Politics then and now...

What I want is for the child to be able to live.

I completely agree. No one should be forced to conceive a child. But in a pregnancy, a child is already there.

You don't think I didn't know it was not the 1930s? Anyway, timeline bears no relevance to this question.

We don't think that. We just think that people, to include unborn people, should be allowed to live. Women are still welcome to get a job. In fact, there are many very skilled women out there that are very greatly admire, including Candice Owens, Carol Swain, and Winsome Sears, among others. Your argument is a straw man.

But, you see, a pregnant woman already IS a mother, whether she likes it or not. Let me ask you this: suppose a woman becomes pregnant and decides that she wants to keep the child. She gives birth, and is very happy with her decision. But when the child is two, she changes her mind and decides she "doesn't want to be a mother" and "shouldn't be forced to be a mother." Should she be allowed to kill that child because she doesn't wish to care for it?

Okay, and you're entitled to your opinion. I feel that we should respect the sanctity of lifee in all of its stages, including those stages before birth.

Also I misspelled life. Sorry about the typo.

That *I* greatly admire...

My issue with your argument is that you falsely accused me of using a strawman argument, yet you yourself use a strawman argument. The pro-choice belief isn't that you should be allowed to kill a fully born baby, outside of the womb. The pro-choice belief is that Women should have the right to abort fetuses, in a womb, not babies, outside wombs.
We shouldn't protect the early life stages, at the fall of the fully developed. We've had the right to abortion for 50 years.
We must stop making laws off of fairy tale books.
Freedom of religion means freedom FROM religion.
White nationalist republicans want to preserve white babies, as white women are the majority getting abortions.

You said our position is that we see women as "unskilled laborers, whose only job is to bear children and be homemakers." That is an exaggerated and, quite frankly, untrue definition of our position.

What you are interpreting as a strawman on my part is actually a rhetorical question. There's a difference.

Okay, why do you think those things?

Slavery was also a "right" for longer than fifty years. That proves nothing.

There's another strawman. Incidentally, it's also a red herring.

This isn't about religion.

WTF? The fact that I don't want babies of ANY RACE to die somehow makes me a white supremacist?

I'm talking about republican lawmakers.

H-what?

Ok then, seemingly enough i was wrong. However, i have a new argument: Abortion is concentrated among low-income women, this will impact them, as well as women of color as well.
And i still stand by my white nationalist republican claim.

Didn't GOP endorse Trump? I mean, i guess i have to give a droplet of credit to the Anti-Trumpist Republicans, but nonetheless they are still republicrooks, so they still suck.

The Mango Mussolini has a long history of racism, including before his politcal career.

You know what. you're right. I'm wrong. I mean, how could he be racist? He's quite the anti-fascist. So anti-fascist, he wanted his soldiers to follow in the footsteps of ''german soldiers in world war 2.''

And he was such a ally, that back in his landlord days, he lied to African-American tenants about apartments being available and got sued by the government because he violated the fair housing act. And one of his former workers wrote an entire book about him in 91' dedicated to his bigotry and incompetence in business. I'm just a ignorant commie propagandist. I dont know what i'm talking about whatsoever. I'm a wittle anti-american terrorist. F**king republicans. Morons.