Social Justice Warriors Thread

[Speaker to Animals]

They killed HWNDU. RIP.

I guess Harambe wasn't enough for them.

[Ex-California]

**PROFANITY WARNING** Transgender Protest Crashes Insurance Board Meeting

http://www.maciverinstitute.com/videos/ ... -decision/

Unhappy with the Group Insurance Board's recent decision to stop covering hormone therapy and gender reassignment surgeries for state employees, one protester thought the board's meeting this morning was the right time to launch a profanity-riddled protest.

The GIB's decision to cease the coverage came after a federal judge ruled that states are not required to cover those treatments under federal law. By ceasing the coverage, the state returned to a policy it had maintained since July 2016.

It needs to be reclassified as mental illness

[TheReal_ND]

It is now racist to NOT subscribe to Netflix. Very clever leveraging of social dynamics on their part.

[Speaker to Animals]

I guses I am racist, then, because I refuse to pay for their hate.

[TheReal_ND]

The Article, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, says newborn babies are not “actual persons” and do not have a “moral right to life”. The academics also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.

The journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, said the article's authors had received death threats since publishing the article. He said those who made abusive and threatening posts about the study were “fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society”.

The article, entitled “After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live?”, was written by two of Prof Savulescu’s former associates, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva.

They argued: “The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual.”

Rather than being “actual persons”, newborns were “potential persons”. They explained: “Both a fetus and a newborn certainly are human beings and potential persons, but neither is a ‘person’ in the sense of ‘subject of a moral right to life’.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/ ... s-say.html

People who oppose killing newborn babies are “fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society”.

[Okeefenokee]

The Article, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, says newborn babies are not “actual persons” and do not have a “moral right to life”. The academics also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.

The journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, said the article's authors had received death threats since publishing the article. He said those who made abusive and threatening posts about the study were “fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society”.

The article, entitled “After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live?”, was written by two of Prof Savulescu’s former associates, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva.

They argued: “The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual.”

Rather than being “actual persons”, newborns were “potential persons”. They explained: “Both a fetus and a newborn certainly are human beings and potential persons, but neither is a ‘person’ in the sense of ‘subject of a moral right to life’.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/ ... s-say.html

People who oppose killing newborn babies are “fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society”.

I told y'all these people need to be culled.

[TheReal_ND]

We should put them in an arena and let them abort each other.

[Okeefenokee]

We should put them in an arena and let them abort each other.

You're an idea man.

[Fife]

That article is a really good exposition of the intellectual attitude of every standard issue Roe-pro-choice person towards human life and the prime human right (the right to your own life).

Not very many of them are honest enough to admit it; probably very many of them are too dumb to realize it.

[Martin Hash]

Human life is secondary to Liberty. I will sacrifice my life or take yours to maintain Liberty. Ironically, many on The Left do not put Liberty first, which means they are putting selfishness over human life. That's pretty messed up.