Abortion thread (Page 13/43)
2.5 APR 06, 01:46 PM

quote
Originally posted by ray b:

on religion

my religion is SEX and DRUGS and ROCK&ROLL
MANY OF MY BELIEFS AND THE SACRAMENTS OF MY RELIGION IS AGAINST YOUR LAWS
WHERE IS MY FREEDOM TO PRACTICE MY RELIGION ?




LOL
olejoedad APR 06, 01:50 PM
Hedonism isn't against the law.

As long as you don't hurt others practicing your beliefs, you should be good.

Have you been arrested for your actions relating to your religious beliefs in the past?
slicknick APR 06, 02:53 PM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:

Hedonism isn't against the law.

As long as you don't hurt others practicing your beliefs, you should be good.

Have you been arrested for your actions relating to your religious beliefs in the past?



Well my religion is sodomy, orgies, and gay interracial marriage and there have definitely been laws about those in the recent past even though they don't hurt anyone.
2.5 APR 06, 03:43 PM
I think I remember anarchy being at the far end of one of those "political" left and right charts.

[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 04-06-2022).]

olejoedad APR 06, 04:49 PM

quote
Originally posted by slicknick:


Well my religion is sodomy, orgies, and gay interracial marriage and there have definitely been laws about those in the recent past even though they don't hurt anyone.



And then the laws changed, right?
ray b APR 07, 12:37 AM

quote
Originally posted by 2.5:


LOL



I do not find religious persecution amusing
slicknick APR 07, 08:00 AM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:


And then the laws changed, right?



As recently as the supreme court justice hearings:

Sen. Mike Braun (R) was comfortable leaving the question of interracial marriage to states (Loving v. Virginia)

Sen. Marcia Blackburn (R) was comfortable rolling back access to birth control by married couples (Griswold v. Connecticut)

and

Sen. John Cornyn (R) questioned the legality of same sex marriage (Obergefell v. Hodges)

So don't come in here trying to roll back Roe v. Wade with an argument that these other things are settled law.
theBDub APR 07, 09:17 AM

quote
Originally posted by 2.5:

Anyway back on topic;
I'm still with my earlier stated view.





quote
Originally posted by 2.5:

I think this is a stretch far beyond the reach of the applicable argument and reprocussions. Stick to reproducing humans. If one sees a human as of no value, worth and having no dignity there isnt much I can talk to them about regarding this topic. Its too late.

I disagree, it is murder. Same as murdering a 1 month old who can't survive by themself. A 6 month old, or a 1 year old, etc.

"The conflict to me is using what I consider irrelevant excuses to override one's own concerns,.
There was no horrible accident and the baby can survive. On top of that [you] created the baby. It wasnt some strange unfortunate circumstance.
The wrongness of killing a child, on either side of the mother to be's belly, doesn't change "



I've already responded to this, but since we did get off track, I think it's prudent to bring it back.

I want to break down your statement into a few pieces:


quote
Originally posted by 2.5:

I think this is a stretch far beyond the reach of the applicable argument and reprocussions. Stick to reproducing humans.




It's not a stretch, because the same logic that you use to demand a pregnant person must keep the fetus in them, even against their will, can be used to defend something like forced blood donation. Why do I say it's the same logic? Because your argument can be summarized as: Abortion is murder because it is the purposeful killing of another human that has the right to and possibility of life. To take that life away is to take away their right to life and to commit murder. You may nitpick the words, but I think the argument is well-understood. That same logic could be used to suggest: Pulling the plug on braindead people in a comatose state is murder because it is the purposeful killing of another human that has the right to and possibility of life. To take that life away is to take away their right to life and to commit murder. It can be used to say: Refusing to provide a blood donation to your brother with a rare blood type is murder because not doing so is the purposeful killing of another human that has the right to and possibility of life. To take that life away is to take away their right to life and to commit murder.


quote
Originally posted by 2.5:

If one sees a human as of no value, worth and having no dignity there isnt much I can talk to them about regarding this topic. Its too late.




Nobody has said this, so I think we can keep moving.


quote
Originally posted by 2.5:

I disagree, it is murder. Same as murdering a 1 month old who can't survive by themself. A 6 month old, or a 1 year old, etc.




To say this is to say that they are the same. A fetus is equivalent to a 1 month old, 1 year old, etc.

To say this would be a gross mischaracterization of the different statuses.

On one end, you have a fetus that physically cannot survive outside of the womb. It requires that specific human to live, or else it will die. If that human dies in a car crash, that fetus will also die.
On the other end, you have a child that can and is surviving outside of the womb. Critically, though it requires someone to provide for it, it does not require that specific human to live. It can be adopted, fostered, or otherwise cared for by another willing party.

I've already outlined the reasoning as to why killing the fetus is not equivalent to murder in other comments, but to restate:
Choosing to not support a separate life that cannot otherwise survive without your body cannot be murder, the same way that pulling the plug on a comatose person is not (usually) murder.


quote
Originally posted by 2.5:

"The conflict to me is using what I consider irrelevant excuses to override one's own concerns,.
There was no horrible accident and the baby can survive. On top of that [you] created the baby. It wasnt some strange unfortunate circumstance.
The wrongness of killing a child, on either side of the mother to be's belly, doesn't change "




Let's pretend it was not rape, even though that's a completely valid argument, let's pretend like pregnancies only result from consensual sex.

The baby cannot survive without many months of existing as a parasitic body on another, specific human. I suggest that both parties have rights. The pregnant party, and the unborn party. They both have rights. It's simply that the right of the pregnant party to choose to not support another party with their organs supersedes the rights of the unborn party.

If you don't think the rights of the pregnant party supersede the rights of the unborn party, then we're back up to why I discussed that as an argument with terrible implications.
2.5 APR 07, 03:11 PM

quote
Originally posted by ray b:


I do not find religious persecution amusing



I do not find any of this amusing. Maybe looking for amusement is some peoples problem.
2.5 APR 07, 03:19 PM

quote
Originally posted by theBDub:

Because your argument can be summarized as: Abortion is murder because it is the purposeful killing of another human that has the right to and possibility of life..



No it cant. I gave alot more details more than once.

Yes you restated your stance again overlooking my details again.

Like I implied we are so far apart I dont think you can hear my reasoning anymore.

But, then you hint at understanding but stand your ground anyway:


quote
Originally posted by theBDub:

The baby cannot survive without many months of existing as a parasitic body on another, specific human. I suggest that both parties have rights. The pregnant party, and the unborn party. They both have rights. It's simply that the right of the pregnant party to choose to not support another party with their organs supersedes the rights of the unborn party.

If you don't think the rights of the pregnant party supersede the rights of the unborn party, then we're back up to why I discussed that as an argument with terrible implications.



Another party huh, like some stranger asking for a kidney huh? You think its the same thing?

No terrible implications, like I said stick to reproduction, the reproduction caused by your own choices, which you didn't care for the outcome of and decided to kill your baby. Decided that was ok because it was easier. Talk about implications.