Texas bans abortion.

[Hlafordlaes]

There is evidence to support that Libs have destroyed the country, certainly. And, abortion law is certainly a part of the equation. Some people want to pretend that it is "fringe" to promote limits on abortion. Voting numbers completely refute this.

"Destruction" is what Americans, among others, do with bombs and missiles, or with criminal duplicity and false witness leading to a breakdown in governance so extreme it threatens social upheaval, even a return to cave dwelling and stone axes. Please be explicit in the form and nature of the "destruction" you claim.

As for abortion, what invests anyone with rights or liberties in general terms, and how does this then apply to a zygote with no awareness, and with no identity whatsoever to lend substance to some purported "soul" appearing before a so-called deity? Be sure not to build in any contradictions in your argument that will sink other positions you might hold, such as regarding the death penalty.

Finally, why should non-universals be set up as if they were such. Surely you are not making claim to absolute truth, are you? Like to see you derive one without pulling verbal rabbits out of empty hats.

 

[Warp12]

"Destruction" is what Americans, among others, do with bombs and missiles, or with criminal duplicity and false witness leading to a breakdown in governance so extreme it threatens social upheaval, even a return to cave dwelling and stone axes. Please be explicit in the form and nature of the "destruction" you claim.

As for abortion, what invests anyone with rights or liberties in general terms, and how does this then apply to a zygote with no awareness, and with no identity whatsoever to lend substance to some purported "soul" appearing before a so-called deity? Be sure not to build in any contradictions in your argument that will sink other positions you might hold, such as regarding the death penalty.

Finally, why should non-universals be set up as if they were such. Surely you are not making claim to absolute truth, are you? Like to see you derive one without pulling verbal rabbits out of empty hats.

Sorry, I don't speak "riddle".

 

[Susheel]

Sorry, I don't speak "riddle".

Is that what they call "don't read too well" nowadays?

 

[turingtest]

[/HILITE]
I didn't "saddle" anyone with such a responsibility. They were born with it. And, all of us have certain powers within our reach; that doesn't mean that we all use them responsibly, nor that our personal choices that might harm others should be acceptable.

Yeah, I had a feeling that you were going to go that route. You obviously didn't saddle them with the physical responsibility- that's pretty much a "duh!" But by tying that physical responsibility to their choices about having sex before it, you saddle them with a moral responsibility that you feel entitled to pronounce on and prescribe for without allowing them any autonomy to make their own moral choices for either case.

My own opinion is that there is no such thing as an unrestricted right, and that includes the right to abortion. But Roe v Wade seems to me to be a pretty good compromise in that direction, with its standard of viability. I don't (like you) necessarily like the idea of a woman who says "I'm gonna ****, and if I get pregnant, I'll just have an abortion"- but you know what? I doubt, first of all, that there are really that many women who actually think in such impractical terms; and, even for those who do, it's not my business to mind theirs. I may not like it, but I like even less the idea of a law that prescribes for all by taking the moral edge cases for a legal norm.

 

[Warp12]

I may not like it, but I like even less the idea of a law that prescribes for all by taking the moral edge cases for a legal norm.

There are laws against murder, and there are far less murders than abortions, annually. And by far less, I mean just a fraction in comparison.

 

[angrysoba]

Careful, there. Someone might come along and mention how some people squawk about "her body, her choice", while they are also pushing for mandatory vaccines. "Choice" and "Rights" are murky moral areas, it would seem.

Well that tells us what we need to know (as if we didn't already), that people who think women should have autonomy over their bodies are "squawking".

 

[Warp12]

Well that tells us what we need to know (as if we didn't already), that people who think women should have autonomy over their bodies are "squawking".

Certainly they should have autonomy over their own bodies. It's the second body that we are talking about, here.

 

[Susheel]

Certainly they should have autonomy over their own bodies. It's the second body that we are talking about, here.

What second body? There is no second body.

 

[JoeMorgue]

And just like that we aren't talking about the law anymore, just as intended.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

There are laws against murder, and there are far less murders than abortions, annually. And by far less, I mean just a fraction in comparison.

So either you don't actually believe that abortion is murder, or you don't mind living in a society of murderers.

 

[turingtest]

There are laws against murder, and there are far less murders than abortions, annually. And by far less, I mean just a fraction in comparison.

(Shrug) If you think that aborting a non-viable fetus is murder, don't do it. Simples. But making that moral decision for yourself doesn't entitle you to declare it for everyone else.

And I have no idea why the quantity of either case has any relevance, but I'm sure there's a good reason in there somewhere- my guess is that you just didn't get what I meant by "moral edge cases." Hint, it needs the context that you snipped.

 

[Warp12]

And just like that we aren't talking about the law anymore, just as intended.

I don't like this law, at all. I have expressed this a few times.

 

[Warp12]

What second body? There is no second body.

Perhaps if you investigate 2nd and 3rd trimester abortions, you would understand my reference to a second body.

 

[Warp12]

(Shrug) If you think that aborting a non-viable fetus is murder, don't do it. Simples. But making that moral decision for yourself doesn't entitle you to declare it for everyone else.

And I have no idea why the quantity of either case has any relevance, but I'm sure there's a good reason in there somewhere- my guess is that you just didn't get what I meant by "moral edge cases." Hint, it needs the context that you snipped.

"Non-viable". Exactly what is your definition of that? Do you feel that the majority of abortions are because a fetus could not be carried successfully to term? Or that viability is a personal decision?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

"Non-viable". Exactly what is your definition of that? Do you feel that the majority of abortions are because a fetus could not be carried successfully to term? Or that viability is a personal decision?

There is a clear definition: the moment the fetus survive outside the womb.

And modern technology is pushing that date earlier and earlier, so that's a problem Roe would have had to address sooner rather than later anyway.

 

[Warp12]

There is a clear definition: the moment the fetus survive outside the womb.

Clearly a construct intended to legitimize abortion.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Clearly a construct intended to legitimize abortion.

Or, alternatively, to allow for bodily autonomy.

You haven't answered the question: do you think abortion is murder or not?

 

[Warp12]

You haven't answered the question: do you think abortion is murder or not?

I didn't realize that was the question, here. In some cases, it certainly is. But, as I have already stated that I don't agree with this Texas law, I am not sure why this is relevant.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I didn't realize that was the question, here. In some cases, it certainly is. But, as I have already stated that I don't agree with this Texas law, I am not sure why this is relevant.

How can it be sometimes murder and sometimes not?

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Clearly a construct intended to legitimize abortion.

If you want an arguable definition, then a fetus becomes a human being about a year after birth, when the infant can pass a mirror test demonstrating sentience. Before then they certainly have awareness and personality, but so does my dog.

But, since we as a society don't want to get into the ethics of drowning babies, setting the line at the moment of birth is an acceptable compromise with the people who are only in it to punish the sluts and whores who refuse to **** them.