It is currently Mon Nov 25, 2024 12:49 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 395 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 9:36 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38348
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
The state doesn't have any rights over my wife's body or children when she is pregnant.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 9:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 22533
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Seacrest wrote:
The state doesn't have any rights over my wife's body or children when she is pregnant.


The state has an interest. Whether that would qualify as legitimate or compelling I'm not sure, and probably depends on the question asked.

EDIT: or rational. I forget the exact terminology


Last edited by Juice's Lecture Notes on Wed Jul 12, 2017 9:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 9:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:33 pm
Posts: 19045
pizza_Place: World Famous Pizza
Seacrest wrote:
The state doesn't have any rights over my wife's body or children when she is pregnant.


If you want to get an abortion past a threshold set by the state and you cross that threshold you break the law. Once you break the law your liberty is in jeopardy.

If you don't think abortion should be legal under ANY circumstances then you are giving the state even greater power to deprive a person of their liberty.

_________________
Seacrest wrote:
The menstrual cycle changes among Hassidic Jewish women was something as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 10:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
SpiralStairs wrote:
Not getting an abortion is literally easier than breathing.

If you are a "life begins at conception" pro-lifer you are acknowledging that the state has geater rights to an individual's body than they do themselves.


That's not true at all. You're simply acknowledging that the fetus is a life worth protecting.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 10:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:33 pm
Posts: 19045
pizza_Place: World Famous Pizza
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
Not getting an abortion is literally easier than breathing.

If you are a "life begins at conception" pro-lifer you are acknowledging that the state has geater rights to an individual's body than they do themselves.


That's not true at all. You're simply acknowledging that the fetus is a life worth protecting.


I wrote that because I thought it was safe to assume that a person who thinks life begins at conception would also approve of, or desire, an across the board ban on abortion.

If that wasn't made clear in my initial post I'm clarifying that now.

_________________
Seacrest wrote:
The menstrual cycle changes among Hassidic Jewish women was something as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 10:42 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38348
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
Not getting an abortion is literally easier than breathing.

If you are a "life begins at conception" pro-lifer you are acknowledging that the state has geater rights to an individual's body than they do themselves.


That's not true at all. You're simply acknowledging that the fetus is a life worth protecting.


I wrote that because I thought it was safe to assume that a person who thinks life begins at conception would also approve of, or desire, an across the board ban on abortion.


It's not safe to assume that.

There are rare instances where a mother's life is in jeopardy and she is faced with the decision to choose to give up her life and give birth, or protect her life.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 10:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
Not getting an abortion is literally easier than breathing.

If you are a "life begins at conception" pro-lifer you are acknowledging that the state has geater rights to an individual's body than they do themselves.


That's not true at all. You're simply acknowledging that the fetus is a life worth protecting.


I wrote that because I thought it was safe to assume that a person who thinks life begins at conception would also approve of, or desire, an across the board ban on abortion.

If that wasn't made clear in my initial post I'm clarifying that now.

I know what you are saying. I disagree with you. Like we've said, once you are pregnant it's no longer just your body. At that point you have a responsibility towards the life of the unborn child, imo.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 10:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:33 pm
Posts: 19045
pizza_Place: World Famous Pizza
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
Not getting an abortion is literally easier than breathing.

If you are a "life begins at conception" pro-lifer you are acknowledging that the state has geater rights to an individual's body than they do themselves.


That's not true at all. You're simply acknowledging that the fetus is a life worth protecting.


I wrote that because I thought it was safe to assume that a person who thinks life begins at conception would also approve of, or desire, an across the board ban on abortion.

If that wasn't made clear in my initial post I'm clarifying that now.

I know what you are saying. I disagree with you. Like we've said, once you are pregnant it's no longer just your body. At that point you have a responsibility towards the life of the unborn child, imo.


I agree that a responsibility exists. I agree that at a certain point the state has an interest in protecting the life on an unborn child. I don't believe that a state's interest in protecting that life begins at conception.

Lastly, I am very curious to know why some advocates for small government are willing to make an exception on this issue.

_________________
Seacrest wrote:
The menstrual cycle changes among Hassidic Jewish women was something as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 11:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
Not getting an abortion is literally easier than breathing.

If you are a "life begins at conception" pro-lifer you are acknowledging that the state has geater rights to an individual's body than they do themselves.


That's not true at all. You're simply acknowledging that the fetus is a life worth protecting.


I wrote that because I thought it was safe to assume that a person who thinks life begins at conception would also approve of, or desire, an across the board ban on abortion.

If that wasn't made clear in my initial post I'm clarifying that now.

I know what you are saying. I disagree with you. Like we've said, once you are pregnant it's no longer just your body. At that point you have a responsibility towards the life of the unborn child, imo.


I agree that a responsibility exists. I agree that at a certain point the state has an interest in protecting the life on an unborn child. I don't believe that a state's interest in protecting that life begins at conception.

Lastly, I am very curious to know why some advocates for small government are willing to make an exception on this issue.

There's no hypocrisy here, so I really don't understand your small government angle. It simply comes down to if you believe the unborn child deserves protection under the law or not.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 11:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
I'll go the other way though and suggest it is hypocritical of anyone saying "the government shouldn't have control over our bodies" unless they are also saying all drugs should be legal as well as prostitution(assuming we are talking about adults obviously).

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 11:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:33 pm
Posts: 19045
pizza_Place: World Famous Pizza
Seacrest wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
Not getting an abortion is literally easier than breathing.

If you are a "life begins at conception" pro-lifer you are acknowledging that the state has geater rights to an individual's body than they do themselves.


That's not true at all. You're simply acknowledging that the fetus is a life worth protecting.


I wrote that because I thought it was safe to assume that a person who thinks life begins at conception would also approve of, or desire, an across the board ban on abortion.


It's not safe to assume that.

There are rare instances where a mother's life is in jeopardy and she is faced with the decision to choose to give up her life and give birth, or protect her life.


So you and I disagree about where the line between the state's interest in preserving life and an individual's interest in personal autonomy should be drawn.

_________________
Seacrest wrote:
The menstrual cycle changes among Hassidic Jewish women was something as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 11:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:33 pm
Posts: 19045
pizza_Place: World Famous Pizza
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
Not getting an abortion is literally easier than breathing.

If you are a "life begins at conception" pro-lifer you are acknowledging that the state has geater rights to an individual's body than they do themselves.


That's not true at all. You're simply acknowledging that the fetus is a life worth protecting.


I wrote that because I thought it was safe to assume that a person who thinks life begins at conception would also approve of, or desire, an across the board ban on abortion.

If that wasn't made clear in my initial post I'm clarifying that now.

I know what you are saying. I disagree with you. Like we've said, once you are pregnant it's no longer just your body. At that point you have a responsibility towards the life of the unborn child, imo.


I agree that a responsibility exists. I agree that at a certain point the state has an interest in protecting the life on an unborn child. I don't believe that a state's interest in protecting that life begins at conception.

Lastly, I am very curious to know why some advocates for small government are willing to make an exception on this issue.

There's no hypocrisy here, so I really don't understand your small government angle. It simply comes down to if you believe the unborn child deserves protection under the law or not.


Is a zygote a child?

_________________
Seacrest wrote:
The menstrual cycle changes among Hassidic Jewish women was something as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 11:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
It's on it's way to being one.

You said you agree the state has a responsibly towards unborn children. What do you think that responsibility entails?

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 11:31 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79557
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
SpiralStairs wrote:
Is a zygote a child?


The answer to that from many is likely: "if it's human".

I think there's a more interesting discussion to be had about why human life is more precious than any other life. Is that simply the arrogance of man? This should be a tough question for atheists. Is it all arbitrary? If man is not created by God in his own image why is a human life more important than the life of a cow? Simply because we are the top predator?

Here's an interesting lecture that touches on the subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqm6_qsYotQ

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 11:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:33 pm
Posts: 19045
pizza_Place: World Famous Pizza
FavreFan wrote:
It's on it's way to being one.

You said you agree the state has a responsibly towards unborn children. What do you think that responsibility entails?


Deterring the killing of unborn children by taking away the liberty of those that kill them. If you're going to make me draw a line, I'd say that the state's interest in protecting an unborn life begins when the fetus has the ability to survive outside the womb. Any earlier than that and you're granting the state too much power over the individual.

Where do you draw your line? If your line is drawn where Seacrest's is, how so you gel it with it your libertarian ideals?

_________________
Seacrest wrote:
The menstrual cycle changes among Hassidic Jewish women was something as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2017 11:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
It's on it's way to being one.

You said you agree the state has a responsibly towards unborn children. What do you think that responsibility entails?


Deterring the killing of unborn children by taking away the liberty of those that kill them. If you're going to make me draw a line, I'd say that the state's interest in protecting an unborn life begins when the fetus has the ability to survive outside the womb. Any earlier than that and you're granting the state too much power over the individual.

Where do you draw your line? If your line is drawn where Seacrest's is, how so you gel it with it your libertarian ideals?

I draw the line at conception I guess. Pregnancies should never be terminated except to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape, in my opinion.

It's very easy to square this belief with being a libertarian. I believe abortion is infringing on the rights of the unborn child. I'm not an anarchist. I do think a government should have some responsibilities. i can't think of a more important one than ensuring lives are not ended needlessly.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:33 pm
Posts: 19045
pizza_Place: World Famous Pizza
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
Is a zygote a child?


The answer to that from many is likely: "if it's human".

I think there's a more interesting discussion to be had about why human life is more precious than any other life. Is that simply the arrogance of man? This should be a tough question for atheists. Is it all arbitrary? If man is not created by God in his own image why is a human life more important than the life of a cow? Simply because we are the top predator?

Here's an interesting lecture that touches on the subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqm6_qsYotQ


This is where all discussions about abortion inevitably end up. When do we become human? I don't remember living inside the womb. I don't remember being born. I don't have any memories prior to age 3 or 4. I don't think I had a conception that my own existence was independent of other people's for some years after that. If I died before I formed my first memory when did "I" exist?

I didn't plan on getting all "whoa dude" here but it has been a strange day.

_________________
Seacrest wrote:
The menstrual cycle changes among Hassidic Jewish women was something as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:15 am
Posts: 27591
pizza_Place: nick n vito's
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
Not getting an abortion is literally easier than breathing.

If you are a "life begins at conception" pro-lifer you are acknowledging that the state has geater rights to an individual's body than they do themselves.


That's not true at all. You're simply acknowledging that the fetus is a life worth protecting.




So why qualify it with " rape" or " incest" or the mothers "health" an unborn child has no say in such matters. Only "sometimes" you feel it is worth protecting and abortion is unethical?

_________________
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
Laurence Holmes is a fucking weirdo, a nerd in denial, and a wannabe. Not a very good radio host either.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:16 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
If a mother can murder a baby at 23 weeks then why do we care what she does at 25 weeks? The government should protect babies from being shredded at any point in their development. The process of an abortion is violent and so inhumane that we would lock anyone up for life if they did that to anyone besides government approved babies.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
312player wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
Not getting an abortion is literally easier than breathing.

If you are a "life begins at conception" pro-lifer you are acknowledging that the state has geater rights to an individual's body than they do themselves.


That's not true at all. You're simply acknowledging that the fetus is a life worth protecting.




So why qualify it with " rape" or " incest" or the mothers "health" an unborn child has no say in such matters. Only "sometimes" you feel abortion is unethical?

Well with the mother's life being in danger that's an easy one. Of course she should be allowed to live. With rape I think the mother is already going to be severely emotionally damaged, making her give birth to her rapist's child does not seem like a sound policy. But there's no easy answer there. But both of these scenarios are such a small percentage of abortions that I don't think they are really even worthy of discussion.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:33 pm
Posts: 19045
pizza_Place: World Famous Pizza
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
It's on it's way to being one.

You said you agree the state has a responsibly towards unborn children. What do you think that responsibility entails?


Deterring the killing of unborn children by taking away the liberty of those that kill them. If you're going to make me draw a line, I'd say that the state's interest in protecting an unborn life begins when the fetus has the ability to survive outside the womb. Any earlier than that and you're granting the state too much power over the individual.

Where do you draw your line? If your line is drawn where Seacrest's is, how so you gel it with it your libertarian ideals?

I draw the line at conception I guess. Pregnancies should never be terminated except to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape, in my opinion.

It's very easy to square this belief with being a libertarian. I believe abortion is infringing on the rights of the unborn child. I'm not an anarchist. I do think a government should have some responsibilities. i can't think of a more important one than ensuring lives are not ended needlessly.


But you've already said that a zygote has the potential to be a child. If a zygote has only reached the "potential to be a child" state, then by your own definition a zygote is not a child. If you're aborting a zygote then you're not infringing on the rights of an unborn child because it hasn't even reached that stage yet.

_________________
Seacrest wrote:
The menstrual cycle changes among Hassidic Jewish women was something as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:21 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
It's on it's way to being one.

You said you agree the state has a responsibly towards unborn children. What do you think that responsibility entails?


Deterring the killing of unborn children by taking away the liberty of those that kill them. If you're going to make me draw a line, I'd say that the state's interest in protecting an unborn life begins when the fetus has the ability to survive outside the womb. Any earlier than that and you're granting the state too much power over the individual.

Where do you draw your line? If your line is drawn where Seacrest's is, how so you gel it with it your libertarian ideals?

I draw the line at conception I guess. Pregnancies should never be terminated except to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape, in my opinion.

It's very easy to square this belief with being a libertarian. I believe abortion is infringing on the rights of the unborn child. I'm not an anarchist. I do think a government should have some responsibilities. i can't think of a more important one than ensuring lives are not ended needlessly.


But you've already said that a zygote has the potential to be a child. If a zygote has only reached the "potential to be a child" state, then by your own definition a zygote is not a child. If you're aborting a zygote then you're not infringing on the rights of an unborn child because it hasn't even reached that stage yet.


You wouldn't even know that you're pregnant.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
It's on it's way to being one.

You said you agree the state has a responsibly towards unborn children. What do you think that responsibility entails?


Deterring the killing of unborn children by taking away the liberty of those that kill them. If you're going to make me draw a line, I'd say that the state's interest in protecting an unborn life begins when the fetus has the ability to survive outside the womb. Any earlier than that and you're granting the state too much power over the individual.

Where do you draw your line? If your line is drawn where Seacrest's is, how so you gel it with it your libertarian ideals?

I draw the line at conception I guess. Pregnancies should never be terminated except to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape, in my opinion.

It's very easy to square this belief with being a libertarian. I believe abortion is infringing on the rights of the unborn child. I'm not an anarchist. I do think a government should have some responsibilities. i can't think of a more important one than ensuring lives are not ended needlessly.


But you've already said that a zygote has the potential to be a child. If a zygote has only reached the "potential to be a child" state, then by your own definition a zygote is not a child. If you're aborting a zygote then you're not infringing on the rights of an unborn child because it hasn't even reached that stage yet.

Sure you are. An abortion is definitely infringing on that. Without the abortion that is going to be a child barring miscarriage.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:15 am
Posts: 27591
pizza_Place: nick n vito's
FavreFan wrote:
312player wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
Not getting an abortion is literally easier than breathing.

If you are a "life begins at conception" pro-lifer you are acknowledging that the state has geater rights to an individual's body than they do themselves.


That's not true at all. You're simply acknowledging that the fetus is a life worth protecting.




So why qualify it with " rape" or " incest" or the mothers "health" an unborn child has no say in such matters. Only "sometimes" you feel abortion is unethical?

Well with the mother's life being in danger that's an easy one. Of course she should be allowed to live. With rape I think the mother is already going to be severely emotionally damaged, making her give birth to her rapist's child does not seem like a sound policy. But there's no easy answer there. But both of these scenarios are such a small percentage of abortions that I don't think they are really even worthy of discussion.



There are states that the rapist gets visitation, I was just picking your brain, Imo it's a woman's decision, I don't believe a guy should have any say in the matter.. I bet if most of the anti choicers were women, they'd do a 180.

_________________
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
Laurence Holmes is a fucking weirdo, a nerd in denial, and a wannabe. Not a very good radio host either.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:33 pm
Posts: 19045
pizza_Place: World Famous Pizza
Nas wrote:
If a mother can murder a baby at 23 weeks then why do we care what she does at 25 weeks? The government should protect babies from being shredded at any point in their development. The process of an abortion is violent and so inhumane that we would lock anyone up for life if they did that to anyone besides government approved babies.


Is a zygote a child?

_________________
Seacrest wrote:
The menstrual cycle changes among Hassidic Jewish women was something as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
312player wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
312player wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
Not getting an abortion is literally easier than breathing.

If you are a "life begins at conception" pro-lifer you are acknowledging that the state has geater rights to an individual's body than they do themselves.


That's not true at all. You're simply acknowledging that the fetus is a life worth protecting.




So why qualify it with " rape" or " incest" or the mothers "health" an unborn child has no say in such matters. Only "sometimes" you feel abortion is unethical?

Well with the mother's life being in danger that's an easy one. Of course she should be allowed to live. With rape I think the mother is already going to be severely emotionally damaged, making her give birth to her rapist's child does not seem like a sound policy. But there's no easy answer there. But both of these scenarios are such a small percentage of abortions that I don't think they are really even worthy of discussion.



There are states that the rapist gets visitation, I was just picking your brain, Imo it's a woman's decision, I don't believe a guy should have any say in the matter.. I bet if most of the anti choicers were women, they'd do a 180.

Well, guys necessarily have to have a say in the matter, unless you believe all governmental bodies should be made up of exclusively women.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:31 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
SpiralStairs wrote:
Nas wrote:
If a mother can murder a baby at 23 weeks then why do we care what she does at 25 weeks? The government should protect babies from being shredded at any point in their development. The process of an abortion is violent and so inhumane that we would lock anyone up for life if they did that to anyone besides government approved babies.


Is a zygote a child?


Yes

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:33 pm
Posts: 19045
pizza_Place: World Famous Pizza
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
SpiralStairs wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
It's on it's way to being one.

You said you agree the state has a responsibly towards unborn children. What do you think that responsibility entails?


Deterring the killing of unborn children by taking away the liberty of those that kill them. If you're going to make me draw a line, I'd say that the state's interest in protecting an unborn life begins when the fetus has the ability to survive outside the womb. Any earlier than that and you're granting the state too much power over the individual.

Where do you draw your line? If your line is drawn where Seacrest's is, how so you gel it with it your libertarian ideals?

I draw the line at conception I guess. Pregnancies should never be terminated except to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape, in my opinion.

It's very easy to square this belief with being a libertarian. I believe abortion is infringing on the rights of the unborn child. I'm not an anarchist. I do think a government should have some responsibilities. i can't think of a more important one than ensuring lives are not ended needlessly.


But you've already said that a zygote has the potential to be a child. If a zygote has only reached the "potential to be a child" state, then by your own definition a zygote is not a child. If you're aborting a zygote then you're not infringing on the rights of an unborn child because it hasn't even reached that stage yet.

Sure you are. An abortion is definitely infringing on that. Without the abortion that is going to be a child barring miscarriage.


This is where my disconnect comes in. I can't understand how you would be comfortable with the state taking away the liberty of an existing human for choosing to terminate the life of a potential human.

_________________
Seacrest wrote:
The menstrual cycle changes among Hassidic Jewish women was something as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
We are just repeating ourselves at this point but the state isn't taking away any liberties if they said that pregnant women aren't allowed to abort their unborn children.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:46 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Intentionally terminating a life is murder in every other situation. Women and cops get special privileges. Totally unfair!

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 395 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group