[RD] Abortion is either murder or not. You can't have it both ways.

[TheMeInTeam]

@TheMeInTeam Where does an ectopic pregnancy fall in your thinking?

i'm surprised you are asking this, given my stance in the other thread of setting fetal personhood ~24wk (ish) for legal personhood out of deference to "we don't actually understand where to draw the line in non-legal sense", and that i've more than once pointed out that in situations where "self defense" is a legit justification for abortion, the state blocking it shouldn't be a thing period.

i am aware of no ectopic pregnancies where you can extract a living fetus at 24wk (to put it mildly). it's a silly question in context of previous discussion.

 

[Farm Boy]

Like clockwork, you claim to be intentionally misintepreted but provide no explanation as to what the correct interpretation would be, nor any evidence that the alleged misinterpretation was intentional.



No, I don't think I'm on a confirmation bias spiral. I just can't help but notice an issue when people do not adhere to the principle of strict concern/respect for "human life" that they claim motivates their anti-abortion views.

Most conservatives who oppose abortion do not merely accept death under other sets of circumstances - they demand it, support it, want it. I'm not going to pretend it's coincidence that the one area where life suddenly becomes sacrosanct is the one area that also involves minutely controlling women's behavior.

I am starting to think the species is a greater net negative than net positive. All you need to do is listen.

Perhaps covid can up its game? At least it's a blameless actor.

 

[Senethro]

I am starting to think the species is a greater net negative than net positive. All you need to do is listen.

Perhaps covid can up its game? At least it's a blameless actor.

If you're right, you could shut up about it. If you're wrong, you should shut up about it.

 

[Farm Boy]

But then I wouldn't keep the finest of company.

 

[Senethro]

Zing and all but cynical misanthropy is as boring as solipsism. If its true its extremely boring, if its not then who cares.

 

[Farm Boy]

Sorry to bore you. This is literally the high point of my day.

 

[Senethro]

Sorry to bore you. This is literally the high point of my day.

Thats messed up and I wish I could complain to management on your behalf, and also with my own long list.

 

[Cutlass]

Well, people want to ban abortion for the purpose of murdering innocent people. So there's that.

 

[Remorseless1]

According to the Bible, God said that life begins when a person takes their first breath. Which only happens outside the womb. So the religious aspect to this issue is settled.

I find it fascinating to insist on personhood for a fetus but not for a woman. I find it noteworthy that many if not most antiabortion people were so loudly insistent that they would reject any and all Covid vaccines because "my body, my choice." And I find hilarious those people can't understand why the contrast invalidates their position on both issues.

By the way, I agreed with people who didn't want to get the Covid shot - it is their body, they are adults, they get to make decisions concerning what goes on in and with their body. It's called body autonomy, the idea the government has no right to interfere with what a person does with their body. But to deny that autonomy to half the population is unAmerican and incredibly vile.


Full dusclosure: fully vaccinated and boosted (twice) for Covid; also got my yearly flu shot.

 

[Farm Boy]

Yeah, but there's no hope for that. We still do the seat belt law thing as an easier and less charged example. There is no correlation between autonomy at this level and personhood. Just what we happen to think is a good idea for you. Then it intensifies downstream.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I find it fascinating to insist on personhood for a fetus but not for a woman.

most people insisting on fetal personhood at some point are considering a tradeoff of rights between two people, not one or the other. though states that are blocking abortion while mother's life at risk do indeed seem to fit your description, and in doing so undermine their own position.

 

[Hygro]

Yeah, but there's no hope for that. We still do the seat belt law thing as an easier and less charged example. There is no correlation between autonomy at this level and personhood. Just what we happen to think is a good idea for you. Then it intensifies downstream.

Maybe but you can't clean yourself up from your seatbelt choice.

 

[Remorseless1]

most people insisting on fetal personhood at some point are considering a tradeoff of rights between two people, not one or the other. though states that are blocking abortion while mother's life at risk do indeed seem to fit your description, and in doing so undermine their own position.

I'm not disagreeing with you in the slightest. I just think rights are not something that can be traded, certainly not without the agreement of the individual affected. Now if you're talking about limit access after the point of viability, I think that's a fair compromise. Very, very few abortions are performed after 20-24 weeks, so using that at the point where fewer options are available seems the way to go.

 

[Farm Boy]

Maybe but you can't clean yourself up from your seatbelt choice.

What situations are you assuming in that don't involve cleaning you up?

 

[Remorseless1]

Yeah, but there's no hope for that. We still do the seat belt law thing as an easier and less charged example. There is no correlation between autonomy at this level and personhood. Just what we happen to think is a good idea for you. Then it intensifies downstream.

Seat belt laws are a public measure, the same as "no shirt, no shoes, no service" or forbidding people from burying their loved ones in the backyard. Having a child is a life-long commitment, a bit different.

 

[Gorbles]

By the way, I agreed with people who didn't want to get the Covid shot - it is their body, they are adults, they get to make decisions concerning what goes on in and with their body. It's called body autonomy, the idea the government has no right to interfere with what a person does with their body. But to deny that autonomy to half the population is unAmerican and incredibly vile.

This inevitably leads to a derail, so I'll keep it brief. Pregnancies aren't contagious. Everything about either situation is harm reduction (at the end of the day, for those weighting moral cost or personal rights and so on). We can't eliminate harm (even if we assume zero harm to a theoretical fetus, an abortion still harms the birth parent - it's quite literally traumatic). So in the interests of harm reduction, denying autonomy in one case isn't the same as in the other. The harms are different.

 

[Farm Boy]

Seat belt laws are a public measure, the same as "no shirt, no shoes, no service" or forbidding people from burying their loved ones in the backyard. Having a child is a life-long commitment, a bit different.

No, they aren't. They aren't even manners like wearing a shirt for men(or women). They don't prevent haphazard internments for property law and zoning/infrastructure to deal with. There is essentially zero public interest in a seat belt law* past "it's gross to clean you up when you don't die quietly at home" or "you could have worked and paid taxes and watched your kids." And for that, we override your bodily autonomy. In a really insidious method too - a thousand times a year. The habit, instead of a damn good idea you'd almost certainly make on your own and get used to making, the habit reinforces that society has a say over this thing you want to do anyways. Watch your kids, and not die, and not be gross when you go.

What we do regularly and why we do it make us who we are. Seat belt laws are really dumb.

*The ones that punish drivers. Not the regulations that force the manufacture of cars to include seat belts. Different rules!

 

[Remorseless1]

No, they aren't. They aren't even manners like wearing a shirt for men(or women). They don't prevent haphazard internments for property law and zoning/infrastructure to deal with. There is essentially zero public interest in a seat belt law* past "it's gross to clean you up when you don't die quietly at home" or "you could have worked and paid taxes and watched your kids." And for that, we override your bodily autonomy. In a really insidious method too - a thousand times a year. The habit, instead of a damn good idea you'd almost certainly make on your own and get used to making, the habit reinforces that society has a say over this thing you want to do anyways. Watch your kids, and not die, and not be gross when you go.

What we do regularly and why we do it make us who we are. Seat belt laws are really dumb.

*The ones that punish drivers. Not the regulations that force the manufacture of cars to include seat belts. Different rules!

Again, it's a safety regulation. It's usually a $25 fine. Again, similar to pouring used motor oil into a public reservoir. However, as a former journalist who covered numerous deadly accidents, I can assure not wearing seat belts usually lead to someone being catapulted through the front windshield, tossed around the interior cabin or being ejected from the vehicle in several different ways. A seat belt dramatically increases your chance of survival and reduces chances of serious injury. Coupled with air bags and survival rate is even better. You are certainly free not to wear one, but please, if you have children in the car, put them in age appropriate safety restraints.

 

[Farm Boy]

You are not free not to wear one, it is not legal. They pull you over for it in Illinois. Children don't have full bundles of rights. I know that they make you safer, and the state will force you to do it. Which is exactly the point. Seat belts are simultaenously a great idea, and the laws mandating them(safety regulations if you would prefer) are really, really stupid. Unless you want a society that is just fundamentally geared to literally be up your ass about anything minor. Which seems to be sort of zeitgeist-relevant, in the spirit of the thread.

 

[Gorbles]

Explaining what seems to be the gap between "a great idea" and "laws mandating them are really, really stupid" would probably go a long way.