So, these websites were being blocked because they were engaged in illegal activity.
Maybe those blocking the sites are not acting on behalf of law enforcement but rather their own ideas of legality and morality.
I think it is like anorexia. Someone who has no control over their own lives tries to control the few things they can. An anorexic controls their food, but a married man controls his wife and kids. It makes even the weakest person feel strong to have someone to boss around.
Access to reproduction is one of the most basic resources a society has available. It is common for the old men to control the young men by being the ones to decide who gets access to women. "Work for us loyally, and we'll allow you to get married"
Society became much more complex than a tribal village where the elders decide everything, and so have the levels of indirection in how control of reproduction is wielded. The situation is also quite a bit more complicated now that populations are able to grow so far above the local carrying capacity of the land. Yet we can still trace a line back to when it was necessary for a community to collectively maintain the sustainability of their population by deciding how many children could be supported at any one time.
Drafts? They typically only targeted men, with a large possibility of maiming or death as the result.
The topic is not access to reproduction. Nobody is controlling access to pregnancy.
> the ones to decide who gets access to women.
Nor is access to women.
Such as Giorgia Meloni?
You ignore that so many leading anti-abortion activists are women. I think for example of Joanna Howe, [0] who is arguably the most prominent activist against abortion rights in contemporary Australia-and far from some “crotchety old man”, she is a 43 year old law professor.
And in the US [1,2]:
2016 election: Approximately 39% to 42% of female voters cast their ballots for Trump.
2020 election: Approximately 44% of female voters cast their ballots for Trump.
2024 election: Approximately 46% of female voters cast their ballots for Trump
Like it or not -- and make no mistake, I don't like it -- many women want this.
----------
1: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2025/06/26/voting-patte...
2: https://www.cfr.org/articles/women-voters-pivotal-role-elect...
I don't know why people are being so (deliberatively?) reductive ITT.
If the mother was raped and knows for sure she will not bring up her rapist's kid ... or if there is a possibility that letting the baby be born will kill the mother, MY belief is to follow the mother's wishes.
It's her body and her life.
Not all of us I would bet. One can believe the fetus is a human life, and still want to allow the mother ending it. Sure it’s rough, but this is a classic case of conflicting interest. Pretending the fetus isn’t human yet is just one of several ways to side with the mother’s decision. Malformations or danger to the mother’s life are two others. And then there’s the more radical position that as long as the fetus hasn’t left the womb, the mother’s autonomy is still more important than its life.
This last one is less a belief, (one week before birth the baby is clearly viable), than it is a value system. Though I’d be curious to see the statistics on countries that allow abortion up to birth itself. If it turns out practically no one aborts after 4 months or whatever, that particular point would be moot.
Upthread, a response to me indicated very clearly that, even at 1 day before delivery, it should be the mother's choice.
There's a lot of nuance here, with clearly many people stuck in denial: this is not a binary question. There's a spectrum, all the way from 1 day after conception to 1 day before delivery.
The pro-choicers are pretending that all the pro-lifers want to outlaw the morning after pill. The pro-choicers are also not doing themselves any favours by actually, on this story alone, positioning themselves as supporting 1-day-before-delivery abortions.
Everyone has a line they'll draw. Not everyone's line is in the same place.
And you think the opposing arguments are?
• Survival rates begin to appear (still low) around 22 weeks (roughly 5–35% depending on the study, active treatment, and hospital, with high rates of complications). https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/154/4/e20240...
And please stop that rape red herring. The overwhelming majority of abortions are carried out as contraceptive methods.
[1]https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullar...
To have the legally available and free abortion that is offered within the first 90 days of their rape?
I say this as someone that is 100% pro-abortion. If a woman wants to not have a baby, it's her body, and her right to decide. The discussion ends there.
Life is hard in the best of times. It must suck to be brought into a world where your mother doesn't even fucking want you around.
Moreover, it's probably preferable that people that make poor decisions regarding pregnancy opt themselves out of the gene pool.
Someone having an abortion have zero effect on a person who is against abortion but has never met them. The anti-abortion person should mind their own business.
I don’t believe in god and think religion is generally harmful but I don’t go around campaigning to eliminate religious freedoms. I don’t tell religious people I think their beliefs are ridiculous, I keep it to myself.
Abortion wasn’t even an issue in the US until Atwater->Reagan realized there were a bunch of religious people they could manipulate into voting for the GOP by making abortion a wedge issue.
The woman is clearly a human life too, and every western country has a right to self defense. A fetus is an imminent danger to women, their health, and their property. They have a right to remove it from their own body to stop that.
Or am I allowed to unconsentually put myself inside anyone for months, eating the food from their blood like a tapeworm, causing chronic pain, permanently changing their hormones, potentially risking death, just to come ripping my way out of their body and then demanding 18 years of pay and attention?
Am I entitled to an unconsenting healthy person's blood or organs or marrow if I'm going to die without it and we know they're "probably" going to be fine?
I believe there’s something very wrong with your moral compass, pal.
The weird thing about Great Replacement bullshit, is how it manages to mix superiority complex with inferiority complex. Like viewing oneself as less attractive than the "inferior" brother accros the street, or believing in the superiority of one’s culture, and in natural selection, and be afraid of being overrun by an "inferior" one…