Abortion Denied

[The Tovian Way]

If abortion were reclassified to be included in the legal definition of infanticide, it would therefore be illegal. So yes, it should be illegal.
Outlawing abortion does not infringe upon anyone's right, it prevents the infringement of others upon rights of another.

Why do you hate women?

I am quite fond of women. That's yet another reason I'm trying to make it illegal to kill very young ones.

[Nervium]

Why do you hate women?

I am quite fond of women. That's yet another reason I'm trying to make it illegal to kill very young ones.

Well that's interesting.

[Hurdegaryp]

I am quite fond of women. That's yet another reason I'm trying to make it illegal to kill very young ones.

Well that's interesting.

He's fond of women in their role as baby makers, apparently. Otherwise he does not seem to care too much.

[Caecuser]

Yet another concept of yours that makes no fucking sense.

If a creature inside my body does not have the exact same genetic makeup as me, I cannot remove it?

If the creature is of the species homo sapiens, then no, you cannot.

That is literally an opinion you've sprouted and you can't seriously expect any single person to respect or change their views on pro-choice/pro-life because of that.

Here; if you're against abortions just don't have an abortion yourself. Advise others not to, appeal to them to seek other methods, that's great. Nobody really wants Woman to get abortions; don't force them not to though.

I'm against people smoking - I'm not gonna ban people smoking and slap the cigarettes out of their hands.

[Immoren]

Why do you hate women?

I am quite fond of women. That's yet another reason I'm trying to make it illegal to kill very young ones.

Outlawing abortions wouldn't make abortions go away. It would just drive it to dank cellar and shady back street clinics of questionable quality.

[Kepler-22]

1. I'll ask again:

I kindly ask that you try to refrain from resorting to special pleadings and ad hocs.

4. There's a difference between "mass belief" and "consensus".

If you were to forcibly implant organs into my body, you would be infringing upon my right to bodily sovereignty. Since the organs are not genetically distinct, they possess no right to life, and can be removed.
The unborn child has not forcibly implanted anything into anyone's body; it began its existence there. Further, since it is a genetically distinct human being, it does possess a right to life, and cannot be removed absent its consent or the necessity of self defense, in a way that causes its death.

There is no difference between mass belief and consensus. Consensus is simply an instance of mass belief that encompasses a very large portion of the population.

What grants human beings and fetuses the right to life? Surely I do not have a right to life if I go and kill another being, yet you claimed that it was a human being's absolute right to life so surely my right to life, even after killing people, could not be removed.

That and the possibility of death due to the fetus is always a chance during a pregnancy, so the fetus could be aborted on the chance that the carrier feels the least bit threatened by it, as the carrier would be carrying of the necessity of self defense.

[Neutraligon]

If the creature is of the species homo sapiens, then no, you cannot.

That is literally an opinion you've sprouted and you can't seriously expect any single person to respect or change their views on pro-choice/pro-life because of that.

Here; if you're against abortions just don't have an abortion yourself. Advise others not to, appeal to them to seek other methods, that's great. Nobody really wants Woman to get abortions; don't force them not to though.

I'm against people smoking - I'm not gonna ban people smoking and slap the cigarettes out of their hands.

I might, in certain places (like hospitals).

[The Tovian Way]

If the creature is of the species homo sapiens, then no, you cannot.

That is literally an opinion you've sprouted and you can't seriously expect any single person to respect or change their views on pro-choice/pro-life because of that.

Here; if you're against abortions just don't have an abortion yourself. Advise others not to, appeal to them to seek other methods, that's great. Nobody really wants Woman to get abortions; don't force them not to though.

I'm against people smoking - I'm not gonna ban people smoking and slap the cigarettes out of their hands.

Of course I don't. Fortunately I live in a society where unanimous consent is not required to bring about my beliefs. I can and do bring them about by supporting policies and politicians that will maximally restrict the availability and legality of abortions, until such time as they are fully illegal absent the necessity of self defense.
I'm against murder, and believe this term includes abortion. Since I believe preventing murder is a just and proper role of the State, I seek to extend this prevention to include abortion as well.
No one wants to be murdered. That's what I'm advocating forcing people to refrain from.

[Hurdegaryp]

I am quite fond of women. That's yet another reason I'm trying to make it illegal to kill very young ones.

Outlawing abortions wouldn't make abortions go away. It would just drive it to dank cellar and shady back street clinics of questionable quality.

And surely we are too civilized for that.

[The Tovian Way]

If you were to forcibly implant organs into my body, you would be infringing upon my right to bodily sovereignty. Since the organs are not genetically distinct, they possess no right to life, and can be removed.
The unborn child has not forcibly implanted anything into anyone's body; it began its existence there. Further, since it is a genetically distinct human being, it does possess a right to life, and cannot be removed absent its consent or the necessity of self defense, in a way that causes its death.

There is no difference between mass belief and consensus. Consensus is simply an instance of mass belief that encompasses a very large portion of the population.

What grants human beings and fetuses the right to life? Surely I do not have a right to life if I go and kill another being, yet you claimed that it was a human being's absolute right to life so surely my right to life, even after killing people, could not be removed.

That and the possibility of death due to the fetus is always a chance during a pregnancy, so the fetus could be aborted on the chance that the carrier feels the least bit threatened by it, as the carrier would be carrying of the necessity of self defense.

Yes, you do have a right to life if you kill another being. Your life may only be taken from you in self defense, that is, the person you are attempting to kill may take action to preserve his own life, even if to do so kills you. But if you have killed, and are not presently attempting to kill, you cannot be killed. The argument that precludes abortion precludes the death penalty as well.
The need is not merely the possibility of self defense, but the necessity of it. You might attempt to kill me at any point, yet I am not justified in killing you to preserve my own life until there is no other option.

[Zottistan]

Outlawing abortions wouldn't make abortions go away. It would just drive it to dank cellar and shady back street clinics of questionable quality.

And surely we are too civilized for that.

Nevermind civilized, surely we're too sensible for that.

[The Tovian Way]

I am quite fond of women. That's yet another reason I'm trying to make it illegal to kill very young ones.

Outlawing abortions wouldn't make abortions go away. It would just drive it to dank cellar and shady back street clinics of questionable quality.

And those clinics and patrons should be hunted down and prosecuted to the full extent of the laws against murder.

[Immoren]

Outlawing abortions wouldn't make abortions go away. It would just drive it to dank cellar and shady back street clinics of questionable quality.

And those clinics and patrons should be hunted down and prosecuted to the full extent of the laws against murder.

And you just contradicted yourself.

[Pandeeria]

Outlawing abortions wouldn't make abortions go away. It would just drive it to dank cellar and shady back street clinics of questionable quality.

And those clinics and patrons should be hunted down and prosecuted to the full extent of the laws against murder.

No not really. Instead of hunting them down, you should actually completely remove them by legalizing abortion.

[Hurdegaryp]

Outlawing abortions wouldn't make abortions go away. It would just drive it to dank cellar and shady back street clinics of questionable quality.

And those clinics and patrons should be hunted down and prosecuted to the full extent of the laws against murder.

There are many ways to make sure that baby will never be born or stay alive. Heavy drinking, for one. If you are pregnant against your will, the will to abuse substances will increase. That is the world you desire.

[Sociobiology]

Outlawing abortions wouldn't make abortions go away. It would just drive it to dank cellar and shady back street clinics of questionable quality.

And those clinics and patrons should be hunted down and prosecuted to the full extent of the laws against murder.

not every splash of semen deserves a name.

[Caecuser]

Outlawing abortions wouldn't make abortions go away. It would just drive it to dank cellar and shady back street clinics of questionable quality.

And those clinics and patrons should be hunted down and prosecuted to the full extent of the laws against murder.

Unless of course the democratic process goes against your own views - and abortion is treated legally and as safely as possible in Hospitals and such.

[Kepler-22]

Outlawing abortions wouldn't make abortions go away. It would just drive it to dank cellar and shady back street clinics of questionable quality.

And those clinics and patrons should be hunted down and prosecuted to the full extent of the laws against murder.

If you go and hunt it down then people will just try to do it themselves or there will be people that are good at avoiding the radar and become profitable.

Also, there is this: That and the possibility of death due to the fetus is always a chance during a pregnancy, so the fetus could be aborted on the chance that the carrier feels the least bit threatened by it, as the carrier would be carrying of the necessity of self defense. Couldn't a person just claim self defense and abort the fetus?

, and this: If the fetus does end up harming and begin killing the mother, does that allow the mother to terminate the fetus, despite how in progress the child could be, or even if the child is being delivered and there is a choice between the mother's life and the infant's life?

[Sociobiology]

Should a fetus in fetu be removed?

I am unclear regarding the genetic makeup of a fetus in fetu. If it is composed entirely of the genetic material of one person, it would therefore be a part of the person and could be removed without infringing upon another's rights, provided the person from whom it was removed consented.
If a fetus in fetu is composed of a distinct genetic makeup, then it does have a right to life, and may not be removed without its consent until it has died, absent the necessity of self defense.

no if its in someone else's body against their will, then that person has a right to have it removed.

[Hurdegaryp]

And those clinics and patrons should be hunted down and prosecuted to the full extent of the laws against murder.

not every splash of semen deserves a name.

Unless your brain is warped enough to scream out loud that male masturbation is murder. Somehow I'm surprised that hasn't become the subject of a thread yet.

[Immoren]

What grants human beings and fetuses the right to life? Surely I do not have a right to life if I go and kill another being, yet you claimed that it was a human being's absolute right to life so surely my right to life, even after killing people, could not be removed.

That and the possibility of death due to the fetus is always a chance during a pregnancy, so the fetus could be aborted on the chance that the carrier feels the least bit threatened by it, as the carrier would be carrying of the necessity of self defense.

Yes, you do have a right to life if you kill another being. Your life may only be taken from you in self defense, that is, the person you are attempting to kill may take action to preserve his own life, even if to do so kills you. But if you have killed, and are not presently attempting to kill, you cannot be killed. The argument that precludes abortion precludes the death penalty as well.
The need is not merely the possibility of self defense, but the necessity of it. You might attempt to kill me at any point, yet I am not justified in killing you to preserve my own life until there is no other option.

What makes a FETUS a person, but doesn't make a CHIMP a person?

[Zottistan]

not every splash of semen deserves a name.

Unless your brain is warped enough to scream out loud that male masturbation is murder. Somehow I'm surprised that hasn't become the subject of a thread yet.

Nevermind male masturbation, do you have any idea how many sperm die during sexual intercourse?

[Nervium]

Unless your brain is warped enough to scream out loud that male masturbation is murder. Somehow I'm surprised that hasn't become the subject of a thread yet.

Nevermind male masturbation, do you have any idea how many sperm die during sexual intercourse?

Has anyone brought up the fact that a certain percentage of fertilised eggs are flushed out?
Making women by the abortion is murder definition, serial killers. (well, if you believe in that sort of stuff)

[Enadail]

You keep saying this, but you don't respond to my straight forward question: why does the fetus get to infringe on the woman's right to bodily sovereignty? Specially if, as you claim, all rights are equal. Seems like you're giving preference to one right over the other.

The fetus does not get to infringe upon the woman's right to bodily sovereignty. The fetus has taken no action to so infringe. The fetus began its existence within the woman, it did not choose to enter into her. Given the state of affairs in any pregnancy, a being exists inside another, and therefore no action can be taken by the one to infringe upon the rights of the other.

So wait, if I don't choose to do something, but my lack of choice infringes on someone's rights, that's cool? Awesome. No way that's abusable precedence.

[Liriena]

Yet another concept of yours that makes no fucking sense.

If a creature inside my body does not have the exact same genetic makeup as me, I cannot remove it?

If the creature is of the species homo sapiens, then no, you cannot.

That's extremely arbitrary.