Texas bans abortion.

[psionl0]

I didn't do that, I merely said that "unique DNA" gets problematic for the sole criterion for personhood, given identical twins and chimeras. I also said that being physically separate is problematic, too, given conjoined twins.

My final point is that there's nothing clear and easy out there..

You are just repeating what you posted earlier. You are suggesting the DNA argument should be thrown out of the window because of the existence of marginal cases. This would leave one less way of distinguishing a zygote from any other clump of cells in the mother - cancerous or otherwise.

The fact remains that a pregnant woman carries a life who's DNA is human and is not the same as its mother, father nor anybody else in the world. The fact that this life form can replicate itself withing the mother's womb doesn't nullify the entire DNA argument.

 

[Suddenly]

I already answered the question in post# 2879, but to repeat

"You could start by sticking with the provisions of Roe v Wade. They are an excellent framework that balances the rights of women to have autonomy over their bodies and the need to protect the viable unborn from unnecessary abortion."

I think you underestimate the reach of Roe v Wade. Pretty much most abortion law in the western world is based, at least in part, on the framework Roe v Wade provides. I know for a fact that some of those arguing before select committees in NZ that have dealt with our abortion laws, have quoted Roe v Wade as part of their arguments. Our laws are very similar (IIRC 20 weeks instead of 24 weeks is the cut-off for the end of the 2nd trimester).

Roe is just a restatement of the English common law. Opponents like to portray it as out of left field but nothing there is new, but it makes sense that every country following that tradition would treat Roe as a handy guide.

Although he whole concept of "unnecessary" is a bit paternalistic, and the majority of the common law is steaming garbage, so....

We accept all sorts of not great results including death in the interest of having a free society. That maybe a woman might not have the tolerance for risk and pain that is deemed acceptable for an abortion to be necessary is maybe one of those spots where the dangers of the body politic having a say are just too adverse to the concept of self determination.

 

[psionl0]

You know what I really really hate about the abortion debate?

It's a distraction from issues that solving would help humanity.

It's a wedge that keeps us from dealing with everything from climate change to greater prosperity for everyone.

I presume that you are aware that you are a very active participant in this distraction/wedge.

 

[acbytesla]

I presume that you are aware that you are a very active participant in this distraction/wedge.

Oh yes.

But I barely discussed it before the last few years.

 

[psionl0]

Oh yes.

But I barely discussed it before the last few years.

There is a reason for that.

Until recently, the rabid right could not do much about the permissive status of abortion. Then two things happened: The balance of power in the SC has changed and a reversal of Roe vs Wade is now on the cards and secondly, Texas has (apparently) found a way to nullify all rights in this matter by making abortion a bounty hunt.

This has put abortion back on the discussion table.

 

[acbytesla]

There is a reason for that.

Until recently, the rabid right could not do much about the permissive status of abortion. Then two things happened: The balance of power in the SC has changed and a reversal of Roe vs Wade is now on the cards and secondly, Texas has (apparently) found a way to nullify all rights in this matter by making abortion a bounty hunt.

This has put abortion back on the discussion table.

I understand that.

But it is still a wedge issue for the 99 percenters. This is an issue that divides the working poor. It is a bauble that prevents them from seeing they are being sodomized by the wealthy.

 

[psionl0]

I understand that.

But it is still a wedge issue for the 99 percenters. This is an issue that divides the working poor. It is a bauble that prevents them from seeing they are being sodomized by the wealthy.

For the rabid right it sounds like "mission accomplished".

 

[acbytesla]

For the rabid right it sounds like "mission accomplished".

I don't disagree. And they didn't use lube.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Well, that is a relatively extreme position, imo. You are in the vast minority.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/alison...t-not-later-in-the-pregnancy/?sh=6e3fbb695074

What is 19% of 300 million? I don’t feel lonely.

What is 1.8% of 12% of 800,000? Hint: it is far less than the number of hospitals in the US.

What number of those were not for a medical necessity?

 

[thaiboxerken]

You know what I really really hate about the abortion debate?

It's a distraction from issues that solving would help humanity.

It's a wedge that keeps us from dealing with everything from climate change to greater prosperity for everyone.

Sadly, it is one that continues because as long as there are anti-abortionists, they will continue to try and subjugate women and punish them for having sex. More accurately, punish them for being women.

 

[Warp12]

What is 19% of 300 million? I don’t feel lonely.

I'll put you down as another endorsing no restrictions on term of gestation.

 

[Warp12]

Sadly, it is one that continues because as long as there are anti-abortionists, they will continue to try and subjugate women and punish them for having sex. More accurately, punish them for being women.

I guess as long as everyone thinks the alike, we won't ever have any distractions or issues for debate. Pro-life supporters can make the same bad argument about pro-choice people.

As far as the "punish them for having sex"...I guess any restriction on third trimester abortion is "a punishment for having sex"?

 

[Aridas]

I’m one of those middle people, and not a progressive by any means. I am pro-choice, but if you think pro-choice all sounds like Joe then you’re falling into the same trap that he has of thinking everyone against it is a Bible-thumping woman hater (sorry Joe )

Just to offer up something additional on the topic of progressive bashing - at last check, JoeMorgue is one of the posters who has been more than happy to bash progressives unreasonably and favor moderates unreasonably. Thus, using him as a model for the sins of progressives is probably more than a little unreasonable. On the other hand, I do count myself as a progressive and I've just ended up rolling my eyes at the unreasonable rancor being tossed in my direction.

I am pro-choice, either way, given the rather pronounced benefits to society that pro-choice policy offers over anti-choice policy. I'm fine with Roe v Wade as a general compromise. As for third trimester abortions? As long as there's allowances for health concerns all around and general extenuating circumstances, I'm rather neutral on restrictions, much as having resources available for the state to care for any of the seemingly remarkably rare babies that they would demand be carried to term would be exercising basic responsibility. Truly, I must be deserving of all the progressive bashing.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I guess as long as everyone thinks the alike, we won't ever have any distractions or issues for debate. Pro-life supporters can make the same bad argument about pro-choice people.

As far as the "punish them for having sex"...I guess any restriction on third trimester abortion is "a punishment for having sex"?

No, they can't. The pro-choice position imposes no limits on the pro-lifers, they can still decide not to have abortions. It doesn't work the other way 'round.

 

[smartcooky]

What is 19% of 300 million? I don’t feel lonely.

What is 1.8% of 12% of 800,000? Hint: it is far less than the number of hospitals in the US.

What number of those were not for a medical necessity?

1. (its actually 19% of 327 million) 62,130,000

2. 1,728 (there are 6,090 hospitals in the US)

 

[Warp12]

1. (its actually19% of 327 million) 62,130,000

2. 1,728

Actually it's certainly less than 327 million, if we consider the 73 million minors in the country. But it really makes no difference to the statement I presented. The point was very clear...people who believe there should be no limits on third trimester abortions are by far in the minority.

 

[Susheel]

I'll put you down as another endorsing no restrictions on term of gestation.

And you would be wrong in doing so.

 

[Warp12]

I'll put you down as another endorsing no restrictions on term of gestation.

And you would be wrong in doing so.

How so? The 19% number he was referring to being a part of are those who support no restrictions on third term abortions. If he meant something else, he can clarify.

 

[smartcooky]

Actually it's certainly less than 327 million, if we consider the 73 million minors in the country. But it really makes no difference to the statement I presented. The point was very clear...people who believe there should be no limits on third trimester abortions are by far in the minority.

Oooh, so minors are not allowed to have opinions, especially given that at least some of those minors are likely to become pregnant. How very Victorian of you,

Lets punish those minors for daring to question their elders and betters

 

[Warp12]

Oooh, so minors are not allowed to have opinions, especially given that at least some of those minors are likely to become pregnant. How very Victorian of you,

Lets punish those minors for daring to question their elders and betters

Huh? I was referring to the survey results that the 19% were drawn from. Late term abortion is not a topic for 8-year-olds. Give me a break.