Yes, since she chickened out when her support for mandatory abortion was challenged. Then again, that might have been for the best.
A. Screw you too
B. You took that position WAY out of context. You forgot the part about "only in cases of incest between siblings or parents and children to prevent children from having to live with crippling birth defects". But it's easier to attack someone when you leave out the reason they advocate a policy you disagree with. Then there's just an inflammatory strawman that gets people angry. And the best part is that you never technically lied about the opinion.
C. I considered changing it after someone made an argument that forced actual thought. I haven't actually changed my mind, and I probably should have said so.
D.Under this policy, people in first degree incest relationships would know that they can't have biological children, so they wouldn't bother trying, instead probably opting to adopt.
E. Seriously, you left out what the opinion actually is, or even the most basic description of where it was even discussed, leaving people with nothing to go off of but your own mischaracterization. A pretty cowardly thing to do. So yes, you are very much a paltroon. Did you expect me to just take you spitting in my face? Because I won't. And this isn't the first time you did this. You called me "some random edgy creep whow supports mandatory abortions". I defended myself (albeit rather awkwardly). You never responded.
Oh wow, I didn't expect this level of self-righteous outrage from someone who's proudly advocating for policies most people with a conscience find inherently abhorrent. Funny.
You're more than welcome to resume the old thread and continue the discussion there. You left a post by Nathan unanswered and I'm really curious to see you grapple with it. If you somehow can put together a coherent response, I'd be happy to take my turn at debunking it.
(BTW,
a quick skim of this might help you understand why the specific circumstances for which you're advocating for mandatory abortions are morally irrelevant to most of us)
