IF these restrictive laws do make it to the Supreme Court…this may be where Kavanaugh and Gorsuch weigh in the most.
I am not super firm on that particular part of my position. If it is more dangerous to the woman, then I am willing to withdraw that portion of my position.
Well, you have to pick a line. The absolute right for a woman to do what she will with her own body - your position - gets compromised as soon as the right of the child begins. So, it’s a line-drawing exercise.
So, where do you personally think that line is? Up to this point, you sound as though it’s at childbirth. Is that your line?
I think that is it. Just to be clear here, I am talking about a right. Not if I think it is right or wrong morally.
But I didn’t say that did I. You put that label to me, not I. You have no Idea what my opinions on Education and healthcare are, both of which are irrelevant to this conversation.
It’s somewhere up there I believe, Maybe I did read that wrong, all good though.
I agree with EVERYONE. There are the special case where it its probably more humane to Term the pregnancy. Anencephaly something along those lines.
So to be clear here - you believe that a woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy as late as a week before her due date?
1 Like
Hasn’t Justice Ginsberg opined against it before as well?
That would be consistent with my stance. I think at that point it is not a very nice thing to do though.
Personally I would not do it myself. That does not mean I think there should be a law that says everybody should not be able to do it.
So a fully formed infant that whose mother could be induced to give birth one week prior to the due date is afforded no rights or protection if the mother decided to terminate.
At that point, in your view, the mother should have the sole authority to decide whether that fully formed child lives or dies - an infant, by the way, not materially different than one born a week later.
That’s untenable, per my earlier comment.
2 Likes
I wasn’t saying that was you man.
I think this actually touches upon one of the law’s major flaws, being that you can’t abort even in the case of rape or incest.
1 Like
It’s a big if. It’s also unclear how Kavanaugh will vote, to say nothing of Roberts.
Politically speaking you are seeing history in the making. As Churchill once said, “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”
As much as is going on, so called ‘abortion rights’ have been irreparably damaged. No way abortion stays legal in its current form, not from conception to partial-birth.
Roe v. Wade only covers 20 weeks. With as many states doing partial to near total bans, I don’t see a way out for abortions after 20 weeks.
I predict, from these initial wave of bans to see heavy nation-wide restrictions on post 20 week gestation abortions.
Do you understand what untenable means?
You don’t agree with me, that doesn’t make my position untenable. I’ve defended my position by saying that a person in all cases should have complete ownership of their own body. The fact that my position is defendable by definition excludes it from being untenable.
The difference is that a newborn is not inside someone else’s body. Once they are outside the mother, the mother loses abortion rights over them.
You endorse what is basically infanticide. Thanks anyway for clarifying your position.
1 Like
I have in no way endorsed the killing of infants. Please be intellectually honest and keep strawman arguments out of this debate.
For me it comes down to should another person be able to have a stake or ownership of another? I think no. Why do you believe it is okay?
You have argued mostly about a fetus having rights, which I have already stated that I don’t care if we call them a full person. I would be convinced if you could argue with objective evidence that it is okay in this circumstance for another person to have ownership over someone else.
Parents don’t have the right to engage in certain dangerous activities with their children. However, a pregnant woman can engage in those activities in spite of the danger to the unborn child. So when and how exactly do the unborn child’s rights limit the rights of the woman?
If we were to come down from our pedestals we would admit that we really have no problems with infanticide under certain conditions. The lives of innocent children have never been enough to stop war.
Nor do many of the champions of every life is precious have a problem being against funding things that go towards making unwanted children’s lives better. The states which want these laws are some of the worst at being prepared for more unwanted children.
Forcing a raped woman to carry a rapists child seems really cruel. I’d be curious to know if any of them change their mind if their 14 year old gets raped and pregnant.
The Bible is their guide. No children were ever killed by God or any of the Israelites.
1 Like