New Restrictions on Abortion Have Real World Consequences
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)
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)
^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:
No you can't, not even close. Read the law for goodness sake
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.
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).
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?
_________________
"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
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,502
Location: Right over your left shoulder
If money and flesh are the same thing, then both of these things should be equally egregious. Right?
Oww, my wallet.
_________________
Watching liberals try to solve societal problems without a systemic critique/class consciousness is like watching someone in the dark try to flip on the light switch, but they keep turning on the garbage disposal instead.
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う
If money and flesh are the same thing, then both of these things should be equally egregious. Right?
Oww, my wallet.
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)
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!
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
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,502
Location: Right over your left shoulder
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.
_________________
Watching liberals try to solve societal problems without a systemic critique/class consciousness is like watching someone in the dark try to flip on the light switch, but they keep turning on the garbage disposal instead.
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う
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!
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
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,502
Location: Right over your left shoulder
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.
_________________
Watching liberals try to solve societal problems without a systemic critique/class consciousness is like watching someone in the dark try to flip on the light switch, but they keep turning on the garbage disposal instead.
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う
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.
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
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,502
Location: Right over your left shoulder
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.
_________________
Watching liberals try to solve societal problems without a systemic critique/class consciousness is like watching someone in the dark try to flip on the light switch, but they keep turning on the garbage disposal instead.
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,739
Location: the island of defective toy santas
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!
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Consequences of Undiagnosed early Autism |
08 Mar 2024, 4:44 pm |
OK bill would charge abortion recipients with murder |
14 Feb 2024, 12:04 pm |
French lawmakers make abortion a constitutional right |
04 Mar 2024, 7:31 pm |
SCOTUS abortion pill access hearing |
26 Mar 2024, 5:17 pm |