New Restrictions on Abortion Have Real World Consequences

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

NobodyKnows
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Jun 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 619

10 Jul 2021, 7:15 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
Just like your insistence on comparing money to flesh.

That doesn't appear in any of my posts. Go read them. If you can't be bothered to do that before shooting your mouth off, you should be more careful with your use of pejoratives like "moronic." Glass houses and all...



XFilesGeek
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,030
Location: The Oort Cloud

10 Jul 2021, 8:18 pm

NobodyKnows wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
Just like your insistence on comparing money to flesh.

That doesn't appear in any of my posts. Go read them. If you can't be bothered to do that before shooting your mouth off, you should be more careful with your use of pejoratives like "moronic." Glass houses and all...


We were discussing bodily autonomy. You came in blathering about taxes.

Taxes don't violate you're bodily autonomy as money isn't your body.

Clear? Good.


_________________
"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)


Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,576
Location: Aux Arcs

10 Jul 2021, 8:29 pm

You may feel you’re getting screwed by taxes but it’s nothing the same.


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 104,477
Location: the island of defective toy santas

11 Jul 2021, 1:35 am

the people who are so worried about taxes have not a clue how they are being used by people who are above taxation.



Dvdz
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 6 Oct 2009
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 101

11 Jul 2021, 2:08 am

Mikah wrote:
Dvdz wrote:
After reading more about it, it seems we are both wrong.

Legal personhood depends on the context. For example, in the context of contract law, children and the mentally-incapacitated are not legal persons.

But in the context of homicide, children are definitely legal persons. And some states in the U.S even extend the concept of legal personhood to fetuses for homicide. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foeticide ... ted_States)


I don't think I am wrong. In the context of homicide they are not legal persons because they still can't sign contracts or sue.

They are "legally speaking, persons".
They are not, however, "legal persons".
Even more confusing, "legal personhood" could correctly refer to either state.


From Dyschkant, A. Legal Personhood: How We Are Getting It Wrong. Illinois Law Review. Volume 2015, p. 2075 (http://www.illinoislawreview.org/wp-con ... chkant.pdf)

Quote:
Children are generally presumed to be legal persons. The Supreme Court has directly addressed the question of personhood for children when analyzing whether children can bring forward a Fourteenth Amendment claim. For example, in Levy v. Louisiana, the Court overturned a Louisiana statute declaring illegitimate children “nonpersons”:
“We start from the premise that illegitimate children are not ‘nonpersons.’ They are humans, live, and have their being. They are clearly ‘persons’ within the meaning of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” The justification for including illegitimate children as legal persons is almost immediately obvious to Justice Douglas
and follows directly from the fact that children are living human beings who “have their being.” The Supreme Court also held that the Fourteenth Amendment protects children as well as adults. This clearly places children in the category of legal persons according to the constitutional meaning.



NobodyKnows
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Jun 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 619

12 Jul 2021, 4:23 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
Clear?

That you're in a non-monogamous relationship with the truth, yes.

XFilesGeek wrote:
We were discussing bodily autonomy.

When the OP raised the question of whether governments curtail it to support safety nets.

Quote:
You came in blathering...

My response was three sentences long and focused exclusively on what he said.

Quote:
...about taxes.

No, it focused squarely on the ability of people to work toward their basic needs and never mentioned taxes directly.



XFilesGeek
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,030
Location: The Oort Cloud

12 Jul 2021, 7:40 pm

Uh-huh. And it's already been addressed.

Taxes don't violate bodily autonomy as money isn't your body. Several people have elaborated on that point, but, for whatever the reason, you keep banging on about how taxation is somehow related to abortion. If you want to talk about invalid comparisons, maybe scrub them from your own arguments before critiquing mine.

Now, as it stands, I'm at work and I don't have time to keep re-explaining things to you, so I'm just going to wish you well on your trip bouncing around the galaxy. Ta.


_________________
"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)