Ministry of Truth

boldwalker12 said:Actually, I didn't misread a thing. You guys are basically demanding permission to call abortion murder. I already pointed out that by doing that, you're effectively labeling people as murderers. And don't even try to lie and say nobody is calling anyone a murderer.

There is no need to escalate tensions with accusations like that; stay on track.
I am not asking for permission to call abortion murder—quite the opposite;

This is an extremely sensitive topic, and the threshold for justifying a ban needs to be set very high, not just regarding the politics abortion debate, but also within the religion politics debate.
The terminology used in this discussion should be precise, accurate, and well-reasoned.

I hope you realize that I am not a spokesperson for everyone who shares my views; I am participating in this debate based on my own stance.
Can you actually quote my post where I supposedly demand what was mentioned above, or explain where this accusation of lying is coming from?

Jessica Kelly4 said:You only searched for "catholiban," you need to search for all variations of that word.
Since we're talking stats, on the abortion thread, the word "killing" shows up in 25 posts out of over 1,500. And that's supposed to be destroying the debate? Using "catholiban" is direct labeling meant to insult, whereas claiming a fetus is being killed is just a rational viewpoint.

Fine, let's drop the other terms.

Indeed. In one specific thread, abortion was characterized as murder—I haven't checked different grammatical forms, mind you—exactly 25 times, even accounting for threads that might have been cut short halfway through. And you are comparing that to the mention of "Catholic extremism," which barely surfaces a handful of times across the entire PDF.

But we are in agreement; let us abandon other terms. There is no point.

Look, you're sitting here claiming you guys don't go around calling anyone murderers. But let's be real—you're constantly pushing the idea that abortion should be labeled a murder, even though the law doesn't see it that way.

rowdydrifter22 said:

boldwalker12 The user states:
It surprises me that those drawing parallels to zoophilia aren't vocalizing their complaints as well.
Look, it isn’t about whether you identify as right-wing or not; the issue is that you lot seem incapable of maintaining even a basic level of civilized discourse. Labeling women who seek abortions as murderers, or branding gay people as pedophiles and zoophiles, isn't an argument—it is pure, unadulterated primitivism. It's beneath any standard of decent human interaction. This isn't a debate.

I held off on commenting on this because I wasn't aware you were a moderator.
That was a pretty distasteful post from the moderator, so I’m adding it to the list.
Just like rowdytiger13, you’re busy slapping labels on people and attributing claims to your opponents that they never actually made. We aren't sitting here discussing whether women are killers; that’s just a point you keep repeating over and over again.So, it’s just a label now—a smear tactic that suddenly and aggressively expanded to include pedophiles, zoophiles, and primitives. Go ahead, add to the list.
The issue is simple: you cannot allow any entry that challenges the remaining ideological foundations of that movement. It is pure dogma. And you execute that quite effectively through censorship.

boldwalker12 said:Yeah, sure. ZK is so famous for everyone being best buddies and constantly agreeing with each other that they even made a custom smiley just to capture that specific brand of harmony. Give me a break.

Total dogma. Talk about the speck in someone else's eye while ignoring the damn log in your own.

Exactly. Isn't it a bit ironic how you "progressive" types end up just recycling our "old-fashioned" ideas? Doesn't that tell you something? 😁

Look, I’m not trying to settle any scores with the mods here.
I don't know much about William Bennett53 anyway; I haven't seen him around the political threads all that often.
Bubimir is actually a decent user who knows how to hold his own in a debate.

This whole mess is just because of this specific topic and my attempt to show the moderators they need to focus more on consistency and actual arguments rather than reacting based on their own biases. Let's be real: this forum is a place for discussion, not some stuffy academic institution.

boldwalker12 said:Look, you're sitting here claiming you guys don't go around calling anyone murderers. But let's be real—you're constantly pushing the idea that abortion should be labeled a murder, even though the law doesn't see it that way.

I was naive enough to hope you would respect that I am expressing my own views and reasoning rather than speaking on behalf of a majority. I have no way of knowing what others think or what they are demanding. I read what the original poster wrote and I agree with him, yet you still choose to call me a liar.
No, I am not asking for abortion to be called murder; I have stated that multiple times, quite the opposite actually. Despite this, you persist in repeating "But you constantly push for abortion to be labeled as murder," which is precisely why my criticism is directed at you as a moderator. It feels like a setup designed to slap a label on people, or at least that's how it comes across to me.
As far as I can tell, neither the thread starter nor I are demanding that abortion be classified as murder.
If there really is a user here who believes abortion is murder and wants to write about it in this thread, then direct those comments to the appropriate person, not to me or to us, but to them.

rowdydrifter22 said:I was naive enough to hope you would respect that I am expressing my own views and reasoning rather than speaking on behalf of a majority. I have no way of knowing what others think or what they are demanding. I read what the original poster wrote and I agree with him, yet you still choose to call me a liar.
No, I am not asking for abortion to be called murder; I have stated that multiple times, quite the opposite actually. Despite this, you persist in repeating "But you constantly push for abortion to be labeled as murder," which is precisely why my criticism is directed at you as a moderator. It feels like a setup designed to slap a label on people, or at least that's how it comes across to me.
As far as I can tell, neither the thread starter nor I are demanding that abortion be classified as murder.
If there really is a user here who believes abortion is murder and wants to write about it in this thread, then direct those comments to the appropriate person, not to me or to us, but to them.

Honestly, I was naively hoping you'd actually read your own posts with a bit of comprehension. By using phrases like "we don't call anyone murderers," you basically lumped yourself in with that side, actively defending their position while pretending to know exactly what they think—even going so far as to claim "we" represent them. I see zero reason to address every single person individually when someone makes such an unambiguous move to group themselves under a "we" or "you" while doing the exact thing they claim not to do.

Also, you clearly didn't even bother reading the very first post in this thread. It seems to me you haven't read a damn thing, because the whole point of this dispute is that abortion is no longer allowed to be called murder in the Politics section.
I'm done talking about this; I'm exhausted from spinning in circles with you guys.
So, let's boil it down to three things:

- You're pushing for abortion to be called murder or some other euphemism for it.
- You're insisting that if abortion is murder, you haven't actually called anyone a murderer.
- You're drowning out those first two points with noise about everything else, muddying the waters so it stays unclear that you're essentially trying to brand people as murderers.

Go ahead, spin another circle trying to argue that I'm wrong about this or whatever, but I'm officially opting out of this merry-go-round.

boldwalker12 said:Holocaust victims were never called "uncles"—it’s honestly horrific to even joke about that or try to make a point with it.

I have no clue who is grinning or using that specific term, but I haven't seen it once from anyone on the pro-choice forums. Because let me be clear: being pro-choice doesn't mean you're pro-abortion.

The second you start equating murders and genocides with abortions, we aren't having a debate anymore; we're just labeling doctors and women as murderers. I don't know why you people refuse to accept that and try to wrap it up in some other fancy wording. The person committing a murder is a murderer. Period.

About a week ago, I was looking through one of those two main political discussion threads—I could probably drop a link if that would help, though I wonder if it might be better just to introduce myself properly first?

boldwalker12 It’s been on my mind lately, just drifting through my thoughts like a slow river, how we all seem to be processing things differently, hasn't it? I was sitting there, just thinking about what was said, and it really makes you wonder if we ever truly grasp the depth of these conversations before they pass us by. Is it possible that we are all just looking for a bit of clarity in a world that feels increasingly cluttered? It's funny how one small observation can trigger such a long chain of reflection, isn't it?
Is there a specific moment when we collectively decide that murder and genocide carry the exact same weight as the conversation surrounding abortion? It feels like we've reached this strange, surreal crossroads where the scale of human loss is being recalibrated in a way that defies all logic. I find myself wondering how we arrived at a point where these massive, historical atrocities are being placed on the same level as such a deeply personal and contentious medical issue. Does the moral compass even function anymore when we start grouping these things together in our debates? It feels like we’ve moved past any kind of actual discussion and entered a phase where we're just slapping labels on doctors and women, calling them murderers. I honestly can't wrap my head around why people refuse to just acknowledge that reality and frame it in a different way. If someone is committing an act of killing, then they are a killer. It really is as simple as that, isn't it?

I really think we’re on the same page here, which is why I felt the need to bring up that particular—well, let's call it a classic trolling—example in the first place, wasn't I? My intention was simply to use such a specific, albeit provocative, instance as a way to illustrate just how incredibly layered and complex the process of constructing a real argument can actually be.

Is equality really anything more than just another way to label people, troll them, or engage in some kind of endless flame war? It feels like we're constantly stuck in this cycle where trying to level the playing field just becomes a tool for targeting others, doesn't it?

But we don't exactly live in a simple world, do we? Even though people are constantly trying to shove these oversimplified, completely disconnected ideas down our throats just to make things seem clearer than they really are, the reality is much more layered. We exist in this incredibly complex landscape where so much of what we experience has already played out; most of what we do today is really just us rearranging the pieces of what came before. You only have to look at Hollywood to see it, don't you? There are hardly any truly fresh concepts anymore, just endless reboots, compilations, and sequels designed to repackage the same old stories for a new audience.

If we were to actually dive into a discussion about communism and Nazism, it would almost certainly be a massive distraction from the core politics abortion debate, yet I can't help but feel there is one specific fact that would carry immense weight in such a conversation.

It’s a chilling historical reality that, before any totalitarian regime ever resorted to the mass slaughter of their political opponents, they always followed a very specific, predictable pattern: they first had to strip those people of their humanity. Isn't it strange how that process works? It seems like there is always this necessary precursor where the target group is systematically dehumanized through rhetoric and propaganda, making them seem less than human in the eyes of the public, just so that when the actual violence eventually follows, the conscience of the masses remains undisturbed. One has to wonder if we aren't seeing the early stages of that same psychological machinery being greased up again today.
If you look at things through the lens of Nazi ideology, they weren't just killing people; they were systematically eliminating what they perceived as "lower species." And honestly, isn't that precisely what makes the whole tragedy so terrifying? It reminds me so much of how Native Americans were treated or the horrific history of Black slaves in this country. It suggests that this wasn't just some isolated, one-off moment in human history, but rather a recurring pattern—a dark, repetitive cycle that seems to surface whenever humanity loses its way.
It seems to me that when we get into the heart of the politics abortion debate, there is this underlying tendency to strip away the humanity from the unborn, isn't there? It feels as though the conversation often shifts toward a way of de-humanizing the very life at the center of it all, which makes one wonder if we are ever truly discussing the essence of what is actually happening.

I don't feel the need to draw any direct parallels to totalitarian regimes when I'm making my point, because honestly, that feels like a distraction from the core issue at hand. What I really want to focus on is the fundamental truth that once you start the process of dehumanizing a group of people, you essentially grant permission to treat them however you see fit. Isn't that the real danger? Once that line is crossed and a person is stripped of their humanity in the eyes of others, what's to stop people from acting with complete disregard for their rights or their dignity? It’s a simple, heavy fact that doesn't require comparing it to historical dictatorships to be true.

Is it truly a fruit? I wonder sometimes if we truly understand what it means to be human, or if we are just drifting through these complex social structures without ever really touching the core of our existence? It feels like we spend so much energy building these massive, intricate systems—our laws, our governments, our endless debates in Congress—yet we often miss the simple, quiet reality of being alive right here in America. Is there a point where all this noise becomes too much, where the constant stream of information makes us lose sight of our own internal compass? I find myself sitting back, watching the world move so fast, and wondering if we are actually progressing or if we are just running in circles, trying to define ourselves through the very institutions that often feel so disconnected from our actual lives. Or perhaps it isn't exactly a debate, though one could argue there is definitely a connection to... I wonder sometimes if we ever truly reach a point of clarity, or if we are all just drifting through these endless waves of information, hoping to catch sight of something meaningful before the tide pulls us back out to sea? It feels like we spend so much of our lives searching for that one steady pulse, that single truth that doesn't shift when the wind changes, but instead, isn't it possible that the search itself is the only thing that remains constant? Is there a purpose to the wandering, or are we just passing time until the lights go out?And honestly, I feel like I have this underlying responsibility to step up and demonstrate exactly what needs to be done when it comes to... nehumanimIt really makes you wonder if we’ve reached a point where everything is being stripped of its humanity, isn't it? I find myself sitting here, staring at the screen and thinking about how pervasive this sense of dehumanization has become in our modern discourse. Is it possible that we are losing the very essence of what connects us as people, simply because we've become so accustomed to viewing one another through such narrow, clinical lenses? It feels as though the nuance of a human soul is being traded for labels and categories, leaving us all feeling a bit more hollow than we were yesterday. Does anyone else feel that weight, or am I just overthinking the way we interact in these digital spaces?


So, I find myself in this rather delicate position where, on one hand, I feel a genuine responsibility to lay out the historical facts and those recurring patterns of behavior that we see repeating themselves over time, yet on the other hand, I have to be incredibly careful to ensure that I don't drift into that territory of unnecessary or purely trolling-style false equivalencies... does that make sense? It’s a bit of a balancing act, really, trying to remain truthful without being reductive.

If we can't find any common ground on this, then I suppose we just have to accept that tackling subjects like these is never going to be a simple task, isn't it? It really does require a much deeper level of effort and more intensive work than most people would ever care to admit, don't you think? I suppose one might wonder if things ever truly change, or if we are all just caught in this perpetual loop of the ordinary, isn't that right? It feels as though we often find ourselves drifting through these mundane, everyday moments, searching for some sort of deeper significance in the middle of the most commonplace routines. Does anyone else ever feel like the sheer weight of the "normal" is actually more overwhelming than the chaos we usually fear? It’s a strange thing, really, to contemplate how much of our lives is spent simply existing within the standard, expected patterns of the world around us. politics topic. 🙂
Because, if you think about it, at least according to some people, we are talking about actual human lives here, aren't we?

Look, sure, they dehumanized them, but let’s get one thing straight: they dehumanized actual people. Not some minor flaws, not a strand of hair, and definitely not someone's fingernails. They dehumanized the entire human being. There is a massive distinction there. These were independent individuals—not some parasitic growths attached to someone else's body, sucking out nutrients while lacking the capacity to think or feel.
That whole line of reasoning is just completely invalid.
But honestly, this isn't the place to get into that specific debate.

boldwalker12 said:Honestly, I was naively hoping you'd actually read your own posts with a bit of comprehension. By using phrases like "we don't call anyone murderers," you basically lumped yourself in with that side, actively defending their position while pretending to know exactly what they think—even going so far as to claim "we" represent them. I see zero reason to address every single person individually when someone makes such an unambiguous move to group themselves under a "we" or "you" while doing the exact thing they claim not to do.

Also, you clearly didn't even bother reading the very first post in this thread. It seems to me you haven't read a damn thing, because the whole point of this dispute is that abortion is no longer allowed to be called murder in the Politics section.
I'm done talking about this; I'm exhausted from spinning in circles with you guys.
So, let's boil it down to three things:

- You're pushing for abortion to be called murder or some other euphemism for it.
- You're insisting that if abortion is murder, you haven't actually called anyone a murderer.
- You're drowning out those first two points with noise about everything else, muddying the waters so it stays unclear that you're essentially trying to brand people as murderers.

Go ahead, spin another circle trying to argue that I'm wrong about this or whatever, but I'm officially opting out of this merry-go-round.

I’m not asking how it should be "labeled." I'm saying that if someone argues a fetus is a living human being, they can logically conclude that abortion is the act of killing it. Killing is a verb that describes the intentional, violent termination of another living thing. To go back to my point: if you step on a spider, you’d say you killed it, and it wouldn't sound weird. Saying you're a "murderer" for stepping on a spider... sure, you could, but people don't usually talk like that.

At the end of the day, pro-life politics is all about pushing to change social and legal norms to criminalize abortion.

By the way, no moderator here has told me what the one "correct" word is for the intentional, violent ending of another life.

Context is everything here. When a pro-life advocate uses the word "murder," they aren't just making a casual observation; the context is worlds apart from someone saying, "Yeah, I killed a spider." For those advocates, using that specific word carries this massive, heavy stigma aimed directly at women seeking abortions. It’s meant to condemn them. It’s meant to label them murderers. And it targets doctors, too. We really shouldn't pretend that this isn't on a completely different level than "killing" a bug.

boldwalker12 said:Look, sure, they dehumanized them, but let’s get one thing straight: they dehumanized actual people. Not some minor flaws, not a strand of hair, and definitely not someone's fingernails. They dehumanized the entire human being. There is a massive distinction there. These were independent individuals—not some parasitic growths attached to someone else's body, sucking out nutrients while lacking the capacity to think or feel.
That whole line of reasoning is just completely invalid.
But honestly, this isn't the place to get into that specific debate.

That’s just your opinion.
You shouldn't be limiting discussions or labeling and banning people just because of their viewpoint.
What looks like a "fingernail" to you is a living human being to an embryologist.
If the other side provides legitimate links to back up their claims, you can't just use your own opinion as the ultimate authority.

How are we supposed to have a real debate on the politics abortion debate if you set the ground rules so that a fetus equals a fingernail and ending a life isn't considered killing? And you're treating that as the official stance?
That isn't moderation.

boldwalker12 said:Context is everything here. When a pro-life advocate uses the word "murder," they aren't just making a casual observation; the context is worlds apart from someone saying, "Yeah, I killed a spider." For those advocates, using that specific word carries this massive, heavy stigma aimed directly at women seeking abortions. It’s meant to condemn them. It’s meant to label them murderers. And it targets doctors, too. We really shouldn't pretend that this isn't on a completely different level than "killing" a bug.

That context is perfectly valid. In almost every country in the West, this kind of activism is standard, using the exact same rhetoric and signing petitions against fetal termination. If it's allowed in the public square, why not here? Honestly, it would be more natural if it were the other way around—if this forum actually encouraged debating different ideas and claims, no matter how twisted they might seem.

Jessica Kelly4 said:That context is perfectly valid. In almost every country in the West, this kind of activism is standard, using the exact same rhetoric and signing petitions against fetal termination. If it's allowed in the public square, why not here? Honestly, it would be more natural if it were the other way around—if this forum actually encouraged debating different ideas and claims, no matter how twisted they might seem.

But hey, it’s not banned on the forum itself. You can talk about it in the Religion section because that’s largely considered part of a religious worldview, especially here in the States.
Since the law here says abortion is legal and isn't classified as murder, I don't see why those kinds of debates belong in Politics. 🤷

I don't really get these arguments against calling abortion murder... I mean, isn't that basically the whole reason people disagree on this in the first place?

Look, I'm pro-choice, but I honestly don't see the point in all this constant bickering.

Either just ban the > entirely on the platform. If you allow the discussion at all, it’s obvious one side is going to claim it's murder. That's the core of the entire issue. They aren't anti-abortion just because they have some vendetta against white corners...

lonebadger6 said:I don't really get these arguments against calling abortion murder... I mean, isn't that basically the whole reason people disagree on this in the first place?

Look, I'm pro-choice, but I honestly don't see the point in all this constant bickering.

Either just ban the > entirely on the platform. If you allow the discussion at all, it’s obvious one side is going to claim it's murder. That's the core of the entire issue. They aren't anti-abortion just because they have some vendetta against white corners...

Murder is a legal term defined by law.
Under the law, abortion is permitted under specific circumstances, which means it isn't murder.
It is simply incorrect to characterize it as murder because, legally, it isn't.
When you accuse someone of committing murder, you have to acknowledge the weight of that accusation; if they didn't actually commit a crime, then you're looking at slander, which is a serious matter.
In that sense, moderators should step in against baseless slander since it violates forum rules.
That part is clear. The other issue is that the moderators insistly claim the pro-life side is being slanderous just because they believe abortion involves ending a life, yet they refuse to call it murder. There is a massive difference between a biological definition and a legal one. They either can't see the difference or they choose not to, if you ask me.

rowdydrifter22 said:Murder is a legal term defined by law.
Under the law, abortion is permitted under specific circumstances, which means it isn't murder.
It is simply incorrect to characterize it as murder because, legally, it isn't.
When you accuse someone of committing murder, you have to acknowledge the weight of that accusation; if they didn't actually commit a crime, then you're looking at slander, which is a serious matter.
In that sense, moderators should step in against baseless slander since it violates forum rules.
That part is clear. The other issue is that the moderators insistly claim the pro-life side is being slanderous just because they believe abortion involves ending a life, yet they refuse to call it murder. There is a massive difference between a biological definition and a legal one. They either can't see the difference or they choose not to, if you ask me.

So, what, you think I’m actually gonna sit here and slander you just because you decided to start dragging my name through the mud? Please. That sounds like way too much effort, and honestly, I've got better things to do with my time.

Am I being shady?

Alright, here it is, plain and simple:

Jessica Kelly4 said:So, you’re actually asking me to just sit here and stay quiet while you basically commit murder? Seriously? That’s a hell of a request.

This is just moving over from the Politics thread.
So, the local legend himself is kicking off this whole discussion. Let's get this party started.

Look, let's just get this straight once and for all: someone who kills a person is a murderer. It’s not exactly rocket science, and there isn't much room for debate here. So, I’m saying it for the hundredth and final time—anyone who insists on constantly pushing the narrative that abortion is the same thing as murder is basically just slapping a "murderer" label on doctors and women. Period.

So, is that clear enough for everyone now?

boldwalker12 said:So, what, you think I’m actually gonna sit here and slander you just because you decided to start dragging my name through the mud? Please. That sounds like way too much effort, and honestly, I've got better things to do with my time.

Am I being shady?

Alright, here it is, plain and simple:

This is just moving over from the Politics thread.
So, the local legend himself is kicking off this whole discussion. Let's get this party started.

Look, let's just get this straight once and for all: someone who kills a person is a murderer. It’s not exactly rocket science, and there isn't much room for debate here. So, I’m saying it for the hundredth and final time—anyone who insists on constantly pushing the narrative that abortion is the same thing as murder is basically just slapping a "murderer" label on doctors and women. Period.

So, is that clear enough for everyone now?

First off, please quote my specific controversial posts; I’ll leave it to the expert to give you an answer.

As for the claim that "anyone who kills a person is a murderer," there actually is room for debate because that statement is fundamentally unfounded.
A murderer is someone who unlawfully takes a life, a distinction clearly defined by the law.
One clear example that refutes your logic is euthanasia, which is perfectly legal in many places.
I have no desire to get deeper into the politics abortion debate itself. We already have dedicated threads for that, so if anything remains unclear to you...

rowdydrifter22 said:First off, please quote my specific controversial posts; I’ll leave it to the expert to give you an answer.

As for the claim that "anyone who kills a person is a murderer," there actually is room for debate because that statement is fundamentally unfounded.
A murderer is someone who unlawfully takes a life, a distinction clearly defined by the law.
One clear example that refutes your logic is euthanasia, which is perfectly legal in many places.
I have no desire to get deeper into the politics abortion debate itself. We already have dedicated threads for that, so if anything remains unclear to you...

I'm responding to you specifically because you're the one accusing me of slander and speaking for everyone when you claimed nobody calls anyone a murderer.

We are miles away from discussing euthanasia here; what's actually happening is they want to bring back the chopping block and brainwash women into thinking they're murderers, all while pressuring doctors through conscience clauses—just look at that situation with the hospital in Florida where they openly admitted they were being coerced.

I only replied because you went after me with those slander accusations, and I don't play that game.

Over&out.

Jessica Kelly4 said:That’s just your opinion.
You shouldn't be limiting discussions or labeling and banning people just because of their viewpoint.
What looks like a "fingernail" to you is a living human being to an embryologist.
If the other side provides legitimate links to back up their claims, you can't just use your own opinion as the ultimate authority.

How are we supposed to have a real debate on the politics abortion debate if you set the ground rules so that a fetus equals a fingernail and ending a life isn't considered killing? And you're treating that as the official stance?
That isn't moderation.

This is the core issue, which the moderator apparently seems incapable of grasping.

Moderators, when you use these subjective standards, you're making any real discussion impossible because you're basically just nuking profiles.
It's not like you're engaging in a reasoned forum debate if you disagree; instead, you're just killing the conversation before it even starts.
With those preconceived standards of yours, a real dialogue is totally off the table.

What you're turning this forum into is a dictatorship of one single thought. From what I can see, the pro-life people are bringing valid arguments and links to studies to the table, and they're acting way more intelligent than the pro-choice crowd, who are allowed to just go "boo!" and use their own biased frameworks without any evidence—just like you do.