NationStates

Sundiata wrote:

Spirit of Hope wrote:
A fetus has no brain, they are brain dead. Are you arguing that dead people should have more rights than living people?

No, I'm arguing that brain-dead people should have the same rights as people who are not brain-dead.

Sundiata wrote:

Spirit of Hope wrote:
A fetus has no brain, they are brain dead. Are you arguing that dead people should have more rights than living people?

No, I'm arguing that brain-dead people should have the same rights as people who are not brain-dead.

Sundiata wrote:

Spirit of Hope wrote:Doesn't answer why the fetus should be able to highjack a woman's body. You can believe something is morally wrong, that doesn't give you the right to deny other people the ability to do it.

It absolutely does if I'm right.

Spirit of Hope wrote:So how do you define "right?"

Sundiata wrote:

Spirit of Hope wrote:So how do you define "right?"

Very differently from wrong.

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

Sundiata wrote:No, I'm arguing that brain-dead people should have the same rights as people who are not brain-dead.

Have you polled the dead about their political preferences lately? After all the dead should be permitted to vote according to you no?

Sundiata wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Have you polled the dead about their political preferences lately? After all the dead should be permitted to vote according to you no?

If brain death = death then a fetus is probably not in the same category.

Sundiata wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Have you polled the dead about their political preferences lately? After all the dead should be permitted to vote according to you no?

If brain death = death then a fetus is probably not in the same category. We probably shouldn't have equated the two I guess.

Spirit of Hope wrote:

Sundiata wrote:If brain death = death then a fetus is probably not in the same category. We probably shouldn't have equated the two I guess.

Brain dead = dead. A fetus would be classified as brain dead if tested.

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

Sundiata wrote:It absolutely does if I'm right.

consider: Thinking that you are 100% right all the time is the sin of hubris.

Sundiata wrote:

Spirit of Hope wrote:Brain dead = dead. A fetus would be classified as brain dead if tested.

Sure, but it obviously isn't dying in healthy circumstances. It's a human life.

Sundiata wrote:

Spirit of Hope wrote:Brain dead = dead. A fetus would be classified as brain dead if tested.

Sure, but it obviously isn't dying in healthy circumstances. It's a human life.

Refusing to act against a blatant crime and ignoring it because it's easier for you is the sin of pusillanimity, however, and I'm pretty that d'Aquin classified it as being a worse one than "misplaced righteousness", if it can even be called so.

Spirit of Hope wrote:

Arlenton wrote:The things others are trying to force me to do are outside of abortion and outside the scope of this thread, yet are very much by I support the McConnell court strategy.

As for abortion, I do oppose Roe on states' rights grounds. In the case of abortion, something I tend to believe should be legal, this is more of a "how the government(s) should function" issue to me as opposed to whether I think abortion should be legal or not.

The government shouldn't take peoples rights away because it offends some people morality. You are directly arguing that the government should have the right to take peoples rights away because someone finds it objectionable and then turning around and complaining when someone is doing that to you.

Sundiata wrote:It's wrong to abort a pregnancy for being unwanted.

Doesn't answer why the fetus should be able to highjack a woman's body. You can believe something is morally wrong, that doesn't give you the right to deny other people the ability to do it.

Arlenton wrote:

Spirit of Hope wrote:
The government shouldn't take peoples rights away because it offends some people morality. You are directly arguing that the government should have the right to take peoples rights away because someone finds it objectionable and then turning around and complaining when someone is doing that to you.



Doesn't answer why the fetus should be able to highjack a woman's body. You can believe something is morally wrong, that doesn't give you the right to deny other people the ability to do it.

This opinion is simply an opinion. The government has, and uses, the ability to take rights away from people for various reason.

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:Abolish the 2nd amendment because civvies with guns personally offends me lmao

Spirit of Hope wrote:Brain dead = dead. A fetus would be classified as brain dead if tested.

Arlenton wrote:

Spirit of Hope wrote:
The government shouldn't take peoples rights away because it offends some people morality. You are directly arguing that the government should have the right to take peoples rights away because someone finds it objectionable and then turning around and complaining when someone is doing that to you.



Doesn't answer why the fetus should be able to highjack a woman's body. You can believe something is morally wrong, that doesn't give you the right to deny other people the ability to do it.

This opinion is simply an opinion. The government has, and uses, the ability to take rights away from people for various reason.

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:wat even is a crime

Sundiata wrote:

Spirit of Hope wrote:Brain dead = dead. A fetus would be classified as brain dead if tested.

Sure, but it obviously isn't dying in healthy circumstances. It's a human life.

Spirit of Hope wrote:

Sundiata wrote:Sure, but it obviously isn't dying in healthy circumstances. It's a human life.

Its only living by highking a women's body. Much like a brain dead body can be kept alive through major medical intervention.

An act that goes against natural, moral or human laws.

Michel Meilleur wrote:

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:wat even is a crime

An act that goes against natural, moral or human laws.

Michel Meilleur wrote:

Spirit of Hope wrote:Brain dead = dead. A fetus would be classified as brain dead if tested.

No, he or she wouldn't for the simple reason that for something to be dead, it first needs to have been alive and thus a fetus can not be called "brain dead" because his brain has yet to form.
Your whole argument hinges on a faulty premise and abusive argumentation, tbh, and being aggressive about it doesn't make it more right.

Spirit of Hope wrote:

Michel Meilleur wrote:No, he or she wouldn't for the simple reason that for something to be dead, it first needs to have been alive and thus a fetus can not be called "brain dead" because his brain has yet to form.
Your whole argument hinges on a faulty premise and abusive argumentation, tbh, and being aggressive about it doesn't make it more right.

So a fetus has yet to gain personhood then. Either way it isn't a person.

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

An act that goes against natural, moral or human laws.

and which pendejo made you the arbiter of that?