Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

New Restrictions on Abortion Have Real World Consequences

Page 19 of 21 [ 327 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

04 Jul 2021, 5:56 pm

NobodyKnows wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
Because the point isn't to "protect babies," it's to control and punish women.

FWIW I don't have any particular need to control American women, as I haven't dated in the US in several years and don't intend to. My girlfriend is a wonderful lady from a much more pleasant country, not only an impressive athlete and professional, but an intuitive nurturer and a fabulous lover as well. I can't think of any good reason to go back.


Cool story, bro.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

04 Jul 2021, 5:57 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
NobodyKnows wrote:
tl;dr


When taxes are collected from one's flesh or require allowing another person to occupy your flesh your comparison will be reasonable. Until then comparing paying taxes with forced pregnancy is just absurd and I'm not interested in engaging further with poor attempts to treat them as the same thing.


Exactly.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


NobodyKnows
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Jun 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 635

06 Jul 2021, 12:10 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
tl;dr

^You're grousing about cans of worms that you chose to open. That says a lot more about you than me, in particular that you were punting rather than making a sincere argument.

I could just as easily have responded in kind:

funeralxempire wrote:
If you don't want to pay taxes you can remove yourself from the society that you're a part of (and if one believes taxes are theft I would support them doing this so they no longer need to feel oppressed by taxes).

No you can't, not even close. Read the law for goodness sake :roll:

Quote:
If you want to pay less taxes you can modify your behaviours to reduce that burden (earn less, buy less, sell less, own less, etc).

You've shifted from saying "no one is going to be forced" to saying "you can slightly reduce it if you starve yourself and live illegally in a tent." The doesn't really deserve any comment.

Quote:
When taxes are collected from one's flesh or require allowing another person to occupy your flesh your comparison will be reasonable. Until then comparing paying taxes with forced pregnancy is just absurd and I'm not interested in engaging further with poor attempts to treat them as the same thing.

I note that you've just taken the position that a fetus is a person (which for the record is something I haven't said).



XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

06 Jul 2021, 5:59 pm

Here's a fun idea: I'll take your wallet and then kick it. Then I'll kick you in the face.

If money and flesh are the same thing, then both of these things should be equally egregious. Right?

:roll:


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 29,100
Location: Right over your left shoulder

06 Jul 2021, 11:20 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
Here's a fun idea: I'll take your wallet and then kick it. Then I'll kick you in the face.

If money and flesh are the same thing, then both of these things should be equally egregious. Right?

:roll:


Oww, my wallet. :lol:


_________________
When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king, the palace becomes a circus.
"Many of us like to ask ourselves, What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?' The answer is, you're doing it. Right now." —Former U.S. Airman (Air Force) Aaron Bushnell


XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

07 Jul 2021, 5:18 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
Here's a fun idea: I'll take your wallet and then kick it. Then I'll kick you in the face.

If money and flesh are the same thing, then both of these things should be equally egregious. Right?

:roll:

Oww, my wallet. :lol:


:lol:

This reminds me of the arguments that clueless MRAs make that getting mugged is the equivalent to rape.

Taking money isn't the same as violating flesh.

There is no comparison. There is no other situation where one person is entitled to use another person's body. Full stop.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,024
Location: Houston, Texas

07 Jul 2021, 6:17 pm

What many probably don’t know is Roe v Wade was actually about doctor-patient confidentiality. Abortion happened to be the procedure that Ms. McCorvey was seeking, and its national legality was a secondary consequence.

Replace abortion with circumcision or heart transplant and Roe still applies.


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!

Now proficient in ChatGPT!


Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 37
Posts: 3,201
Location: England

07 Jul 2021, 6:48 pm

Tim_Tex wrote:
What many probably don’t know is Roe v Wade was actually about doctor-patient confidentiality. Abortion happened to be the procedure that Ms. McCorvey was seeking, and its national legality was a secondary consequence.

Replace abortion with circumcision or heart transplant and Roe still applies.


I know. It's one of the most ridiculous parts of this baby holocaust story. A matter of life and death, murder or not murder and its gratuitous license was decided on the Right to Privacy. Imagine passing judgement on an older life in such a way. Again I think this is a sign of which side is going to be viewed by future generations as monsters.


_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 29,100
Location: Right over your left shoulder

07 Jul 2021, 6:55 pm

Mikah wrote:
Tim_Tex wrote:
What many probably don’t know is Roe v Wade was actually about doctor-patient confidentiality. Abortion happened to be the procedure that Ms. McCorvey was seeking, and its national legality was a secondary consequence.

Replace abortion with circumcision or heart transplant and Roe still applies.


I know. It's one of the most ridiculous parts of this baby holocaust story. A matter of life and death, murder or not murder and its gratuitous license was decided on the Right to Privacy. Imagine passing judgement on an older life in such a way. Again I think this is a sign of which side is going to be viewed by future generations as monsters.


It does seem that the legal footing would be firmer if they actually addressed the issue head-on instead of indirectly like that.


_________________
When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king, the palace becomes a circus.
"Many of us like to ask ourselves, What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?' The answer is, you're doing it. Right now." —Former U.S. Airman (Air Force) Aaron Bushnell


Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 37
Posts: 3,201
Location: England

07 Jul 2021, 7:42 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
It does seem that the legal footing would be firmer if they actually addressed the issue head-on instead of indirectly like that.


Indeed, but that would probably not have resulted in abortion being generally legal.


_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!


Jiheisho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jul 2020
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,507

07 Jul 2021, 7:47 pm

Mikah wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
It does seem that the legal footing would be firmer if they actually addressed the issue head-on instead of indirectly like that.


Indeed, but that would probably not have resulted in abortion being generally legal.


Well, you take religion out of the debate and abortion will always come out as legal--like it is now. There is no logical argument against abortion--only a religious one.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 29,100
Location: Right over your left shoulder

07 Jul 2021, 7:49 pm

Mikah wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
It does seem that the legal footing would be firmer if they actually addressed the issue head-on instead of indirectly like that.


Indeed, but that would probably not have resulted in abortion being generally legal.


Several states already had it legal, but further if Roe v. Wade had not occured it might have made it easier for American pro-choicers to make their case based on the results in states that weren't legalizing it vs. ones who have and apply a different strategy.

There's other countries that did deal with the issue in a more head-on manner than the US and they likely have a firmer footing, legally speaking.

Somewhere like Canada or Ireland seems to have that issue much more firmly settled than the US.


_________________
When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king, the palace becomes a circus.
"Many of us like to ask ourselves, What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?' The answer is, you're doing it. Right now." —Former U.S. Airman (Air Force) Aaron Bushnell


Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 37
Posts: 3,201
Location: England

07 Jul 2021, 8:15 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Several states already had it legal, but further if Roe v. Wade had not occured it might have made it easier for American pro-choicers to make their case based on the results in states that weren't legalizing it vs. ones who have and apply a different strategy.

There's other countries that did deal with the issue in a more head-on manner than the US and they likely have a firmer footing, legally speaking.

Somewhere like Canada or Ireland seems to have that issue much more firmly settled than the US.


How head-on are we talking? What I understand as head-on is tackling the nature of the unborn. I know in the UK the argument wasn't particularly concerned with it, the argument was emotive and about back alley abortion clinics, rather than the question of "is this murder?". Granted, it's not quite as silly as the right to privacy of a person seeking to commit what is potentially infanticide, but I wouldn't classify it as head-on either.

Jiheisho wrote:
Mikah wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
It does seem that the legal footing would be firmer if they actually addressed the issue head-on instead of indirectly like that.


Indeed, but that would probably not have resulted in abortion being generally legal.


Well, you take religion out of the debate and abortion will always come out as legal--like it is now. There is no logical argument against abortion--only a religious one.


My position does not rely on religion.


_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 29,100
Location: Right over your left shoulder

07 Jul 2021, 8:18 pm

Mikah wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Several states already had it legal, but further if Roe v. Wade had not occured it might have made it easier for American pro-choicers to make their case based on the results in states that weren't legalizing it vs. ones who have and apply a different strategy.

There's other countries that did deal with the issue in a more head-on manner than the US and they likely have a firmer footing, legally speaking.

Somewhere like Canada or Ireland seems to have that issue much more firmly settled than the US.


How head-on are we talking? What I understand as head-on is tackling the nature of the unborn. I know in the UK the argument wasn't particularly concerned with it, the argument was emotive and about back alley abortion clinics, rather than the question of "is this murder?". Granted, it's not quite as silly as the right to privacy of a person seeking to commit what is potentially infanticide, but I wouldn't classify it as head-on either.


Head-on means addressing the question of does one have the right to intentionally terminate a pregnancy.


_________________
When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king, the palace becomes a circus.
"Many of us like to ask ourselves, What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?' The answer is, you're doing it. Right now." —Former U.S. Airman (Air Force) Aaron Bushnell


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,555
Location: the island of defective toy santas

07 Jul 2021, 8:20 pm

medical technology has already rendered "right" or "no right" at least somewhat moot.



Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 37
Posts: 3,201
Location: England

07 Jul 2021, 8:30 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Head-on means addressing the question of does one have the right to intentionally terminate a pregnancy.


Right. Though of course I would argue that question cannot be properly tackled without a decision on the exact nature of the unborn.


_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!