Discussion in 'The Red Room' started by We Are Borg, May 17, 2021.
Texas just signed a law that bans abortion after a fetal heartbeat can be detected. Which is about six weeks into pregnancy. Which means that it would give women very little time after a missed period to discover they were pregnant and arrange for an abortion. Also, it apparently only has a medical necessity exception, not for rape or incest. Also, it apparently outsources enforcement to private citizens, which opens its own cans of worms.
That entire argument is bullshit. It's not a heartbeat. It's an electric impulse. and I can get that out of a potato.
Who is making arguments against this bullshit?
When do you think there starts to be a person inside that body? A soul, if you will, some something that isn't just autonomic functions going about their business?
Then why did you bring survival up? I'm responding to your argument by asking if it's a serious part of your position. If you don't take it seriously, then why should I?
Which is why "lost the baby" is such a popular phrase. Because there's no baby to lose. Or give a name to.
(I don't expect you to read those links, but they're a sample of the phenomenon.)
Is it not a person until you can hold it in your arms? Is that your standard for personhood?
Fetus -> newborn -> toddler -> preschooler -> etc. These are simply categories to describe stages of life. If there's some part of your understanding of "fetus" that precludes "someone in there" then please say it explicitly so we don't garamet-and-Jenee for ten pages.
I agree that a lot of males behave deplorably toward women. To lump me in with people who would use a woman for sex and then run, simply because I am categorized in the same 50% of the species as them, is frankly prejudiced. If I didn't understand you were venting against them, I'd be offended.
You probably also have your signatures turned off or hidden.
Briefly: in favor of it.
And yet I have no doubt that much of the vehemence in abortion support comes from women being mistreated in other parts of life.
Rape is one of the worst, most horrifying, most inhuman, most invasive crimes there is. I'm not going to demand that the victim live with part of her attacker inside her for nine months, a constant physical reminder of what happened to her. So -- read carefully -- I'm willing to allow grey area there that the harm done to her mental health might destroy her life, from a crime committed against her beyond her control, to the point that ending the pregnancy does less damage than insisting it continue.
Similarly, a woman carrying a baby that puts her life in jeopardy might have to choose between her own life and her baby's (or fetus's if you like). We don't demand a mother run back into a burning house to save her child. We don't demand "you must choose the other person's life over your own" from anyone else, aside from specific professions such as police, do we? And we shouldn't. So that's another exception.
I'm on board, let's do this.
I much, much, prefer an expansion on A2, in a society that thoroughly, genuinely values children at all stages and is built around supporting them and other vulnerable groups like single mothers and the mentally ill. I understand it won't happen overnight, but that's the vision I want the world to work toward.
Now watch as people tell me I'm nuts or lying.
If she signs an affidavit or similar saying she was raped (or otherwise impregnated against her will, e.g. he said he was snipped when he wasn't, that may not be the strict definition of rape but it's certainly some kind of sexual assault), and the story doesn't seem false on the face of it, that seems about good enough for starters.
Will some women lie to get an abortion? Yeah. There's a layer of trust there, as there is in most parts of society. Is it difficult to get rape victims to come forward? Yes. We make it clear there is no shame in being raped, and we clamp down on those who say or behave otherwise just like we should clamp down on racism. We should be doing that anyway.
It's gonna take a while to get there. But if it cuts down on people dying, recognizes the worth of unborn babies (or fetuses if you must), and diminishes the role of Planned Parenthood-type groups in counselling abortions so that anti-abortionists lay off them and they're freer to do the good work they do, then that's a step forward.
We don't wear masks right now because we're promised it will prevent everyone from dying, we do it because it will prevent a lot of people from dying and that's a step forward, even though there are people who betray the trust of our less than totalitarian state by not wearing a mask properly and think they're upholding their freedom. Do you see the parallel?
Die, most likely. Abortion, gays, and the Supreme Court as defense against both were basically the three political issues that Christian talk radio cared about in the '90s, and I fear that's changed little since then.
You've 98% lost the gay issue, you have the SC, you got rid of abortion . . . you can only fearmonger about transsexuals so much. I guess they're probably screaming gravely intoning about Biden packing the Court right now. Hm. Well, what else are they supposed to do now, push for government support for the widow and the orphan? That's Democrat talk.
You Yanks can't even agree that the second amendment is fucking stupid, so how do you expect to get an abortion amendment through?
If that's your threshold, I would think most newborns don't even meet that criteria, at least not for the first few days or weeks.
And arguably even fully developed humans can be viewed as an automatic system reacting to various stimuli, albeit far more complex.
Of course Lanzman thinks the Second Amendment is just swell.
After all, his taxpayer-funded job is constitutionally-mandated!
The Second Amendment recognizes and protects the fundamental human right of self defense, without which no other rights can exist.
Arms are for hugging.
So how is it that countries that many, many countries that don't enshrine that right like we do have at least as many rights protected by their respective states? We have people routinely die due to inability to pay for meds or heating, we go bankrupt from higher education and healthcare.
You are just quoting dogma.
And outdated dogma at that - Washington said the militia was worthless in 1787. And that was before the state had nuclear weapons, chemical and biological agents, and could render you unconcscious with white sound projectors. You'd have problems defending against drones, let alone advanced strike craft of main battle tanks. Hell, we are creating battlefield lasers and have functional rail guns.
HA! So Jenee is right! A fetus isn't a baby until it's downloaded. It could be a potato, a sea urchin, or even a cuddly kitty! You never know what might pop out of there.
I hear that!
A whole bunch of people on this board are going to be pretty surprised when they learn that they have no rights whatsoever.
Seems like revisionist history, when the people who wrote it blatantly considered that many people had no such right to self defense.
Really expected better of you than this rubbish. First, Washington was referring to militia who broke and ran or were undisciplined, generally early in the war. For an example of militia doing it right, look up Francis Marion, the Swamp Fox. Also General Friedrich von Stueben, who almost single-handedly turned a bunch of volunteers and militiamen into Continental Soldiers.
If the Second Amendment is "dogma," then so is the entire Constitution. Those other countries you mention all went thru their own spasms of conflict to achieve the rights they have. No rights are ever won other than by blood, and if you believe otherwise you're not paying attention. And I would also point out that "self defense" does not always mean armed self defense. A lot of self defense goes on in courtrooms, for example.
I've noted elsewhere that the First Amendment is the pivot of the entire American experiment, but the Second is the foundation that that pivot sits on.
And loathe as I am to start this argument here, education and health care are not rights. They impose substantial obligations on the time and effort of others, so they are privileges, not rights. An actual right requires nothing other than that you observe and respect it.
The cops in the US can kill you at any time if they THINK you have a gun (or say they did). You have no right to bear arms, you just believe you do.
I don't know. But, that isn't a scientific question, rather a philosophical one.
That is a worthy discussion, but not what we are discussing. This line of questioning was specifically about abortion - right here, right now. Not hypotheticals. A baby can live on life support at 4 or 5 months. Are you suggesting that if a woman cannot afford a baby, then she should somehow wish into existence several thousand dollars to have the fetus removed from her body and moved onto life support while awaiting someone else to adopt the baby?
We're talking about fetus', babies, abortion, and women. Why are you bringing up philosophical questions? and what is "personhood"? are we talking slave vs free person; human vs corporation? Or are you suggesting that once a woman has sex, she is now slave to whatever organisms are swimming around inside her body?
Now you're changing the definition again. a fetus is not a baby. Now, you want to say "someone in there" - as in a soul. Again, that's a philosophical question, not a scientific one.
I don't even know what that last sentence means - unless you think you'll be taking up where garamet left off. In which case, you might wish to rethink that. I can scroll past your posts as easily as I scroll past anyone elses. Any back and forth between garmet and I and why I didn't ignore her ... well, has nothing to do with you.
I didn't lump you in with anyone else. I made a statement. If you wish to put yourself into that category then that's on you, not me. What I will say about you is this - if you want to end abortions, I suggest you start with policing those of your own sex before telling women what they must do with their own body.
"What if we have X supernatural property we can't scientifically verify (because supernatural implies outside the bounds of science)?" is a poor argument. Do dogs have souls?
Would you (tearfully, one hopes) have your dog put down if they were suffering? Is that murder?
Oh, your holy book says humans were given stewardship over animals?
The book that has a dozen contradictions and had to have a fucking committee formed (several times!) to agree what should be canon?
Right to a fair trial with a jury?
Sorry bub, don't ask me to approve codifying religion. You and yours are free to practice it.
Not a right. A responsibility. You "pay" for your right to a jury trial by being available to act as a juror yourself.
So non-citizens don't have a right to a fair trial?
And how often does this happen? Do you realize that there are many thousands of police/citizen interfaces across America every single day? The odds of getting shot by a cop are incredibly slim (yes even for minorities!) and the odds get slimmer if you don't pull your gun on the cops. For a supposedly smart guy you don't seem to understand odds and probability very well.
And you have poor situational awareness.
Non-citizens are a tiny minority of the population, covered (as in so many other things) by the majority of actual citizens. You have to assume that the non-citizens want to become citizens, unless they're just tourists or something, and if they're tourists or on a work visa or whatever, they should be keeping their noses clean anyway. If they're illegals, the hell with them. They get deported and their native country can deal with them.
gotta disagree with you there. I live and breath situational awareness, risk versus reward, risk mitigation, etc etc. You can't make anything 100 percent safe, but you can make things safer.
More to the point the odds of Matthunter dying of a heart attack or stroke are much, much, holy shit much greater than oldfella getting shot by a cop. Change my mind!
Sort of - they get deported and come right the fuck back to America, rinse and repeat. Hell I'm guessing Biden will personally buy them a return bus ticket to make sure they return!
Separate names with a comma.