Concern for the protection of women’s lives in anti-abortion laws is not a pro-choice ploy. It’s a p

[pearl]

The abortion issue, therefore, is more than just about having babies, it is about the aftermath (homelessness on the streets, rape, hunger, and the desire to avoid public shelters at all cost because of the lack of security from rapists).

And that's the problem with too many anti-abortion people, no concern post uterus.

 

[pearl]

Kind of like how we can euthenase our grandparents now when they feel they are just a burden to us.

Or they are coerced into believing they have become a burden.

 

[pearl]

Even in rape victims it should be considered.

I think the one hang up with rape is the innocence of the fetus.

 

[firedragon]

I think the one hang up with rape is the innocence of the fetus.

I am not educated on when life begins in the foetus. So I can't make much of a case.

 

[joe1776]

From a religious perspective, why should Man think he has authority to punish another person for “wrong-doings”. Is this not God’s job?

Research in the US and Canada has shown that babies and toddlers can discern right from wrong. They act to reward good behavior and punish the bad.

Humans are born with a hard-wired morality: a sense of good and evil is bred in the bone/ i know this claim might sound outlandish, but it's supported now by research in several laboratories --- Paul Bloom, Yale psychologist

 

[Wildswanderer]

I like Peter Singer's point of view, a mother or father should be able to terminate the life of a child up to the age of five if there's some serious disability with the child. Also, if this child is effecting the mental health of the parents. Kind of like how we can euthenase our grandparents now when they feel they are just a burden to us.

Seriously? But this is the next logical step for the pro death crowd.

 

[Wildswanderer]

View attachment 64912

You mean like the free clinics pro life people are running all over the country?

 

[Sheldon]

That's like saying if I don't approve of murder the solution is not to kill anyone myself but let everyone else do it.

No it isn't, but thanks for proving my point.

 

[Sheldon]

The idea of abortion to save the mothers’ life is something that people cling to because it sounds noble and pure- but medically speaking, it probably doesn’t exist. It’s a real stretch of our thinking.”

It's anti-choicers who focus endlessly on late term abortions, pro-choice has nothing to do with the very rare late term abortions performed from medical necessity, as described. So thanks for proving that point, I was getting nowhere.

 

[Sheldon]

I would rescue the infant and leave the embryos to burn. If you had the courage of your convictions you would accept the ramifications of those convictions. But instead you dodge. I have only ever heard one antichoice person actually stand behind their own words when faced with that hypothetical choice.

Notice how after producing endless analogies themselves, they are suddenly dismissed as stupid, when they expose the vacuity of the anti-choicer's arguments.

 

[1213]

...Not because of a renewed culture of life, but because of capitalism. ...

If capitalism would rule, abortions would be forced for poor so that rich people could buy body parts and young blood for them so that they could look younger and live longer.

 

[Sheldon]

Kind of like how we can euthenase our grandparents now when they feel they are just a burden to us.

This has been exposed as false, yet you still use it? It also has nothing whatever to do with abortion, and the pro-choice argument. Lastly this is yet another of your slippery slope fallacies.

 

[Sheldon]

Another way to look at abortion is with a parallel to slavery, but not from the POV of the slave, but from the POV of the slave owner. The USA became divided in the 1860's and the Civil War was fought because of this slave owner POV that lingered in spite of a widening push for slave rights.

The slave owner saw their slaves as private property and not as a human beings. To them the slave was no different than a horse or a plow, which they legally bought at the store and thereby owned by legal means.

Because of their ownership of private property they felt had the right do as they pleased with the slaves, up and including the death penalty. They had an entitlement mentality that could not see slaves as part of humanity. This did change, after the war was lost. The Southern Democrats who lost the war vowed to rise again, but did so in a different guise of slave owner.

I agree, the far right want to enslave women by taking away their bodily autonomy, it's immoral, and all to grant rights to a clump of insentient cells that are part of that woman's body.

 

[Sheldon]

It would be interesting to see where we are on the issue as a country by placing the abortion issue on the ballot and the result binding.

About six-in-ten Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

 

[Sheldon]

Seriously? But this is the next logical step for the pro death crowd.

It's nonsense, like this slippery slope fallacy you have created.

 

[Sheldon]

You mean like the free clinics pro life people are running all over the country?

Good for them, though it's clear you've entirely missed the point of that post.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Research in the US and Canada has shown that babies and toddlers can discern right from wrong. They act to reward good behavior and punish the bad.

Humans are born with a hard-wired morality: a sense of good and evil is bred in the bone/ i know this claim might sound outlandish, but it's supported now by research in several laboratories --- Paul Bloom, Yale psychologist

Sorry, I don’t believe your response addressed my question.

Allow me to rephrase it somewhat: if someone is judging someone else from a religious point of view (for example, by saying that doing so and so is a sin), why then, do they seem to think that Man (and his worldly institutions) have the authority to punish that person for doing so and so? Do they doubt [their] God’s ability to judge and punish fairly? Why not trust God’s judgement of others and worry more about one’s very own actions towards one’s fellow beings instead?

 

[joe1776]

Sorry, I don’t believe your response addressed my question.

Allow me to rephrase it somewhat: if someone is judging someone else from a religious point of view (for example, by saying that doing so and so is a sin), why then, do they seem to think that Man (and his worldly institutions) have the authority to punish that person for doing so and so? Do they doubt [their] God’s ability to judge and punish fairly? Why not trust God’s judgement of others and worry more about one’s very own actions towards one’s fellow beings instead?

Since I have no religion, I will only be speculating on "the religious point of view."

I'm not sure that religious people do think that sins are to be punished in this world. For example, the Jehovah Witnesses believe that killing is always a sin even if the facts support a killing in self-defense; but I've known a couple of JWs well and I've never heard either say that all killers should be punished.

On the other hand, since all religious people are human. And we humans are born with the ability to discern right from wrong and also born with the inclination to punish wrongful acts, how would we go about determining whether the inclination to punish was caused by religion or if it was just naturally human?

 

[pearl]

Research in the US and Canada has shown that babies and toddlers can discern right from wrong. They act to reward good behavior and punish the bad.

And unfortunately, it is this stage of mentality that many adults have yet to 'grow' beyond.

 

[The Hammer]

You mean like the free clinics pro life people are running all over the country?

Hmmm.... Kinda like planned parenthood too. Weird.