• thantik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    You don’t have to wonder any longer. You’ve figured it out. Take the morality out of many political decisions and you have the right answer. Abortions? – nobody gives a shit about those children. It’s a convenient cover so they don’t have to say “Mothers are killing the thing that we will enslave and drain later on in the economy!” Everyone says that they care about the child until it’s born – they don’t even care before that point. And the lack of care/suffering/poverty of the child afterwards is the point of exploitation. So the system is working as intended. They need more workers, they need to siphon every ounce of production out of those workers.

    • AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Abortions? – nobody gives a shit about those children. It’s a convenient cover so they don’t have to say “Mothers are killing the thing that we will enslave and drain later on in the economy!"

      What sort of purpose does it serve to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term when the fetus has a Fatal fetal abnormality?

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s for the useful idiots who follow these politicians to believe that those politicians’ choices are driven by moral principles rather than cold personal upside maximization and a sociopathic disregard for others: for appearances’ sake, same as going around kissing babies and shaking the hands of people they look down on.

        This might sound crazy to any normal person because normal people wouldn’t sacrifice others like that merely for the sake of “the message”, but sociopaths don’t feel any guilt or shame when they hurt or harm others, so they’re capable of sacrificing others to quite an extreme level merelly for some minor benefits to themselves, if the victims are powerless to reciprocate (which in this case they are).

      • IHadTwoCows@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        It gives conservatives something to jack off about.

        Violence is the only reasonable response.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        What sort of purpose does it serve to force a woman to carry a pregnancy

        One sterile woman is a good exchange for 10 babies born in poverty who will join the Army.

        • Fedizen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The policy creates orphans more than it creates a population boom. And eventually people do find ways to prevent/stop pregnancies they’re just more dangerous and you see small bump in births then they go down as women die. With more women dying on their 3rd or 4th child then you get more kids who are ophaned.

          The strategic problem is nobody wants orphans so what happens? They get abused or fend for themselves and become unstable. Ain’t many of them going to join the army.

            • Fedizen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              What I’m saying tho is the bump is negligable and small, if it exists at all for abortion. Its actually the fight against schools and education that will bring meat for the meat grinder.