or rites of passage to have a seat at the table?
Oh they'll give a mild acknowledgement that this or that thing "isn't really to their taste" or "I'm not really for that", but it's not approached with any of the same vehemence.
If you want proof of that, you can look at the reaction to what I write here. It'll be ignored, or just dismissed without thought. We're touching something that is off limits. They'll feel the flaws of the excesses and whine about oversexualisation, but never dare look at the source, or tear at its roots.
Ah, I see you're into QAnon.
Just because there are some retards falling for some poor psyop, doesn't mean the underlying idea that existed before that doesn't have merit.
Just like you aren't discredited by the "penis in vagina is rape" feminists that are also staunch abortion defenders. You are credited and discredited according to your own ideas and their merit or lack thereof.
