There are also those out there who think the same of you because of your thoughts. So that’s even.
1 Like
I should not have said tenant. Do you have the right to kick someone off of your property?
So, as my reply above I used the wrong word (tenant). Should you be allowed to kick someone off your property?
Actually, this is more for @NickViar s he was the one asserting he is his own property. Which I don’t find consistent with his views on abortion.
Nick, if someone is on your property (not a tenant), should you be able to have them removed? In northern climates they might die in the cold of winter. Do you have an obligation to house them? Do you have an obligation to house them long term?
Okay, but can you kill them if they cannot leave of their own freewill and had no choice in the matter of how they got there?
What if someone dropped a paralyzed person on your property. You tell them to leave, but they cannot. Can you get your shotgun and blow their head off?
1 Like
Yes.
Yes.
No.
No.
Of course, almost all aborted babies have a lease because they were conceived voluntarily. In cases of rape, I’d say the baby can absolutely be removed…but not killed.
@pat this is response to you as well. I think it is a logically sound position to say that they shouldn’t be purposefully killed in the abortion process, so I agree with you there.
What if removing them without killing them results in them dying on their own almost all the time? Is that okay?
By this logic, we wouldn’t be able to abort after the start of the third trimester, as the baby would likely live outside of the womb if it was removed. Trying to be consistent, I don’t support third trimester abortions.
Sharia law for example is just stupid as fuck. I cannot find anyone to coherently argue for it. Such religious ideas/scare tactics piss me off.
1 Like
Well, the property owner would then have to pay for accommodations for the tenant until that tenant can successfully live on its own.
This hasn’t been my favorite analogy. Like it or not, humans start lives in woman. And I can feel as sorry as I can be for that woman for what ever situation she is in or how she got there, but I cannot support killing a human being just because it’s there and someone doesn’t like it.
Reminds me of an old joke…
Know how to get a nun pregnant?
Tenant was the wrong word to use. Just someone on your property.
There is no lease between a woman and her baby.
This is fine. Nick is the one who is saying he believes humans have private ownership of their selves. IMO, he is a bit inconsistent with that position and his position on abortion.
This forum cracks me up. You guys cant even figure out if 5x5 or 3x10 gives you the best gains. Yet here you think there is only one way to live the perfect christian life. Maybe I should quit reading articles on T-Nation and just ask God what makes a muscle grow…
Legally, I believe it should be. Minimize abortions, while technological advances allow even more babies to survive. Remember: I’m only talking about cases of rape and/or threats to the mother’s life. Edit: Otherwise, the baby has a 9-month lease.
I think you are consistent here. I salute that!
Ideally, we wouldn’t have unwanted pregnancies. I don’t know your stance on birth control, but I think it should be easily available for all. It isn’t like I like abortions or something.
How do you come to the conclusion the baby gets a 9 month lease? I don’t understand how you get there logically?
Depends on what type of gains you are looking for. Strength? Size? Endurance? Your question is loaded.
I view this section of the forums as strictly for fun. I like debate. That is enough of a purpose IMO.
1 Like
I think we can safely assume the baby wouldn’t sign one for less time. Except in cases of rape, the baby was voluntarily given a home for nine months. If a mother wants to abort her child, we could also point to the fact that the child lacks the capacity to enter into a contract agreement; therefore, the contract is unenforceable AGAINST that child.
I guess I am not convinced that any agreement between the child and mother exists that obligates the mother to host the child. If you can convince me that there is an obligation, I would change my position.
If there is no obligation, or no way to prove an obligation, then I would say logically we should have abortions available until the start of the third trimester (when the child can survive on it’s own).
I don’t care about your position. I was only answering your confusion regarding property rights and abortion.
Well, if you don’t have a reason explaining your asserted agreement between mother and child, you can’t rationally defend your position as anything other than an opinion, and you are not consistent logically.
Mixing Rand and God doesn’t work.
Bad analogies. You can have tenants removed; you don’t have to do it yourself.
The same way the Indians had deeds? Don’t mix Rand and God.
The problem is that nick is trying to reconcile his Ayn Rand appreciation with his belief in God. It doesn’t work.
1 Like