We already have that. It’s called the death penalty. But once again, it’s people who really decide how much value an individual life has.
It would seem like we could start with gay people. At least that’s the Alabama sexual education playbook.
People in poverty are already by far the highest risk of unwanted pregnancies. They are less likely to be educated about safe sex and they are less likely to have access to contraceptives and use them.
But we wouldn’t want to do anything crazy like work on fixing those things for them. Spending money to help poor people is socialism.
For me, it’s not about how I personally feel about abortion, and I haven’t said I support it or am against it, but that the prolife arguments are inherently flawed. They try to use science but will include the premise that life is precious or sacred. Those are not science based facts but feelings. They mention innocent which is also a subjective term open to interpretation. A fetus is innocent and must live but if it’s going to kill the mother then it’s guilty and can be killed/executed? As if it is consciously trying to commit murder? And attempted murder is not a capital crime anyway, so it can be executed for a crime it might commit?
The Bush admin was prolife yet it had no problems with invading Iraq for bs reasons and not only killed innocent Iraqis but caused the deaths of many Americans. But war is an exception I guess. And I’m not saying it shouldn’t be but it makes the prolife innocent human argument look silly
Science is relied upon to demonstrate that an individual human with its own lifecycle exists. You in the womb. You here. Same life.
That’s the part science tells us.
If you want to concede that and say “fine, but human life isn’t precious,” be my guest. In which case there’s no more an inherent right to legal abortion then there is to life.
Innocent is pretty straightforward in this case.
Shouldn’t you put some skin in the game? I feel like you did this during one of the many theism/atheism debates, too. If you’re critical of another’s arguments, shouldn’t own position and supporting arguments be put forward for scrutiny?
I’d be all on board with most of this. Adoption and foster care are already drawing short end of the stick with pretty much every state. I’d be happier if we found a way to minimize shitty foster parents milking the system though while doing it, instead of just randomly throwing money at it. That approach has done fuck all for K-12 education results with tons of waste.
Not sure how that’s an argument against saving the lives of those in the womb.
Sorry, but no. I can be against both. I am doing it right now.
You can’t stretch the guilt of abortion to anyone but pro-abortionists. The blood is on their hands.
Well you can be for both and still recognize the points I’ve made which is why you won’t attempt to refute them.
You can feel free to be opposed to things that would decrease the number of abortions. And you can say the blood isn’t on your hands or whatever you want to say.
None of this changes the simple fact that what I’m saying is correct. And it doesn’t change the fact that by refusing to support these things women and children will be at risk when illegal abortions are performed.
Whether abortion is legal or not doesn’t change what I’ve said. You just get to say abortion is illegal and I’m happy and will do nothing else to keep them from happening. Maybe like gay lives the blood from illegal abortions won’t be worth worrying about?
You’re absolutely correct, I will be happy that abortion is illegal. Won’t you be?
It isn’t.
I would rather prevent the circumstances that lead to abortion than pretend life will be better once we make sure the abortions that take place won’t be done by health professionals.
You won’t be happy that it’s illegal to deliberately take those innocent human lives?
Yes the foster system is fucked up. I do have a good friend who’s an amazing foster parent but I do know it’s the exception and not the reality. A lot of inefficiencies and people in it for the wrong reason as well.
I’m sure things will be much better when we introduce lots more unwanted children to the system. If only we could do something to reduce that scenario…
1 Like
I’m not sure what you mean. How will this make illegal abortions not deliberate. My google dictionary says consciously and intentionally. Not sure how illegal abortions don’t fit that.
Think of it like making murder illegal. Murder doesn’t cease to exist. The whole ‘there will still be some abortions thing’ isn’t an argument.
In your scenario you say murder is wrong let’s make it illegal and then you stop.
In mine I say let’s start by reducing things which lead to murder. This helps people out who may commit murder despite the legality. This of course leaves out the idea that illegal abortion may take a mom and a fetus instead of just a fetus.
You’re completely fine with not doing things to decrease the number of women seeking abortions. You just want to make sure that it’s labeled illegal to have one.
And we’re not even touching the myriad of benefits for children who end up being born to parents that aren’t completely unprepared to raise them. My way helps that as well.
Well no, I’ll support law enforcement just as I do with murder.