BSBD Tiller the Baby Killer

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

In such an argument as posed above one can think of men as land mines. (I _am_ going somewhere with this analogy.

exactly, no need to go further

no need for the warning, I'm extremely happy at this very point in the debate and would like to subscribe to your newletter - or encourage you to write one




ok, I'll read the rest of it

edit: ok, lots of big words, but mainly, the man is (most of the time ) autonomous up to a point in time - ejaculation

That's fine, he responsible for anything - up to that point in time. But not the consequences, since it's all owned now in the woman's body.

Treating the man like a landmine is the underlying position of the pro-choice and feminist (extreme) version efforts. So this is exactly the point I'm making. If the 'father's' position is value zero, then all aspects of his participation in the entire structure is then, also zero.

You can't take away his responsibility and only leave culpability. There has to be a mutual choice in it's place to justly assign culpability.

Either that, or we are just both acknowledging that the simple chestnut of "her body, her decision" is really way too simplified to apply to reality at all. But that's just sneaky.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Butters 0]

Quote

Quote

So pro-choice people are always pro-choice?

Yes, regarding the subject. I do not expect every "pro-life" person to be vegetarian either, but having someone claiming to be "pro-life" but supporting death penalty sounds pretty hypocritical to me.

So pro-choice is only in regards to the subject (abortion) but pro-life isn't?

PS: You still haven't answered my question, what is the difference between a viable fetus and a comatose person on life support?

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

So pro-choice is only in regards to the subject (abortion) but pro-life isn't?

Of course! 'Pro-choice' is explicitly referred to abortion only. But if you call yourself 'pro-life' under the "protect the sacred human life" slogan, you're already getting out of scope of just abortion, and must address other issues which affect the "sacred human life", such as death penalty. And if your 'pro-life' position only addresses abortion, this means you're really just anti-choice, and only call yourself 'pro-life' for marketing purposes.

Quote

PS: You still haven't answered my question, what is the difference between a viable fetus and a comatose person on life support?

What exactly has a comatose person on life support with pro-choice, anti-choice or pro-life, assuming you're not talking about euthanasia?

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[n23x 0]

Quote

If the 'father's' position is value zero, then all aspects of his participation in the entire structure is then, also zero.

Ah, but the donor ('father', if you'd prefer) has every right to exercise his position by NOT having sex. I (and many others) might argue that the decision to engage in sexual intercourse is of pretty significant value.

Quote

You can't take away his responsibility and only leave culpability.

What do you mean here?

Quote

There has to be a mutual choice in it's place to justly assign culpability.

Sure there was. Sex!

.jim

"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

First, YOU can explain the connection between "pro-life, pro-war" and "pro-life, vegan".

Easy. If you oppose abortion on the ground that "human life should be valued either from conception or implantation until natural death" (a general Christian style pro-life belief), then you should oppose death penalty and war conflicts on the same ground. If you do not, then your beliefs are not based on value of human life, and it will be honest to tell it straight that you're just anti-choice.

Quote

After you do that, I'll explain the hypocrisy of your "life is life - unless it's an unborn baby" viewpoint to you.

Unless you could quote me saying "life is life - unless it's an unborn baby" I would ask you to stop pretending you're arguing with me, while in fact you're arguing with yourself.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[mnealtx 0]

Your argument is equally valid in reverse for the 'pro-abortion, anti-capital punishment' scenario.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Butters 0]

Quote

Quote

So pro-choice is only in regards to the subject (abortion) but pro-life isn't?

Of course! 'Pro-choice' is explicitly referred to abortion only. But if you call yourself 'pro-life' under the "protect the sacred human life" slogan, you're already getting out of scope of just abortion, and must address other issues which affect the "sacred human life", such as death penalty. And if your 'pro-life' position only addresses abortion, this means you're really just anti-choice, and only call yourself 'pro-life' for marketing purposes.

I'm pro-choice. People have the choice to have sex. People have the choice to commit crimes. Both choices have consequences ... (if you read my previous posts in other threads you'll realize I don't support abortion but I do tolerate it before the fetus becomes viable).

Quote

Quote

PS: You still haven't answered my question, what is the difference between a viable fetus and a comatose person on life support?

What exactly has a comatose person on life support with pro-choice, anti-choice or pro-life, assuming you're not talking about euthanasia?

It has to do with the definition of a legal person.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Your argument is equally valid in reverse for the 'pro-abortion, anti-capital punishment' scenario.

Pro-choice means that a woman has the right to choose whether to abort or not.

Anti-choice means that a woman has no such right to decide, and has to keep the fetus because you have made choice for her (hence "anti-choice").

Pro-abortion is something you just invented, which, I guess, means that a woman has no such right to decide, and has to abort because again you have made choice for her. Which, in fact, is also "anti-choice" as well.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[mnealtx 0]

I call it what it is. Pro-abortion. The injured party doesn't get a 'choice'.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

I'm pro-choice. People have the choice to have sex. People have the choice to commit crimes. Both choices have consequences ...

But if the consequences are correctable, do you recognize the person's choice to fix them? For example, if a person made a bad choice to have sex and got an STD as a result, do you recognize their choice to get medical help to counter the consequences, or you will just say "that's the consequence; you knew it could have happened, now live with it"? Do you believe that most people who got AIDS just "got what they deserved" and should now just accept the consequences?

Quote

It has to do with the definition of a legal person.

What is "legal person"? Someone who's in the country legally and could prove it? Someone who can execute specific legal rights (then which? drive? buy alcohol?) I don't get it.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[Butters 0]

Quote

What is "legal person"? Someone who's in the country legally and could prove it? Someone who can execute specific legal rights (then which? drive? buy alcohol?) I don't get it.

The fact that you don't get it implies that you don't get the issue surrounding abortion ... what is a legal person.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

That's fine, he responsible for anything - up to that point in time. But not the consequences, since it's all owned now in the woman's body.

You can't take away his responsibility and only leave culpability. There has to be a mutual choice in it's place to justly assign culpability.

Uh, no ... men are autonomous. Women are too.

So how do you "justly assign culpability" with out denying autonomy to a woman? Because your previous hypothesis was unjust -- either men have to be treated as non-autonomous or you deny women basic autonomy in your scenario.

The notional argument you were making (to which I replied) effectively removes autonomy from the man. I really don't think your point is men should not be considered autonomous beings?

Quote

Treating the man like a landmine is the underlying position of the pro-choice and feminist (extreme) version efforts.

I'm not sure how you got it, since I was arguing from Kant w/r/t land mine analogy, as something non-autonomous. As I explicitly stated *that's not case* for real-life men - you are autonomous (& that's a very good thing, imo.)

Treating woman like non-autonomous beings is the underlying position of the Taliban and extreme versions of some other religious fundamentalisms.

Quote

So this is exactly the point I'm making. If the 'father's' position is value zero, then all aspects of his participation in the entire structure is then, also zero.

One of the problems with that argument is that it's not valid. You keep ignoring his choices. The man's position is not value zero. There is no "point" - it's rounded where it suits the argument. As an autonomous being each has choices, rights, and responsibilities. His choices, rights, and responsibilities do not obviate a woman's autonomy.

Or as I more concisely wrote earlier:

No, it [your notional argument] doesn't make sense.

A man has choices to use contraception or not (temporary or permament).

I look forward to you advocating as strongly for responsibility for those decisions.

You've also aggregated what are "benefits" (altho' that's a poor word option, imo; it is the one that is commonly used) for a child with issues of autonomy of personhood for the woman. The first two in your list are the latter [Abort or not, Use contraception or not], and the bottom three are the former [Raise the child, Pay for college, Pay for the medical bills.]

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

I call it what it is. Pro-abortion. The injured party doesn't get a 'choice'.

This is funny. You probably got employed on a specific position several times during your life. This means some people who could be employed there, left unemployed. So, I believe, you're now pro-unemployment - because the other party didn't get a choice.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

The fact that you don't get it implies that you don't get the issue surrounding abortion ... what is a legal person.

The fact you can't explain it implies that the "issue surrounding abortion" might not necessary be there, or even be anything but your own creation.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

I call it what it is. Pro-abortion. The injured party doesn't get a 'choice'.

This is funny. You probably got employed on a specific position several times during your life. This means some people who could be employed there, left unemployed. So, I believe, you're now pro-unemployment - because the other party didn't get a choice.

The employer had the choice to offer me the job, I had the choice to take it, so your argument is false on it's face.

Now that we have that out of the way, care to explain what 'choice' the baby has in regards to abortion?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Butters 0]

Quote

Quote

The fact that you don't get it implies that you don't get the issue surrounding abortion ... what is a legal person.

The fact you can't explain it implies that the "issue surrounding abortion" might not necessary be there, or even be anything but your own creation.

Are you laughing because I want to know if I'm laughing at you or with you ... The issue surrounding abortion is based on the definition of a legal person because legal people are entitled to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

The employer had the choice to offer me the job, I had the choice to take it, so your argument is false on it's face.

But another person who wanted to take the same job did not get a choice, which makes your choice pro-unemployment!

Quote

Now that we have that out of the way, care to explain what 'choice' the baby has in regards to abortion?

Your position is based on two assumptions: a) the fetus could make a knowledgeable choice and b) the fetus choice is always against abortion. However there is no evidence at all that a fetus could really make a choice, and if it could, what kind of choice it would make. Therefore your argument about "baby" having a choice is dramatically flawed.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

The issue surrounding abortion is based on the definition of a legal person because legal people are entitled to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

My opinion may be biased, but mostly I see the "issue surrounding abortion" as a bunch of heavy hypocrites (mostly driven by Christianity), with the only goal to deny adults of their rights while pretending to fight for higher grounds like "protecting sacred human life". Which, again, doesn't bother some of them when discussing other things like death penalty - "sacred human life" is not sacred anymore.

Next time you see another anti-choice person, ask him how many kids has he adopted, or how long has he been a foster parent. You may be luckier than me (I've seen only three so far who really did something to support their anti-abortion position), but still prepare for a lot of excuses. People who do not want to put their money where their mouth is always could explain why they cannot do it right now themselves, but still why everyone else should do it.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[rehmwa 2]

That's just a circular argument.

The short of it is equality. To the best that anatomy allows anyway.

Men and women must have the same choices in terms of having sex. So that's given. Do it or not. Protect yourself or not.

They should have the same choices for any decision point afterwards then. This is tougher isn't it? It's easy to give the women an out but lay the cost on the man if the woman opts to have the child. Typical of people with a very patriarchical and male dominant viewpoint. (is it spelled 'misogynistic'?)

So - The women is to have the ability to correct her mistake with a very extreme and morally undefinable act.

But the Man doesn't have that option too?

UNFAIR

If one really considers that the woman has the sole choice to bear the child, then one must concede that the man doesn't have that option IN ANY WAY AT ALL.

Therefore, his 'choice' is to also to totally reject his responsibilities in the matter as well. A different, but equivalent, type of 'abortion' - also morally difficult to define and equally reprehensible. But, really, why should he also be 'punished' with a mistake?

The man can't choose for the woman to have the baby. So the woman should not be able to choose for the man to 'have' that baby as well. Equal - at all times.

The current proposed policies are hypocritical. The woman chooses, but the man doesn't. And people don't even realize how 'male dominated' that attitude is.....

You do believe in equality? Don't you?

It's easier to assume the landmine=men thing. And more fun. I think it's more accurate in many cases too.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

The employer had the choice to offer me the job, I had the choice to take it, so your argument is false on it's face.

But another person who wanted to take the same job did not get a choice, which makes your choice pro-unemployment!

Wrong, again.

Here, I'll put it back in abortion terms in the hope that you'll understand.

In real life, I (the fetus) don't have the option of accepting the job (birth) or not (abortion). I don't get to say "hey, I really NEED that job, you've gotta give it to me" - and neither does the fetus. That decision - whether I work (get born) or not (get aborted) is solely in the hands of the employer (mother).

So, yeah... your argument was hosed from the beginning.

Hopefully that clears it up for you....but I doubt it will.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

a bunch of heavy hypocrites (mostly driven by Christianity), with the only goal to deny adults of their rights while pretending to fight for higher grounds like "protecting sacred human life".

And the reverse of that is a bunch of heavy hypocrites (mostly driven by liberalism) with the only goal to deny unborn infants of their right to life, while pretending to fight for higher grounds like 'protecting sacred human life" (on death row).

Funny how well the argument fits in reverse, isn't it?

Quote

Which, again, doesn't bother some of them when discussing other things like death penalty - "sacred human life" is not sacred anymore.

See above for the reversal and how well it fits.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Here, I'll put it back in abortion terms in the hope that you'll understand.

In real life, I (the fetus) don't have the option of accepting the job (birth) or not (abortion). I don't get to say "hey, I really NEED that job, you've gotta give it to me" - and neither does the fetus. That decision - whether I work (get born) or not (get aborted) is solely in the hands of the employer (mother).

Ok, so you're saying fetus should be treated as a consensual adult, and therefore we need to know it's opinion before abortion? Then please enlighten us, how exactly are you going to ask the fetus' opinion? Or you just want us to ask you instead?

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Here, I'll put it back in abortion terms in the hope that you'll understand.

In real life, I (the fetus) don't have the option of accepting the job (birth) or not (abortion). I don't get to say "hey, I really NEED that job, you've gotta give it to me" - and neither does the fetus. That decision - whether I work (get born) or not (get aborted) is solely in the hands of the employer (mother).

Ok, so you're saying fetus should be treated as a consensual adult, and therefore we need to know it's opinion before abortion? Then please enlighten us, how exactly are you going to ask the fetus' opinion? Or you just want us to ask you instead?

Hey, YOU'RE the one that made the abortion=job offer argument - don't blame ME when I show you where it breaks down.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

And the reverse of that is a bunch of heavy hypocrites (mostly driven by liberalism) with the only goal to deny unborn infants of their right to life

Hey, dude, you're arguing with yourself again. That was you who started with 'pro abortion', and you're now fighting your own theory. I told you that 'pro choice' means letting people to make a choice - it is not forcing everyone to make an abortion as you naively suggest. You missed the point completely.

Quote

while pretending to fight for higher grounds like 'protecting sacred human life" (on death row).

Vast majority of people I know who are against death penalty do NOT base it on sacredness of human life. Usually it's based on past justice errors, and impossibility to correct such error after death penalty. You missed the point again.

Quote

Funny how well the argument fits in reverse, isn't it?

Well... they do not.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Hey, YOU'RE the one that made the abortion=job offer argument - don't blame ME when I show you where it breaks down.

Well, that's you who claimed that "fetus don't have the option of accepting the job (birth) or not (abortion)". That's why I asked you how you suggest we could ask fetus' about it. Seems like you have no answer.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *