Florida’s house introduces abortion bill similar to Texas.
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (28)
sorted by:
The Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade defined viability as the ability to survive outside the womb, not the ability to survive outside the womb with no other human assistance. Obviously we're social creatures. We need each other to survive. But we hold the right to privacy and bodily autonomy as sacrosanct. Every bit as important as the right to life. It's why we feel ok using deadly force against invaders trying to take our land or trying to enslave us. It doesn't matter if they want to kill us or not, because freedom is worth dying, and killing for.
Again you're ignoring realities about killing here in order to bolster a weak point. You know that not every killing is a murder. When a soldier kills another soldier in battle, it's not murder. When a father kills an intruder in his home, it's not murder. We define what types of killings constitute murder. Now, you clearly think that the moment a sperm enters an egg that nobody else's rights matter anymore, and frankly I agree with you in principle, but when I think about what this country would be like if we adopted that precedent, that the right to life immediately subordinates all other rights well...just think about that for a minute and tell me you'd be ok with that. Because I don't think you would either.
It was completely legal to kill Jews in Nazi Germany.
Completely legal.
Right?
Certainly. Like John McCain.
Worse than the industry of selling baby parts?
Name "all other rights" subordinated. I'm certain you have a long list, because it sure sounds like it.
But I'll be surprised if you name one.
I think so. I mean...I don't think the general citizenry were encouraged to kill them, but report them, so they could be arrested and deported--I was under the impression that Germans by and large had not idea the Jews were actually being murdered, do you know otherwise? Either way though I'm not sure I get your point.
Exactly.
That's quite the strawman. I never said I was in favor of selling baby parts.
I'm not sure what you're driving at here. Could you maybe rephrase your request?
It's no strawman at all. Women have abortions at planned parenthood, where they harvest baby parts for sale.
There is no abortion-on-demand of whatever demographic baby ages you think is appropriate to kill that won't get sold as body parts.
To say you don't want to live in a world where women can't have abortions prior to a certain age is exactly equivalent to saying you are ok living in a world where the bodies of those babies are harvested and sold.
You said this:
I'm asking what you meant by that.
I can imagine what you meant by that, as follows:
etc.
But I don't know that that's what you meant, so I asked you specifically what rights you think are being subordinated by a woman being denied having an abortion.
It's a strawman in this discussion. I'm aware what Planned Parenthood has done, and they should be prosecuted for it, as should anyone else who does it. Insisting on this point makes me question if this is actually a good faith discussion. It's certainly not encouraging.
See now that makes me think you aren't even reading my replies. I've been pretty clear on what rights are in conflict on this issue. The question, as it was raised in Roe v. Wade, is at what point society is obligated to step in and override a woman's right to medical privacy and autonomy. If you think the right time for that is conception, I don't think you've thought it through very well. I think if you do you'll see what a dangerous precedent that would set, not just for the abortion issue, but for other issues as well--namely: vaccines.
Again, I see that you think a baby's right to be protected and cared for should begin at conception, but I don't. At least not as far as society and laws are concerned. I don't know how much more clear I can make it that I think Roe v. Wade represents a good compromise on the matter. As I've said several times already: I don't want to live in a world where viable babies are killed simply because they haven't exited the birth canal yet, but I also don't want to live in a world where we make what's happening in women's bodies our constant business the moment they become sexually active. I think there needs to be a window there where they maintain their privacy and autonomy and I think Roe v. Wade provides a good window.