Americans Becoming More Pro-Life

[Hallistar]

Calling the kettle black is a saying which means that you are a hypocrite.

1. Exactly, the feelings should have no relation.
2. Morals according to whom? A denominational interpretation of the Bible? So what if they don't blindly follow it?

Above 1 and 2: Thanks for clearing things up.

1. Correct. something that is immediately agreed.
2. IMO, morals can have two definitions.
A: doing what is moral = Doing what is most Universally (as well as beyond) beneficial (Universal morals).
B: Human morals, Giving all human beings as much rights and freedoms as possible without having ones that contradict each other.

There is the possibility that a "Denominational interpretation of the bible" is in line with both definitions. Assuming what they interpret is correct and factual.

Theres the human beings that are already existing and are sentient and metacognitive, and then we have fetuses. Since the fetus loses nothing and knows nothing by not being carried to term, versus a more developed human, and since the woman can lose alot by having to carry a fetus to term, it is most beneficial to give her the choice.

[No Water No Moon]

Can you point to "bodily autonomy" as a right in the U.S. Constitution?

We're not arguing what is, we're arguing what should be.

"Bodily autonomy", as a concern of 'privacy', has been shown to be constitutional by precedent, although not strictly enumerated.

[Trotskylvania]

Fetal jelly isn't a human being either, and the point about transplants is that American law does not believe the 'right to life' trumps bodily autonomy.

Can you point to "bodily autonomy" as a right in the U.S. Constitution?

Don't have to. That's the whole point of enumerated powers and limited government. The state cannot compel you to do anything unless it is related to one of its enumerated powers. Protecting nonpersons is not the job of the state.

[Hallistar]

Except we don't like living in theocracies, tyvm.

Good luck living with yourself.

Because I'm the only one who wouldn't want to live in a theocracy?

[Pootania]

Cancer isn't a human being and removing an organ (which you need to live) is different than killing an unborn human being's life.

Try again.

Fetal jelly isn't a human being either, and the point about transplants is that American law does not believe the 'right to life' trumps bodily autonomy.

What does "fetal jelly" have to do with anything? I said a fetus is a human being who's life should be protected under the law like yours or mine. I also never said or implied that the current law follows my reasoning. I was just explaining the pro-life argument and why abortion should be illegal once more.

[Christian Democrats]

Funnier is that more conservative areas want to ban contraception altogether, as it violates the doctrine of some churches.

Who wants to ban contraception?

[No Water No Moon]

Fetal jelly isn't a human being either, and the point about transplants is that American law does not believe the 'right to life' trumps bodily autonomy.

What does "fetal jelly" have to do with anything? I said a fetus is a human being who's life should be protected under the law like yours or mine.

And you're wrong. Brainless bubbles of tissue have no rights, and should have no rights.

[Trotskylvania]

Funnier is that more conservative areas want to ban contraception altogether, as it violates the doctrine of some churches.

Who wants to ban contraception?

A large portion of the pro-life movement. Many of them consider birth control, particularly emergency contraception, to be no different than abortion. They also whine about how it encourages people to have sex before marriage and should be banned for that reason too.

[Christian Democrats]

I do not accept your misogynistic and medievalistic conceit

Fallacy: argumentum ad hominem

[Hallistar]

Funnier is that more conservative areas want to ban contraception altogether, as it violates the doctrine of some churches.

Who wants to ban contraception?

[Pootania]

Can you point to "bodily autonomy" as a right in the U.S. Constitution?

I don't need to. Seriously, go to your nearest hospital, ask any of the doctors if they could legally hook someone up with a transplant against the will of the donor. Even blood.

How is harvesting someone's organs against their will remotely related to terminating the life of another human being?

[AiliailiA]

You don't get to attach obligations to a woman just because she's willing to have sex with you.

And I really wish they'd all stop trying. It has an obvious chilling effect on women's willingness to have sex. Or indeed to get into emotional relationships with men.

Decent men like you or I suffer from the moralism. We have to take more time, and be tested by women for any tendency we may have to want to OWN or CONTROL the women we have sex with. Women are suspicious of that, and rightly so.

In short, less sex for us. Damn those moral crusaders, why can't they just keep their sword of righteousness in their pants?

[Christian Democrats]

(Image)

Who wants to ban contraception?

A large portion of the pro-life movement. Many of them consider birth control, particularly emergency contraception, to be no different than abortion. They also whine about how it encourages people to have sex before marriage and should be banned for that reason too.

Do you have any facts to back up this claim?

[Pootania]

Also I like how the libs had to change the topic to contraception because they're obviously losing the abortion debate.

[AiliailiA]

I do not accept your misogynistic and medievalistic conceit

Fallacy: argumentum ad hominem

No. A "conceit" is a "belief" ... admittedly desparagingly.

You are not being attacked. Your misogynistic and medievalist belief is.

[Hallistar]

I don't need to. Seriously, go to your nearest hospital, ask any of the doctors if they could legally hook someone up with a transplant against the will of the donor. Even blood.

How is harvesting someone's organs against their will remotely related to terminating the life of another human being?

Because the other human being is not sentient and is just 'there', more or less. Forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term against her will is similar to violating another's will in regards to a transplant.

[Hallistar]

Also I like how the libs had to change the topic to contraception because they're obviously losing the abortion debate.

It was Christian Democrats who kept bringing it up, but of course lets all wallow in ignorance.

[Christian Democrats]

Fallacy: argumentum ad hominem

No. A "conceit" is a "belief" ... admittedly desparagingly.

You are not being attacked. Your misogynistic and medievalist belief is.

When logic fails, people resort to labeling the positions of their opponents as backwards. They stop making actual arguments.

[Pootania]

What does "fetal jelly" have to do with anything? I said a fetus is a human being who's life should be protected under the law like yours or mine.

And you're wrong. Brainless bubbles of tissue have no rights, and should have no rights.

So if I you and I were involved in a car accident and you become mentally incapacitated, I should be able to shoot you dead right there on the spot? After all, no brain = no rights.

[AiliailiA]

Also I like how the libs had to change the topic to contraception because they're obviously losing the abortion debate.

That we me. I have a name.

I am Aliailia.

If you want to argue with me, reply with Quote to one of my posts. Or at least put my name in whatever you write.

[Hallistar]

And you're wrong. Brainless bubbles of tissue have no rights, and should have no rights.

So if I you and I were involved in a car accident and you become mentally incapacitated, I should be able to shoot you dead right there on the spot? After all, no brain = no rights.

Except No Water No Moon used to be sentient and metacognitive, and had hopes and desires and would stand to lose if they were killed, versus a fetus that never was sentient or had anything to lose in the first place.

[Trotskylvania]

I do not accept your misogynistic and medievalistic conceit

Fallacy: argumentum ad hominem

No, it is not.

If you're going to be accusing me the philosophy major of making a fallacious argument, you better damn well make sure that you understand what the fallacy is.

Ad hominem is when an argument is made on the person of the opponent, besmirching their character or their intelligence, and then using that as the warrant for dismissing their argument.

I did no such thing. I called your conceit about the relationship between sex and pregnancy consent exactly what it is: medievalist and misogynistic. If a lady decides she wants sleep with you, that in no way means she wants to have your kids. Presuming that it becomes her duty to accept that is patriarchal and reactionary to the core. And I will call it like it is.

[David Williams]

And if the woman does not take any "preventative" measures, why should she be allowed to abort?

Better to abort a fetus that can't think or feel than to bring a child into the world into poverty and hardship, or who will be resented by the mother.

You think I'm "living it up"?
My mother was advised to abort me for health reasons, and she carried on with it anyway.
Now my parents are divorced, One on the invalids benefit the other on Domestic purposes benefit.
It's a tough living, especially because of our anti-socialist government which means i eat shit for food.
But I'm moral enough to say that instead of being biased in favor of self interest, i support what is moral. It would have been immoral to kill me, and also immoral to have my parents get more welfare.

[Christian Democrats]

Also I like how the libs had to change the topic to contraception because they're obviously losing the abortion debate.

It was Christian Democrats who kept bringing it up, but of course lets all wallow in ignorance.

I did not bring up the topic. Someone else said that women who abort have taken measures to prevent pregnancy when this is not the case. Less than 20 percent of women who abort were using a form of contraception properly.

[Hallistar]

I do not accept your misogynistic and medievalistic conceit

Fallacy: argumentum ad hominem

Your argument is being attacked, not you. That Fallacy does not apply.