Pro Choice or Pro Life (Survey)

[Subduction Zone]

Five and they probably vote.

Only if they vote Republican.

 

[Secret Chief]

Only if they vote Republican.

You always have to state the obvious.

 

[KW]

These four cells do not constitute a person.

View attachment 62885

When do you think they do constitute a person?

Every human being now living in the world was once for cells.

If the four cells that grew into who you are today were killed, you would have been killed.

Preventing an abortion saves a human life.

 

[KW]

Simply by the fact that it requires the suspension of bodily autonomy of the pregnant person. Mandated vaccines could have saved millions of lives during the pandemic. We didn't do that because people have a right to bodily autonomy. It's the same thing. That's what this thread is about.

Inconvenience is not an excuse for killing.

 

[Secret Chief]

When do you think they do constitute a person?

Every human being now living in the world was once for cells.

If the four cells that grew into who you are today were killed, you would have been killed.

Preventing an abortion saves a human life.

See my post #38.
The four cells that started "me" ? I suspect at four cells I wasn't conscious so that is irrelevant.

 

[KW]

See my post #38.
The four cells that started "me" ? I suspect at four cells I wasn't conscious so that is irrelevant.

It is relevant, because had you been killed at that point you wouldn't be here advocating for the death of others.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The responsibility for preventing infection is you. Not someone else.

"My right to swing my arms doesn't end at the tip of your nose. If you don't want to get hit, it's your responsibility to move your face."

 

[Nakosis]

I am not sure I understand.
Let me take a step back: When you say you are pro-life I take it you are opposed to abortion in a way that the right to life takes precendence over the woman's bodily autonomy. Why would then the right to life not take precedence when it comes down to mask mandates?

Pro-life is my personal view. That doesn't mean I want the government to enforce my personal view on everyone.
However, if a majority decide a ban on abortion should be enforced, that just happens to support my personal view.

Personally I wouldn't wear a mask, except if I was sick, in which case I'd simply isolate myself, or if I had to be around people who were vulnerable. Which for me seems pretty easy to avoid.
However, since state authorities said otherwise, I followed the law.

I suspect the problem is less about whether I'm consistent and more whether the laws are consistent. Not my fault if the majority of voters can't be consistent.

 

[The Hammer]

I'm a hypocrite.

Because an abortion impacts the woman having it, the fetus, and the immediate family actively involved only.

Whereas the lack of vaccination impacts society and the community at large.

 

[The Hammer]

No. It's my responsibility.

If I see someone sneezing enough times, ill just avoid the person.

It's a shame that by that point you've already been exposed to it, and are at risk. (a sneeze is several hundred mph, and spreads almost immediately).

If only there was something you could take to lessen your chance of contraction of the disease, by mild exposure. Hmmmm

 

[Nakosis]

How many cells does a baby have after it is born?

IDK, I didn't bring up counting cells.

 

[Nakosis]

I'll leave that to the medical professionals. Certainly more than four, imo. Four cells is not a person.

I guess my point is, is there a possibility for a compromise?
Nobody gets exactly what they want but terms acceptable to a majority can be agreed on?

 

[Koldo]

Pro-life is my personal view. That doesn't mean I want the government to enforce my personal view on everyone.
However, if a majority decide a ban on abortion should be enforced, that just happens to support my personal view.

Personally I wouldn't wear a mask, except if I was sick, in which case I'd simply isolate myself, or if I had to be around people who were vulnerable. Which for me seems pretty easy to avoid.
However, since state authorities said otherwise, I followed the law.

I suspect the problem is less about whether I'm consistent and more whether the laws are consistent. Not my fault if the majority of voters can't be consistent.

Are you opposed to the law in general, as in having things enforced against others' will?
If not, why specifically on abortion and mask mandates?

 

[icehorse]

To clear things up, in both cases the question is to be interpreted as being reasonable. Of course people with medical problems shouldn't be forced to take the vaccine and likewise people with medical problems shouldn't be forced to give birth. Think about a law with reasonable exceptions for both cases.

I haven't looked at the other responses, I'm just responding to the OP.

Your poll commits several logical fallacies: false dilemmas and "apples to oranges" comparisons.

 

[KW]

"My right to swing my arms doesn't end at the tip of your nose. If you don't want to get hit, it's your responsibility to move your face."

That has nothing to do with vaccination. If you think vaccines work get vaccinated. I think they work in most cases but I'm not convinced the Covid vaccine does much good and they are finding out more about the damage it can do all the time.

 

[Heyo]

Inconvenience is not an excuse for killing.

So I have convinced you that vaccine mandates are a good thing™ and should become law?

 

[Altfish]

What if those who refused the vaccine were rounded up and put on an island in the middle of nowhere? Reasonable?

I'd prefer persuasion

 

[Altfish]

Families don't get to decide to kill in a civil society.

No, but catholic hospitals get the choice to kill the mother.

Death of Savita Halappanavar - Wikipedia

This is one of the reasons I'm pro-choice.
Banning abortion doesn't stop abortions; it just stops safe abortions.

 

[Nakosis]

Are you opposed to the law in general, as in having things enforced against others' will?
If not, why specifically on abortion and mask mandates?

Yes, I'm basically an anarchist at heart.
I see all laws as a matter of compromise. A necessary evil.

Any of your property, any pursuit of your happiness, as long as it ain't impinging on my pursuit of happiness would be completely safe around me.
Unfortunately, this is not true of everyone.

I see it as my responsibility to deal with, in any manner I see fit, if you go about impinging on my pursuit of happiness. I'd rather the government stay out of it.
Probably not, but in some rare cases, it might be better that you have government protection.

 

[Nakosis]

So I have convinced you that vaccine mandates are a good thing™ and should become law?

No.

However I might accept them as a necessary evil. If nothing else, to keep the peace.