Have I no right?

[Tunizcha]

Thank you grammar ranger for pointing out my mistake, clearly I'm the one who should have been aborted for my clear misuse of the English language.

Grammar ranger? That's a hell of a step up from grammar nazi.

I rather like grammar sniper. Or grammar assassin.

[Araraukar]

This thread is about a human being that you all should be showing more respect to then you are.

Oh, you mean the long-since-gone OP, who cooked up a good lie about being rape-child just to stir up some emotional responses? Even Hidden isn't buying that anymore, so I guess that leaves just you. Hmm... pawn of the OP, or the OP was your pawn, maybe?

[Ashmoria]

It could not be "legal" and "murder" at the same time.
If wishes were horses, would you go afoot?

Are you deliberately making this difficult or did you really not understand?

If the law defined a fetus as a person, abortion would be murder. You can argue that wouldn't be true, make some sort of legal argument about how the legislature might, for policy reasons, create an exception here. But let's just assume that the big boogeyman facing us is that if we go and call the fetus a person, we'd run into sticky legal problems (like abortion being murder) that would require messy exceptions etc. It is legally and legislatively easier to say a fetus is not a person. Can we agree on that?

Okay. So let's say the law defines a fetus as a person. Abortion is murder. Would you support abortion?

I ask for two reasons:

1) If you say you would support abortion, then it seems clear that your argument in support of abortion is moral, and not purely legal. I would then have some idea of what thread to follow in discussing that moral argument.

2) If you say you wouldn't support abortion, then it would seem that your argument for abortion is based on its current legality. This would also allow me to follow THAT thread.

All of this assumes that the person I'm asking (don't want to get too personal!) supports abortion right now.

I hope that clarified things. If not, please feel free to ask me questions.

for abortion to be murder it would not have to be just illegal. it would require legal personhood on the part of the embryo on up.

that would be a legal, societal disaster.

[Hiddenrun]

What rule have I broken Katganistan? Why do you always side with them? I am expressing my opinion just like them.

Because it's a well-known fact that mods aren't allowed to have opinions and participate in debates.

They shouldn't be moderating in a thread they are actively participating in though.

IMO.

[Takaram]

Thank you grammar ranger for pointing out my mistake, clearly I'm the one who should have been aborted for my clear misuse of the English language.

Grammar ranger? That's a hell of a step up from grammar nazi.

I rather like grammar sniper. Or grammar assassin.

Grammar green beret

[Grave_n_idle]

Are you deliberately making this difficult or did you really not understand?

Good opening gambit.

If the law defined a fetus as a person, abortion would be murder.

Only if it was illegal.

[Kormanthor]

Abortion is only part of what we are discussing. I am siding with QM's right to exist even if his mother had decided otherwise.

[Katganistan]

I don't feel like reading through 18 pages of posts, so, to answer the question "Have I no right?":

You do now. Now that you can actually live independently of your mother you do. Before then, you are not much more than a parasite on her body; what to do with you is as much her descision as whether or not to remove a tumour.

These are Children, not parasites or tumors

Making these statements without support, despite their having been discussed before in this thread, is the equivalent of standing in the room with fingers in ears yelling la la la not listening.

[Araraukar]

I don't know, what did Quotation Marks do to you all to deserve the way you have treated him here?

He posted on NSG. 'nuff said.

[Hiddenrun]

for abortion to be murder it would not have to be just illegal. it would require legal personhood on the part of the embryo on up.

that would be a legal, societal disaster.

What am I, in crazy town?

Did I not just state that this would require the fetus to be legally a person?

[New Kereptica]

What rule have I broken Katganistan? Why do you always side with them? I am expressing my opinion just like them.

Because it's a well-known fact that mods aren't allowed to have opinions and participate in debates.

They shouldn't be moderating in a thread they are actively participating in though.

IMO.

I agree. But Kat hasn't yet (In this thread, I believe. She may have earlier, however.), so the point is rather moot.

[Takaram]

Abortion is only part of what we are discussing. I am siding with QM's right to exist even if his mother had decided otherwise.

...and had gone with abortion?

[Tunizcha]

Thank you grammar ranger for pointing out my mistake, clearly I'm the one who should have been aborted for my clear misuse of the English language.

Grammar ranger? That's a hell of a step up from grammar nazi.

I rather like grammar sniper. Or grammar assassin.

Grammar green beret

Grammar KGB.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Making these statements without support, despite their having been discussed before in this thread, is the equivalent of standing in the room with fingers in ears yelling la la la not listening.

Yeah, but isn't that essentially what fundamentalist religion always boils down to?

[Muravyets]

Abortion is only part of what we are discussing. I am siding with QM's right to exist even if his mother had decided otherwise.

Except that an embryo/early stage fetus that is not viable has no such right. The woman is not its slave. She is not her own biology's slave, either. She maintains the right to control how her body gets used and by whom/what.

[Ashmoria]

Abortion is only part of what we are discussing. I am siding with QM's right to exist even if his mother had decided otherwise.

its a silly point. he had no right to exist when he was of a developmental stage for legal abortion. NOW he has a right to exist and no one can legally use their time machine to go back in time and force his mother into aborting.

[Hiddenrun]

Are you deliberately making this difficult or did you really not understand?

Good opening gambit.

If the law defined a fetus as a person, abortion would be murder.

Only if it was illegal.

Ho
Ly

Fuck.

Please. Someone who is not being deliberately obtuse, read what I wrote, and see if it makes sense when you are not going out of your way to pretend you don't understand it.

Or at least read past what GNI has quoted so you see where I work that part out.

[New Kereptica]

Abortion is only part of what we are discussing. I am siding with QM's right to exist even if his mother had decided otherwise.

That is a core issue in abortion. Perhaps the core issue. Abortion is almost exclusively what we are discussing.

[Grave_n_idle]

What rule have I broken Katganistan? Why do you always side with them?

Pointing out that your post was an appeal to emotion is not a moderation action.

Regardless when a mod makes a post it makes a person wonder just because they are a mod.

If it's got comments at the bottom in red, it's 'just because they are a mod'.

If they're pointing out a logical fallacy, that doesn't require special mod powers.

[The Rifle Brigade]

Regardless when a mod makes a post it makes a person wonder just because they are a mod.

That person would be you. The rest of us can figure out that mods are also humans with distinct abilities to form and voice opinions.

Unless, of course, having power means you shouldn't voice an opinion. Guess God needs to calm down a little.

[Ashmoria]

for abortion to be murder it would not have to be just illegal. it would require legal personhood on the part of the embryo on up.

that would be a legal, societal disaster.

What am I, in crazy town?

Did I not just state that this would require the fetus to be legally a person?

pay attention.

the POINT is that it would be a legal, societal disaster.

the rest was to make sure we are on the same page.

[Araraukar]

Unlike you all trying to use the mothers supposed right to commit murder

There you go again. It's like you hadn't read the previous answers.
1. It's not murder. You can only murder a viable person. Viable in this case meaning something no longer biologically parasitical.
2. The woman is not a mother until she's given birth to a baby. If the parasite is removed before becoming viable, she's not a mother. At most 'gravid female', but one that wishes to end said gravidity.

[Kormanthor]

What rule have I broken Katganistan? Why do you always side with them? I am expressing my opinion just like them.

Because it's a well-known fact that mods aren't allowed to have opinions and participate in debates.

They shouldn't be moderating in a thread they are actively participating in though.

IMO.

No he has a right to his own opinion, just like everyone else. I just wanted to know what I had done to warrant his arrival ... if anything.

[Kalnisov]

Thank you grammar ranger for pointing out my mistake, clearly I'm the one who should have been aborted for my clear misuse of the English language.

Grammar ranger? That's a hell of a step up from grammar nazi.

I rather like grammar sniper. Or grammar assassin.

Grammar green beret

Grammar KGB.

All of these make up the Grammar Force Elite....Oooooo, I like that.

[The Rifle Brigade]

You're too kind.


Thus, I'll refrain from getting in my Tartus and aborting you.