News Roe v. Wade overturned

[Zorba]

I’ll give you a little tip: if you aren’t an authoritarian then you don’t want government legislating morals and ethics for individuals, which is what you are arguing for. You want your beliefs forced upon others but you don’t give them the same respect and allow them to force their beliefs on you. So why should anyone respect your position?

Any moral or ethical choice is a private one and not one that should be regulated by government or by strangers. So why do you think you or anyone else is privy to making such decisions for anyone but yourself?

Btw, we should note that you have yet to provide any data to support your premise so you are either arguing in bad faith or your whole argument rests purely on your feels.

Government regulates morals and ethics all the time. Your premise is shit unless you want anarchy

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Why doesnt a womans right to bodily autonomy trump any consideration of a fetus uptil birth?

Because the fetus is a human being also.

 

[dank69]

Because the fetus is a human being also.

Why aren't you forced to donate blood to save human beings?

 

[Saylick]

Why aren't you forced to donate blood to save human beings?

Why can't people be forced to be organ donors because someone else's life is at risk? They need a new kidney, you have two. Why can't you just, you know, give it up? It's no big deal, right?

/s

 

[nOOky]

Everyone that refuses to donate blood or organs should be jailed immediately!

 

[Moonbeam]

Because the fetus is a human being also.

This is close. If you go deeper you may see that it the real issue is that you not only want to be a good person but you are deeply committed to being one too and your understanding of abortion, your position on it can't be other than it is because your understanding of what the good is has been conditioned by a need to look at the world as black and white, that moral complexity must never be considered because it will threaten your fear of uncertainty. You might make a mistake and turn out to be actually evil.

For example, suppose a human life is worthless. Don't like that? How about masturbation is killing millions, maybe billions of unborn children? Would that more apply to you? If you want to be moral and morally wrong at the same time it is very important never to think. Never look at the implications that for your moral beliefs that are personal to you, you are more than happy to tell others what their moral values should be, that a woman, in order not to commit a crime in your mind and about which you maintain a powerful will never to examine, winds up meaning she should be forced to carry a fetus, maybe one born of rape.

The problem as I see it is that because everyone who has any moral sense at all knows that human life is, lets just use the word 'sacred', this becomes a moral absolute. But there are other moral absolutes and one of them is that you have no right to impose your moral absolutes on other people or you will have them apply theirs to you. Let he or she who is without sin cast the first stone.

When two absolute moral positions conflict it is up to liberals with their greater logic and greater ability not to need to protect their moral beliefs from clouding judgment to find rational compromise. It is the duty of a secular state to determine when abortion should be legal and when it should not, and that requires people who will not judge the situation based on religiously held beliefs. What conservatives have done to protect themselves from the fear of sin is throw secular society under the bus.

Repressed conservative fear always leads to the witch hunt and the Spanish inquisition, politicians cheating to stay in power because of the certainty that God is on their side.

It is not enough to want to be good. You also have not to know what the good really is because only blind bigots and dangerous fanatics think they do. Abortion does not threaten the good. It is a demonstration the competing goods require intelligent compromise.

 

[cytg111]

Because the fetus is a human being also.

I think stand your ground laws apply here, bitch be trespassing, put the fucker down.

 

[eelw]

Everyone that refuses to donate blood or organs should be jailed immediately!

But how many of these prolifers won’t accept blood from a non white Christian?

 

[Zorba]

I don't think it would be unreasonable to cut off elective abortions at 16 weeks provided access was low cost and convenient. Along with making contraceptives (including Plan B) extremely cheap or even free. Therapeutic abortions should be not limited by law and are a matter of health the state shouldn't be sticking its nose in.

Conservatives simply want an end to all of it (abortion, contraceptives, pre-marital sex) with force of law so it's not like this is a position that can be achieved anyway.

I think viability makes the most clear cut decision point. Anything before or after gets more into morality and when life "starts." Viability fits the argument that you can be forced to let someone else use your liver or kidneys. At viability, the baby can be delivered and live. Before that, it's basically a parasite.

 

[Zorba]

Well you guys keep hoping those changes will come while being tenuous against the removal of rights that’s happening right now. I’m sure it’ll work out for you.

What removal of rights? Roe never guaranteed abortion up to the moment of birth. I'm extremely pro life, but I don't think you should kill a 100% viable baby at 39 weeks. I don't give a shit how rare it is.

I do support abortions for medical reasons as decided by the mother and doctor without interference. But if you are into the third trimester and decide you don't want the baby any more, induce labor and put the kid up for adoption.

You being an extremist on it will just help drive people to the other side. That is why Republicans talk about late term abortions all the time. It drives a wedge between pro choicers.

 

[Zorba]

Been said before, but overturning Roe doesn't limit abortions. It limits safe abortions.

Is isn't true, and shouldn't be spread. It limits all abortions, while massively increasing unsafe ones.

 

[ivwshane]

Government regulates morals and ethics all the time. Your premise is shit unless you want anarchy

Not really. Not at the federal level.

 

[ivwshane]

What removal of rights? Roe never guaranteed abortion up to the moment of birth. I'm extremely pro life, but I don't think you should kill a 100% viable baby at 39 weeks. I don't give a shit how rare it is.

I do support abortions for medical reasons as decided by the mother and doctor without interference. But if you are into the third trimester and decide you don't want the baby any more, induce labor and put the kid up for adoption.

You being an extremist on it will just help drive people to the other side. That is why Republicans talk about late term abortions all the time. It drives a wedge between pro choicers.

I’m the Extremists? You don’t even understand the situation of why someone would have a late term abortion and you don’t even care to find out. You just want to force your morality on others because of your irrational feels.

Republicans talk about late term abortions because people like you allow them to frame it because you don’t bother thinking critically and that’s what they count on.

 

[HomerJS]

Because the fetus is a human being also.

Based on what? An autonomous person?

Based on religion? Whose? The bible says life begins at birth.

 

[cytg111]

Based on what? An autonomous person?

Based on religion? Whose? The bible says life begins at birth.

conservative nutter: Science says it begins at inception
Science: No it doesnt. Also, the bible cant be true.
cvntservative nutter: Ban all the science.

 

[Pens1566]

Is isn't true, and shouldn't be spread. It limits all abortions, while massively increasing unsafe ones.

Semantics. Women will still get them, just not in the medically proper manner they can now. There's a reason the "coat hanger" and "back alley" exist.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Because the fetus is a human being also.

What human being has a right to occupy the body of another person against their will?

What human being has the right to inject another person with hormones and body waste against their will?

Aside from the fact that no, a fetus is not a person, why do you think it should have more rights than actual persons enjoy?

 

[darkswordsman17]

Why can't people be forced to be organ donors because someone else's life is at risk? They need a new kidney, you have two. Why can't you just, you know, give it up? It's no big deal, right?

/s

Hell, why can't right wingers be forced to donate sperm to all these poor couples with infertile males, and then be forced to pay for the kid? After all, as they're so keen to point out, there's so many poor impotent white dudes unable to get a goddamn baby into their wives that they just don't have any options any more for adoption. I don't know, maybe they should start investigating that as "legitimate rape" since they were so keen to claim that legit rapes lead to no baby.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Semantics. Women will still get them, just not in the medically proper manner they can now. There's a reason the "coat hanger" and "back alley" exist.

Since our war on drugs is an unmitigated failure, I assume the US will just be flooded with emergency contraceptives.

 

[zinfamous]

Because the fetus is a human being also.

this is preposterously (and legally) untrue.

 

[Zorba]

Not really. Not at the federal level.

Last I checked, murder, fraud, theft, drugs, etc all have federal laws against them.

 

[Zorba]

I’m the Extremists? You don’t even understand the situation of why someone would have a late term abortion and you don’t even care to find out. You just want to force your morality on others because of your irrational feels.

Republicans talk about late term abortions because people like you allow them to frame it because you don’t bother thinking critically and that’s what they count on.

I know why nearly all late term abortions happen. For medical reasons or genetic defects, and I think that should be legal. You are the one pushing for 40 week, healthy abortions, playing right into the republicans hand. If you don't want a healthy baby at 36 weeks, well get induced and give it up for adoption. A late term abortion and a birth are basically the same, except one kills the fetus and one doesn't.

You have the extremist position because it is way past what even the vast majority of pro-choice people agree with.

 

[Zorba]

Semantics. Women will still get them, just not in the medically proper manner they can now. There's a reason the "coat hanger" and "back alley" exist.

Most women won't still get them. It isn't semantics. Some women will get unsafe ones, most will be forced to carry to term. Just like some women can travel for a safe abortion, but most won't.

 

[ivwshane]

Last I checked, murder, fraud, theft, drugs, etc all have federal laws against them.

Yeah and they don’t exist for moral reasons but rather because they violate others peoples rights. It’s why there are different degrees of crimes, steeling doesn’t become more immoral the more you steal does it? No it doesn’t.

 

[fskimospy]

Yeah and they don’t exist for moral reasons but rather because they violate others peoples rights. It’s why there are different degrees of crimes, steeling doesn’t become more immoral the more you steal does it? No it doesn’t.

How does drug use violate someone else’s rights?