Texas bans abortion.

[JoeMorgue]

It is pointless to respond. Apparently nobody here can even grasp the concept of levels of accountability in even the most basic sense....and/or they avoid acknowledging the concept. Abortion and birth control are on the same level, around here.

Because women are not "accountable" to you because they have more sex than you think they should.

Provide a reason why women need to have fewer abortions.

Everything else is a hijack.

Or just pretend like we can't all tell you jumped straight from the "Don't have a reason" to "But I already told you my reason" without actually giving a reason.

 

[cosmicaug]

They don't even seem to feel that a bigger focus should be on proactive action rather than reactive action. How do you debate such insanity?

We have different tools in public health. They do different things. All are useful. You are bringing up this "bigger focus" thing. It's not really in scope of what anyone else is discussing.

ETA: But the reason folk have been responding to you was your bizarre notion that having an abortion is evading accountability. In that context, it seemed like you were suggesting: «well, now you have made a "baby", deal with it!» where terminating the pregnancy is not an allowable, correct means of dealing with it. This seems like the sort of thinking where, as a matter of "morality", having sex is seen as an activity that must be linked to a certain type of consequence: pregnancy & birth. Basically, it's the notion of a baby as punishment (that is, bringing into this world an actual human being for the purpose of punishing an allegedly immoral act). Understand how this reads.

 

[Warp12]

You are bringing up this "bigger focus" thing. It's not really in scope of what anyone else is discussing.

Exactly my point, as related to the issue of accountability and how it applies to abortion.

 

[JoeMorgue]

What do women need to be held "accountable" for?

 

[Paul2]

It is pointless to respond.

Thank you for your response; even saying it is pointless to respond is a direct response.

Apparently nobody here can even grasp the concept of levels of accountability in even the most basic sense....and/or they avoid acknowledging the concept.

But if you can't even articulate what that accountability looks like in even one scenario of your own choosing, your complaint that no one else can grasp the concept of accountability would have to include yourself, too.

I'm asking you to articulate what accountability looks like in your opinion through any number of possible scenarios, some of which I laid out. Don't assume that I would disagree with you; I might, and I might not.

They have a right to such opinions; I just don't happen to agree with them. You seem a reasonable person, and therefore I am pretty sure that you know that nobody is going to change anyone's mind, here. This is a forum of opinionated debate, not rational discussion.

I'm open to changing my mind. Please give me a chance.

 

[Stacyhs]

Exactly my point, as related to the issue of accountability and how it applies to abortion.

You've been presented several posts by several members explaining what they view as 'accountability' by women, yet you continue to evade answering what your idea of 'accountability' is. Why is that?

 

[JoeMorgue]

I'm so sick of people not answering questions but just going "Here's some broad outline of how I might be answering this question if I was actually in this discussion as an honest agent"

 

[JimOfAllTrades]

It is pointless to respond. Apparently nobody here can even grasp the concept of levels of accountability in even the most basic sense....and/or they avoid acknowledging the concept. Abortion and birth control are on the same level, around here.

They don't even seem to feel that a bigger focus should be on proactive action rather than reactive action. How do you debate such insanity?

They have a right to such opinions; I just don't happen to agree with them. You seem a reasonable person, and therefore I am pretty sure that you know that nobody is going to change anyone's mind, here. This is a forum of opinionated debate, not rational discussion.

It's not pointless to respond if you have a rational response. Rational response doesn't equal "responses I agree with".

I've asked this question or made the highlighted point below in several ways in this thread, which I think is a rational:

Promoting a proactive approach is good.

But your "accountability" sounds like you want to make sure women aren't getting away with anything, to make sure they're seen as less respectable because they failed to be "accountable" according to your opinion.

Why is it you or anyone else should be involved in someone else's medical procedure? They aren't accountable to you, the government, or anyone else as long as they are not a public health threat. Let them confer with their medical personnel and make the best decision for them.

Can you point me to your response? I must have missed it.

 

[smartcooky]

I repeat, guy is trolling.

In addition to constantly equivocating on the use of "human" (ie. "is human" vs. "is a human"), did you not notice how he edited his own quote of the text you linked so as to make it appear as if it supports his "reading" of the text (or that the text is, at worst, unclear in this point)?

I did not point it out (I just called him a troll without referencing this) because it just jumped out at me.

The quote "human being for which the state has in interest in preserving" was originally "the idea the fetus is a human being (for which the state has in interest in preserving)is earnestly disputed". The object here is "a human being". He is forcing a reading here in which the object becomes "a human being for which the state has in interest in preserving". Thus, as he has explained, he is making the erroneous point that the court is creating the class of human beings for which the state has an interest in preserving and the class of human beings which do not fall in that category (presumably zygotes, embryos, fetuses, sperm & ova).

He clearly knows that the object in that sentence is "a human being". He dishonestly made that edit removing the parentheses that make this unambiguously clear*.

Nothing here is in good faith. These are not innocent errors. He is just trolling here (and everywhere else in this thread).


* The parenthesis are expanding on "the idea the fetus is a human being is earnestly disputed". There is no ambiguity here. This is a statement about a dispute regarding whether a fetus is a "human being". It is not a statement regarding a dispute concerning which of two classes of human being a fetus should placed in (one deserving legal protection or one not deserving of legal protection).

What? He dishonestly edited a quote to change its meaning in order to better to fit his agenda... I'm shocked I tell you, shocked!

 

[JoeMorgue]

What? He dishonestly edited a quote to change its meaning in order to better to fit his agenda... I'm shocked I tell you, shocked!

That sounds like the kind of thing someone should be held "accountable" for.

 

[Warp12]

You've been presented several posts by several members explaining what they view as 'accountability' by women, yet you continue to evade answering what your idea of 'accountability' is. Why is that?

My idea of accountability is that abortion is treated and promoted, by society and individual, as the absolute last resort, not just another "method of birth control", as has been put forth by some. However, this will never happen...because the focus will never be on that in an environment of liberals.

You can screech and cry about it all you want. You can tell me about how abortion laws lead to a clothes-hanger shortage. The bottom line is, by promoting the reactive response as being just as valid as the proactive measure, society has failed.

And there is no better example of such failure than in the liberal arguments going on in this thread.

 

[JoeMorgue]

My idea of accountability is that abortion is treated and promoted, by society and individual as the last resort, not just another "method of birth control", as has been put forth by some.

Why? What difference does it make?

Try not to wait 2 pages to actually respond with an answer this time.

 

[JimOfAllTrades]

My idea of accountability is that abortion is treated and promoted, by society and individual, as the absolute last resort, not just another "method of birth control", as has been put forth by some. However, this will never happen...because the focus will never be on that in an environment of liberals.

You can screech and cry about it all you want. You can tell me about how abortion laws lead to a clothes-hanger shortage. The bottom line is, by promoting the reactive response as being just as valid as the proactive measure, society has failed.

And there is no better example of such failure than in the liberal arguments going on in this thread.

So society can win by forcing the woman to carry a pregnancy to term? And "accountability" means forcing her to risk her body and health after the "mistake" has been made?

And who in this thread has argued against a proactive approach?

 

[smartcooky]

You've been presented several posts by several members explaining what they view as 'accountability' by women, yet you continue to evade answering what your idea of 'accountability' is. Why is that?

I think everyone here know why!

 

[ponderingturtle]

The fact that a reflexive top of the lung shrieking about "YOU WANT MY UNDERAGE DAUGHTER TO HAVE SEX!" is literally the only argument against one of the most effective and life saving vaccines on the market is so goddamn pathetic.

But it is nice to see people on the side of cancer. People far too often just fall into the side of cancer being a bad thing.

 

[Warp12]

And who in this thread has argued against a proactive approach?

By all means, let them stand up and promote it fervently, if they in believe it is so important.

It would beat the hell out of the, "babies are parasites", "abortion is the same as any other form of birth control", and "abortion has great benefits as related to population control" ways of thinking that have been brought up. Not mention a few others.

Maybe a common ground? Although I thought we at least had one when I said that I don't support the TX law, as it is too restrictive.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I think everyone here know why!

I won't tell you what I think, but I will outline the broad philosophical argumental structure in which I might one day to getting around to saying what I think.

It all started a few million years ago when some monkeys decided to come down from the trees... no further back. It all started when some fish decided to walk onto land and grow lungs. No that's still close to the actual topic. It all started a when the first carbon items were created....

 

[JoeMorgue]

By all means, let them stand up and promote it fervently, if they in believe it is so important.

It would beat the hell out of the, "babies are parasites", "abortion is the same as any other form of birth control", and "abortion has great benefits as related to population control" ways of thinking that have been brought up. Not mention a few others.

Well yeah because all those points are true. Get over it.

Maybe a common ground? Although I thought we at least had one when I said that I don't support the TX law, as it is too restrictive.

Sure. You can get all the abortions you want. Women can get all the abortions they want. Perfectly common ground.

Stop trying to pretend you're building some philosophical framework. You just don't want to actually talk about the point.

 

[JimOfAllTrades]

By all means, let them stand up and promote it fervently, if they in believe it is so important.

It would beat the hell out of the, "babies are parasites", "abortion is the same as any other form of birth control", and "abortion has great benefits as related to population control" ways of thinking that have been brought up. Not mention a few others.

Maybe a common ground? Although I thought we at least had one when I said that I don't support the TX law, as it is too restrictive.

No argument that abortion should be the choice of the woman is an argument against teaching sex education, birth control, responsibility, or any other proactive approach.

Where do you see any actual argument against any proactive measures in this thread?

 

[Suddenly]

So society can win by forcing the woman to carry a pregnancy to term? And "accountability" means forcing her to risk her body and health after the "mistake" has been made?

And who in this thread has argued against a proactive approach?

The accountability stuff sounds like an admission that the pregnancy is meant to be punitive.

They want to legally force bringing a person into existence just to be spiteful because they don't like the thought of women freely having sex. And those are the people lecturing about the sanctity of life?