[Abortion Thread] (YET ANOTHER POLL!) Taking measure.

[Telconi]

Unless we grant them such a right.

At which point you place your own bodily autonomy in danger.

I don't see how, perhaps you could explain.

[Telconi]

Unless we grant them such a right.

So why don;'t we count a fetus as person?

Who are you to force a woman whose been through the trauma of rape or incest to carry a child they do not want or might not have the means to care for?

It a fetus is a person should a woman whose had a miscarriage be investigated for murder?

Because people like you are allowed to have a say in government.

A voter.

If it's a suspicious miscarriage.

[Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft]

So why don;'t we count a fetus as person?

Who are you to force a woman whose been through the trauma of rape or incest to carry a child they do not want or might not have the means to care for?

It a fetus is a person should a woman whose had a miscarriage be investigated for murder?

Because people like you are allowed to have a say in government.

A voter.

If it's a suspicious miscarriage.

Legally, we don't count a fetus as a person before viability

Meanwhile in Uganda... "Who are you to force LGBT+ individuals not to have gay sex?" "A voter"

In El Salvador, 17 women are currently serving prison sentences for miscarriages which Salvadoran police thought were abortions

[Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft]

At which point you place your own bodily autonomy in danger.

I don't see how, perhaps you could explain.

A simple question for you, Telconi. Would you rather a woman has a safe, legal abortion in a medical centre, or she has an unsafe, illegal abortion in a back-alley?

Nobody likes abortions, even when safe and legal.

But no one likes women bleeding to death on the bathroom floor from illegal abortions either. What should we do?

[Luna Amore]

Legally, we don't count a fetus as a person before viability

That's not entirely true, if you are talking about the US in general that is.

I don't see how, perhaps you could explain.

A simple question for you, Telconi. Would you rather a woman has a safe, legal abortion in a medical centre, or she has an unsafe, illegal abortion in a back-alley?

Nobody likes abortions, even when safe and legal.

But no one likes women bleeding to death on the bathroom floor from illegal abortions either. What should we do?

If you use another topic, the absurd nature of the question comes out:

"A simple question for you. Would you rather safe, legal capital punishment in a government facility or unsafe, illegal lynching down by the creek."

The simplest answer is neither because it's a false dichotomy. Being against one does not imply support for the other.

[Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft]

Legally, we don't count a fetus as a person before viability

That's not entirely true, if you are talking about the US in general that is.

A simple question for you, Telconi. Would you rather a woman has a safe, legal abortion in a medical centre, or she has an unsafe, illegal abortion in a back-alley?

If you use another topic, the absurd nature of the question comes out:

"A simple question for you. Would you rather safe, legal capital punishment in a government facility or unsafe, illegal lynching down by the creek."

The simplest answer is neither because it's a false dichotomy. Being against one does not imply support for the other.

These two topics are not connected. Criminalisation of abortion will not reduce the number of abortions at all, however abolishing the death penalty will not lead to all murderers being lynched.

[The New California Republic]

Legally, we don't count a fetus as a person before viability

That's not entirely true, if you are talking about the US in general that is.

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 still does not attribute personhood to the fetus, it defines them as a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb. Being human is a step towards personhood, but not quite there.

[Luna Amore]

That's not entirely true, if you are talking about the US in general that is.

If you use another topic, the absurd nature of the question comes out:

"A simple question for you. Would you rather safe, legal capital punishment in a government facility or unsafe, illegal lynching down by the creek."

The simplest answer is neither because it's a false dichotomy. Being against one does not imply support for the other.

These two topics are not connected. Criminalisation of abortion will not reduce the number of abortions at all*, however abolishing the death penalty will not lead to all murderers being lynched.

*Citation needed but ultimately irrelevant. If you are arguing that abortion is murder, the end result is that it should be illegal. The fact that people will continue to illegally do it does not affect whether it was right to strike down the law.

And you missed the point. It's still not an either or.

That's not entirely true, if you are talking about the US in general that is.

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 still does not attribute personhood to the fetus, it defines them as a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb. Being human is a step towards personhood, but not quite there.

It attributes them enough rights to being murdered. We obviously care enough about the unborn to escalate punishments against pregnant women regardless of week count.

[Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft]

These two topics are not connected. Criminalisation of abortion will not reduce the number of abortions at all*, however abolishing the death penalty will not lead to all murderers being lynched.

*Citation needed but ultimately irrelevant. If you are arguing that abortion is murder, the end result is that it should be illegal. The fact that people will continue to illegally do it does not affect whether it was right to strike down the law.

And you missed the point. It's still not an either or.

No. Criminalisation of abortion simply does not work. In Africa, abortion is illegal in most circumstances in most countries, and on average there are 28 abortions per 1000 women per year. In Europe, abortion is legal on request in most countries, and on average there are 27 abortions per 1000 women per year. If you want a more relevant example, would you rather a person legally smokes weed bought from a coffee shop or illegally smokes weed bought from some drug dealer? I'd pick the former - btw I support legalisation of marijuana.

[The New California Republic]

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 still does not attribute personhood to the fetus, it defines them as a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb. Being human is a step towards personhood, but not quite there.

It attributes them enough rights to being murdered.

Fetal homicide laws don't conflict with Roe v Wade though. And the capacity to be murdered doesn't attribute personhood.

We obviously care enough about the unborn to escalate punishments against pregnant women regardless of week count.

Not really, I care more about the women to be honest. At least they are people.

[Luna Amore]

*Citation needed but ultimately irrelevant. If you are arguing that abortion is murder, the end result is that it should be illegal. The fact that people will continue to illegally do it does not affect whether it was right to strike down the law.

And you missed the point. It's still not an either or.

No. Criminalisation of abortion simply does not work. In Africa, abortion is illegal in most circumstances in most countries, and on average there are 28 abortions per 1000 women per year. In Europe, abortion is legal on request in most countries, and on average there are 27 abortions per 1000 women per year. If you want a more relevant example, would you rather a person legally smokes weed bought from a coffee shop or illegally smokes weed bought from some drug dealer? I'd pick the former - btw I support legalisation of marijuana.

You'd need to compare in the same country. Lumping the entirety of Africa together and the entirety of Europe together doesn't really demonstrate anything other than a lot of muddy data and a variables.

Stats before Roe v Wade and after for example. This doesn't touch the actual argument though. If a person thinks it's murder, they are naturally going to want it illegalized.

Smoking weed doesn't have the same gravitas as this discussion, hence the capital punishment example.

[Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft]

No. Criminalisation of abortion simply does not work. In Africa, abortion is illegal in most circumstances in most countries, and on average there are 28 abortions per 1000 women per year. In Europe, abortion is legal on request in most countries, and on average there are 27 abortions per 1000 women per year. If you want a more relevant example, would you rather a person legally smokes weed bought from a coffee shop or illegally smokes weed bought from some drug dealer? I'd pick the former - btw I support legalisation of marijuana.

You'd need to compare in the same country. Lumping the entirety of Africa together and the entirety of Europe together doesn't really demonstrate anything other than a lot of muddy data and a variables.

Stats before Roe v Wade and after for example. This doesn't touch the actual argument though. If a person thinks it's murder, they are naturally going to want it illegalized.

Smoking weed doesn't have the same gravitas as this discussion, hence the capital punishment example.

In my example, I stated that if a woman cannot have a safe, legal abortion, she will have an unsafe, illegal abortion instead. My other example about weed states that if someone who wants to smoke weed cannot do it legally, they will do it illegally.

In your example, you have insinuated that if a murderer is not executed, they will be extrajudicially killed. LMFAO, that is not the case - no one has lynched Anders Breivik.

[Luna Amore]

You'd need to compare in the same country. Lumping the entirety of Africa together and the entirety of Europe together doesn't really demonstrate anything other than a lot of muddy data and a variables.

Stats before Roe v Wade and after for example. This doesn't touch the actual argument though. If a person thinks it's murder, they are naturally going to want it illegalized.

Smoking weed doesn't have the same gravitas as this discussion, hence the capital punishment example.

In my example, I stated that if a woman cannot have a safe, legal abortion, she will have an unsafe, illegal abortion instead. My other example about weed states that if someone who wants to smoke weed cannot do it legally, they will do it illegally.

In your example, you have insinuated that if a murderer is not executed, they will be extrajudicially killed. LMFAO, that is not the case - no one has lynched Anders Breivik.

Alright, let's walk it back. You said:

A simple question for you, Telconi. Would you rather a woman has a safe, legal abortion in a medical centre, or she has an unsafe, illegal abortion in a back-alley?

Which to a pro-life proponent boils down to 'Would you rather safe legal murder or unsafe illegal murder?' The obvious answer is neither. The capital punishment example was a parallel to show how ridiculous the question is in the context of the pro-life viewpoint. I don't care if it's legal or illegal. I don't care if it's safe or unsafe. It's murder either way.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

In my example, I stated that if a woman cannot have a safe, legal abortion, she will have an unsafe, illegal abortion instead. My other example about weed states that if someone who wants to smoke weed cannot do it legally, they will do it illegally.

In your example, you have insinuated that if a murderer is not executed, they will be extrajudicially killed. LMFAO, that is not the case - no one has lynched Anders Breivik.

Alright, let's walk it back. You said:

A simple question for you, Telconi. Would you rather a woman has a safe, legal abortion in a medical centre, or she has an unsafe, illegal abortion in a back-alley?

Which to a pro-life proponent boils down to 'Would you rather safe legal murder or unsafe illegal murder?' The obvious answer is neither. The capital punishment example was a parallel to show how ridiculous the question is in the context of the pro-life viewpoint. I don't care if it's legal or illegal. I don't care if it's safe or unsafe. It's murder either way.

Ok so let's punish it as first degree murder? One abortion one death penalty?

[Estanglia]

Alright, let's walk it back. You said:



Which to a pro-life proponent boils down to 'Would you rather safe legal murder or unsafe illegal murder?' The obvious answer is neither. The capital punishment example was a parallel to show how ridiculous the question is in the context of the pro-life viewpoint. I don't care if it's legal or illegal. I don't care if it's safe or unsafe. It's murder either way.

Ok so let's punish it as first degree murder? One abortion one death penalty?

Who would get punished, the doctor or the woman? or both?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Ok so let's punish it as first degree murder? One abortion one death penalty?

Who would get punished, the doctor or the woman? or both?

Everybody involved. Planning an abortion is now also attempted murder.

[Luna Amore]

Alright, let's walk it back. You said:



Which to a pro-life proponent boils down to 'Would you rather safe legal murder or unsafe illegal murder?' The obvious answer is neither. The capital punishment example was a parallel to show how ridiculous the question is in the context of the pro-life viewpoint. I don't care if it's legal or illegal. I don't care if it's safe or unsafe. It's murder either way.

Ok so let's punish it as first degree murder? One abortion one death penalty?

I'm not for the death penalty, so no. I don't see the point in arguing over length of sentence in this thread though.

[The New California Republic]

Ok so let's punish it as first degree murder? One abortion one death penalty?

I'm not for the death penalty, so no. I don't see the point in arguing over length of sentence in this thread though.

But you'd expect life sentences for women that did abort? And the length of sentence actually is important, to see what kind of punishment you consider that women getting abortions should have...

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Ok so let's punish it as first degree murder? One abortion one death penalty?

I'm not for the death penalty, so no. I don't see the point in arguing over length of sentence in this thread though.

I don't care if it's legal or illegal. I don't care if it's safe or unsafe. It's murder either way.

So why won't you punish murder with malicious forethought to the fullest extent of the law? If it's to be considered first degree murder why all this handwringing and hesitation over pursuing the maximum penalty?
You who are against legal abortion wants it considered murder yet do not want it to be punished like murder. Where the hell do you even stand?

[San Lumen]

So why don;'t we count a fetus as person?

Who are you to force a woman whose been through the trauma of rape or incest to carry a child they do not want or might not have the means to care for?

It a fetus is a person should a woman whose had a miscarriage be investigated for murder?

Because people like you are allowed to have a say in government.

A voter.


If it's a suspicious miscarriage.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? By your logic should you a voter be able to decide if LGBT people can get married or adopt children?

Just because you vote does not give you the right to make medical decisions for others

And why wouldn't any miscarriage be labeled as suspicious if a fetus is a person?

[Dark Socialism]

Deletus fetus

[Triassica]

I'm not for the death penalty, so no. I don't see the point in arguing over length of sentence in this thread though.

I don't care if it's legal or illegal. I don't care if it's safe or unsafe. It's murder either way.

So why won't you punish murder with malicious forethought to the fullest extent of the law? If it's to be considered first degree murder why all this handwringing and hesitation over pursuing the maximum penalty?
You who are against legal abortion wants it considered murder yet do not want it to be punished like murder. Where the hell do you even stand?

They are acting in bad faith. Same arguments that SocCons use about "state rights" which is really just code word for wanting to take away rights from gay and brown people. They know that their policies are extreme against public Opinon. So they do everything to hide and deceive people from their cruel and wicked intentions. Thus, while they declare that abortion is murder, they do everything they can to hide the logical conclusions of their arguments under the rug with dishonesty.

[Freezic Vast]

So why won't you punish murder with malicious forethought to the fullest extent of the law? If it's to be considered first degree murder why all this handwringing and hesitation over pursuing the maximum penalty?
You who are against legal abortion wants it considered murder yet do not want it to be punished like murder. Where the hell do you even stand?

They are acting in bad faith. Same arguments that SocCons use about "state rights" which is really just code word for wanting to take away rights from gay and brown people. They know that their policies are extreme against public Opinon. So they do everything to hide and deceive people from their cruel and wicked intentions. Thus, while they declare that abortion is murder, they do everything they can to hide the logical conclusions of their arguments under the rug with dishonesty.

lol no they don't.

[Luna Amore]

I'm not for the death penalty, so no. I don't see the point in arguing over length of sentence in this thread though.

I don't care if it's legal or illegal. I don't care if it's safe or unsafe. It's murder either way.

So why won't you punish murder with malicious forethought to the fullest extent of the law? If it's to be considered first degree murder why all this handwringing and hesitation over pursuing the maximum penalty?
You who are against legal abortion wants it considered murder yet do not want it to be punished like murder. Where the hell do you even stand?

I have no idea what you are going on about here or why you seem so aggravated by my stance. Punishments are not cut and dry the same. There are mitigating factors in each case. It'd be like any other crime.

I'm confused how being against the death penalty qualifies as hesitation and hand-wringing.

And why wouldn't any miscarriage be labeled as suspicious if a fetus is a person?

The same way every death isn't defacto murder. Miscarriage is an unfortunate and natural aspect of pregnancy. If I don't wake up tomorrow, the police aren't going to automatically arrest my wife for murder.

They are acting in bad faith. Same arguments that SocCons use about "state rights" which is really just code word for wanting to take away rights from gay and brown people. They know that their policies are extreme against public Opinon. So they do everything to hide and deceive people from their cruel and wicked intentions. Thus, while they declare that abortion is murder, they do everything they can to hide the logical conclusions of their arguments under the rug with dishonesty.

It's telling that you assume those who don't believe as you do are acting in some malevolent, mustache-twirling manner.

Also, all demographics have pro-life proponents in them. Important fact to remember that one come election time. When you are painting everyone with the 'evil conservative' brush (including an independent who has voted top ticket Democrat since he could vote), you are alienating voters. It doesn't work out well. Assuming you are the righteous one and everyone who disagrees is stupid or cartoonishly evil is how you end up with the Democratic 2016 loss.

[Godular]

So why won't you punish murder with malicious forethought to the fullest extent of the law? If it's to be considered first degree murder why all this handwringing and hesitation over pursuing the maximum penalty?
You who are against legal abortion wants it considered murder yet do not want it to be punished like murder. Where the hell do you even stand?

I have no idea what you are going on about here or why you seem so aggravated by my stance. Punishments are not cut and dry the same. There are mitigating factors in each case. It'd be like any other crime.

I'm confused how being against the death penalty qualifies as hesitation and hand-wringing.

And why wouldn't any miscarriage be labeled as suspicious if a fetus is a person?

The same way every death isn't defacto murder. Miscarriage is an unfortunate and natural aspect of pregnancy. If I don't wake up tomorrow, the police aren't going to automatically arrest my wife for murder.

You would be surprised.

Also dead, but you would be surprised how preconceptions can drive even law enforcement officials to cherry pick and target people who have been little more than victims of circumstance.

(The Staircase is a remarkably engaging show, btw)