NATION

PASSWORD

[Abortion Thread] (POLL 4) A compromising position...

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

What would you consider to be the best 'compromise'?

Reduce abortions with welfare supports / other non-invasive measures, leave access untouched.
132
33%
Set conditions under which abortions can be accessed.
83
21%
Allow free access, under a given time limit.
38
9%
Allow free access, but give men an option to excuse themselves from child support.
40
10%
HELL WITH COMPROMISE, IT'S MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY!
86
21%
Look out! They're here! Pink Elephants on Parade! Here they come, hippity hoppity!
22
5%
 
Total votes : 401

User avatar
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20742
Founded: Jun 28, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Austria-Bohemia-Hungary » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:53 am

Sundiata wrote:
Godular wrote:
Then it is free to go live the remainder of its natural life elsewhere, outside the woman's uterus, once it is removed.

To remove it is actively choosing to kill it.

"Abortion is murder." Drink of choice y'all.

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 69785
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:55 am

Sundiata wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Does it have the right to someone else's body?

Not anymore than the rights that someone else has to its body.

Noone here is arguing that someone else has the right to its body so this is a non-sequitor.
We are arguing that the fetus does not have the right to someone else's body.
Last edited by Genivaria on Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
Anarcho-Communist, Democratic Confederalist
"The Earth isn't dying, it's being killed. And those killing it have names and addresses." -Utah Phillips

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 153071
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Ifreann » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:57 am

Sundiata wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Whether the unborn's existence is an act of intrusion, whatever that's supposed to mean, is irrelevant. They are not welcome, and they are not leaving, therefore they are not innocent.

No, the existence of the unborn, let alone the state of being welcomed, is not the fault of the unborn and no fault should be ascribed.

A zygote is an innocent human person.

I am not talking about their existence, and the unborn ceases to be innocent when they fail to leave once they are unwelcome. How they came to be unwelcome is irrelevant, and talking about ascribing fault for that is just nonsense, the fact is that they are unwelcome and therefore they must leave.
Mistake Not My Current State Of Regular Thorough Handwashing For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Mask Wearing That Are Themselves The Mere Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Social Distancing

no war but class war
He/Him

User avatar
Godular
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11708
Founded: Sep 09, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Godular » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:14 am

Sundiata wrote:
Godular wrote:
Then it is free to go live the remainder of its natural life elsewhere, outside the woman's uterus, once it is removed.

To remove it is actively choosing to kill it.


No it isn't. It's simply ejecting it from the property. What it does after that is nobody's business but its own.
RL position
Active RP: ASCENSION
Active RP: SHENRYAX
Dormant RP: Throne of the Fallen Empire

Faction 1: The An'Kazar Control Framework of Godular-- An enormously advanced collective of formerly human bioborgs that are vastly experienced in both inter-dimensional travel and asymmetrical warfare.
A 1.08 civilization, according to this Nation Index Thingie
I don't normally use NS stats. But when I do, I prefer Dos Eckis I can STILL kill you.
Post responsibly.

User avatar
Elwher
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5991
Founded: May 24, 2012
Capitalizt

Postby Elwher » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:17 am

Godular wrote:
Sundiata wrote:To remove it is actively choosing to kill it.


No it isn't. It's simply ejecting it from the property. What it does after that is nobody's business but its own.


If a hospital does that to a patient who can't pay, they are in a mess of legal trouble.
CYNIC, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among the Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision.
Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20742
Founded: Jun 28, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Austria-Bohemia-Hungary » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:19 am

Elwher wrote:
Godular wrote:
No it isn't. It's simply ejecting it from the property. What it does after that is nobody's business but its own.


If a hospital does that to a patient who can't pay, they are in a mess of legal trouble.

Is this the intellectual standard here these days? Amaze.

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9490
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:20 am

Godular wrote:
Sundiata wrote:To remove it is actively choosing to kill it.


No it isn't. It's simply ejecting it from the property. What it does after that is nobody's business but its own.

Women's bodies, human bodies, are not property.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20742
Founded: Jun 28, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Austria-Bohemia-Hungary » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:22 am

Sundiata wrote:
Godular wrote:
No it isn't. It's simply ejecting it from the property. What it does after that is nobody's business but its own.

Women's bodies, human bodies, are not property.

So you agree that women have the right to not be molested by undesirable elements, unlike inanimate objects?

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 153071
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Ifreann » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:25 am

Sundiata wrote:
Godular wrote:
No it isn't. It's simply ejecting it from the property. What it does after that is nobody's business but its own.

Women's bodies, human bodies, are not property.

Indeed, a person's body is not property, it is that person. So however mildly we talk about it, one person being literally inside the body of another without permission is not a minor transgression. It is a serious violation of the most basic human rights.
Mistake Not My Current State Of Regular Thorough Handwashing For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Mask Wearing That Are Themselves The Mere Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Social Distancing

no war but class war
He/Him

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9490
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:26 am

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:
Sundiata wrote:Women's bodies, human bodies, are not property.

So you agree that women have the right to not be molested by undesirable elements, unlike inanimate objects?

Yes. Do you agree that the unborn have the right not to be massacred en masse as if they are beneath human beings, animals?
Last edited by Sundiata on Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
The New California Republic
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35392
Founded: Jun 06, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The New California Republic » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:27 am

Sundiata wrote:
Godular wrote:
No it isn't. It's simply ejecting it from the property. What it does after that is nobody's business but its own.

Women's bodies, human bodies, are not property.

Bodily sovereignty says different, as that's possession/ownership of one's own body. Having control of one's body implies it's one's own property in a sense.
Last edited by Sigmund Freud on Sat Sep 23, 1939 2:23 am, edited 999 times in total.

The Irradiated Wasteland of The New California Republic: depicting the expanded NCR, several years after the total victory over Caesar's Legion, and the annexation of New Vegas and its surrounding areas.

White-collared conservatives flashing down the street
Pointing their plastic finger at me
They're hoping soon, my kind will drop and die
But I'm going to wave my freak flag high
Wave on, wave on
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

User avatar
The New California Republic
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35392
Founded: Jun 06, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The New California Republic » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:28 am

Sundiata wrote:
Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:So you agree that women have the right to not be molested by undesirable elements, unlike inanimate objects?

Yes. Do you agree that the unborn have the right not to be massacred en masse as if they are not human beings?

You are doing that thing again where you mimic the writing style of the person you are responding to.
Last edited by Sigmund Freud on Sat Sep 23, 1939 2:23 am, edited 999 times in total.

The Irradiated Wasteland of The New California Republic: depicting the expanded NCR, several years after the total victory over Caesar's Legion, and the annexation of New Vegas and its surrounding areas.

White-collared conservatives flashing down the street
Pointing their plastic finger at me
They're hoping soon, my kind will drop and die
But I'm going to wave my freak flag high
Wave on, wave on
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

User avatar
Godular
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11708
Founded: Sep 09, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Godular » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:31 am

Elwher wrote:
Godular wrote:
No it isn't. It's simply ejecting it from the property. What it does after that is nobody's business but its own.


If a hospital does that to a patient who can't pay, they are in a mess of legal trouble.


Are you just spitballing?

A woman who does not consent to a pregnancy is not the same as a fucking hospital refusing service. The hospital contains staff who have undergone significant amounts of training, licensing, and a wide variety of professional qualifications that specifically focus on aiding others in need. To equate such a thing with a single untrained and unwilling individual is not even remotely reasonable nor realistic.

No. The woman is more akin to some person that for 'reasons' is being tasked with giving of their own body in order to sustain the existence of another individual. If they do not consent to this, forcing them to do it anyway is one of the most fundamental violations of self-determination possible. Some people might take issue if they refuse to provide this assistance, saying that they should feel honored to assist in saving the life of another. But the person's reasons for the refusal are for that person and that person alone, and it is wrong to judge their refusal when one does not know the facts.
RL position
Active RP: ASCENSION
Active RP: SHENRYAX
Dormant RP: Throne of the Fallen Empire

Faction 1: The An'Kazar Control Framework of Godular-- An enormously advanced collective of formerly human bioborgs that are vastly experienced in both inter-dimensional travel and asymmetrical warfare.
A 1.08 civilization, according to this Nation Index Thingie
I don't normally use NS stats. But when I do, I prefer Dos Eckis I can STILL kill you.
Post responsibly.

User avatar
Godular
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11708
Founded: Sep 09, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Godular » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:31 am

Sundiata wrote:
Godular wrote:
No it isn't. It's simply ejecting it from the property. What it does after that is nobody's business but its own.

Women's bodies, human bodies, are not property.


Yes they are. They are the most fundamental property that a person can possess. Some folks might choose to give it away when they are done with it. Others might rent it out. In the end however it is one of those things where the person's own self-ownership is seen as a fundamental right, and it is unconscionable to take such a thing away.
Last edited by Godular on Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
RL position
Active RP: ASCENSION
Active RP: SHENRYAX
Dormant RP: Throne of the Fallen Empire

Faction 1: The An'Kazar Control Framework of Godular-- An enormously advanced collective of formerly human bioborgs that are vastly experienced in both inter-dimensional travel and asymmetrical warfare.
A 1.08 civilization, according to this Nation Index Thingie
I don't normally use NS stats. But when I do, I prefer Dos Eckis I can STILL kill you.
Post responsibly.

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9490
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:39 am

Godular wrote:
Sundiata wrote:Women's bodies, human bodies, are not property.


Yes they are. They are the most fundamental property that a person can possess.

The sense that human bodies are "property," is a figure of speech, a quirk of language. The human body is not really any person's property.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44837
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Grave_n_idle » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:46 am

Sundiata wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
Immoral?

Your 'morals' are just something you made up.

Not really, no. No.


Yes, absolutely.

You keep talking about things being 'moral' and 'immoral'.

Personally, I think that you doing that is 'immoral'. Which is at least as valid as your claims about morality. Probably more valid, because I'm not trying to force other people to be slaves because of it.

So take your personal 'morality' which means nothing to anyone else, and leave it out of the debate. It's fine for you to thi9nk something is 'moral' or 'immoral', but unless you've got something more than a 'feeling', it doesn't matter to the debate.
I identify as
a problem

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44837
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Grave_n_idle » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:48 am

Sundiata wrote:
Godular wrote:
Then it is free to go live the remainder of its natural life elsewhere, outside the woman's uterus, once it is removed.

To remove it is actively choosing to kill it.


Nope. Choosing to terminate a pregnancy is not a decision to 'kill' anything. The destruction of any fetus is entirely incidental.

Maybe you should be trying to invent a way to make abortions less risky for the fetus, rather than wasting time trying to stop women having autonomy?
I identify as
a problem

User avatar
The New California Republic
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35392
Founded: Jun 06, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The New California Republic » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:49 am

Sundiata wrote:
Godular wrote:Yes they are. They are the most fundamental property that a person can possess.

The sense that human bodies are "property," is a figure of speech, a quirk of language. The human body is not really any person's property.

It isn't a quirk of language at all: that thing you are ignoring, "bodily sovereignty", implies ownership over one's own body as a form of possession, of property.
Last edited by Sigmund Freud on Sat Sep 23, 1939 2:23 am, edited 999 times in total.

The Irradiated Wasteland of The New California Republic: depicting the expanded NCR, several years after the total victory over Caesar's Legion, and the annexation of New Vegas and its surrounding areas.

White-collared conservatives flashing down the street
Pointing their plastic finger at me
They're hoping soon, my kind will drop and die
But I'm going to wave my freak flag high
Wave on, wave on
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9490
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:55 am

The New California Republic wrote:
Sundiata wrote:The sense that human bodies are "property," is a figure of speech, a quirk of language. The human body is not really any person's property.

It isn't a quirk of language at all: that thing you are ignoring, "bodily sovereignty", implies ownership over one's own body as a form of possession, of property.

Any sense of ownership that one has over the human body is illusory, the human body cannot be owned by one human being or the other. It's not a possession; it's not property.
Last edited by Sundiata on Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
Godular
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11708
Founded: Sep 09, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Godular » Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:59 am

Sundiata wrote:
Godular wrote:
Yes they are. They are the most fundamental property that a person can possess.

The sense that human bodies are "property," is a figure of speech, a quirk of language. The human body is not really any person's property.


The person's body is that person's property, on the most fundamental level. I very much champion the right of a person to defend themselves and their property from anyone who intrudes upon it without the person's consent. In the case of use against a born person, such defense can be nonlethal, but the lethality of the force to be used is not considered a limiting factor among those who champion such things.

Bodily Sovereignty. Self-Determination. These things all fall under my axiom that a person's body is the one thing that they own, both as property, and as an intrinsic property.

Trespassers beware.
RL position
Active RP: ASCENSION
Active RP: SHENRYAX
Dormant RP: Throne of the Fallen Empire

Faction 1: The An'Kazar Control Framework of Godular-- An enormously advanced collective of formerly human bioborgs that are vastly experienced in both inter-dimensional travel and asymmetrical warfare.
A 1.08 civilization, according to this Nation Index Thingie
I don't normally use NS stats. But when I do, I prefer Dos Eckis I can STILL kill you.
Post responsibly.

User avatar
The New California Republic
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35392
Founded: Jun 06, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The New California Republic » Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:03 pm

Sundiata wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:It isn't a quirk of language at all: that thing you are ignoring, "bodily sovereignty", implies ownership over one's own body as a form of possession, of property.

Any sense of ownership that one has over the human body is illusory

No, it really isn't. It is backed up and codified in law. Bodily sovereignty has very real effects, and can be readily observed in the behaviour of people. You need to bring some weighty evidence to the table if you want to prove it's an illusion.

Sundiata wrote:the human body cannot be owned by one human being or the other. It's not a possession; it's not property.

Again bodily sovereignty says different. I possess my body for instance, you have no right over it.
Last edited by Sigmund Freud on Sat Sep 23, 1939 2:23 am, edited 999 times in total.

The Irradiated Wasteland of The New California Republic: depicting the expanded NCR, several years after the total victory over Caesar's Legion, and the annexation of New Vegas and its surrounding areas.

White-collared conservatives flashing down the street
Pointing their plastic finger at me
They're hoping soon, my kind will drop and die
But I'm going to wave my freak flag high
Wave on, wave on
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

User avatar
Godular
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11708
Founded: Sep 09, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Godular » Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:05 pm

And with my talk of fundamental properties and axioms, I think I know what my next poll question is gonna be!

We're rapidly closing on on another 100 pages.
RL position
Active RP: ASCENSION
Active RP: SHENRYAX
Dormant RP: Throne of the Fallen Empire

Faction 1: The An'Kazar Control Framework of Godular-- An enormously advanced collective of formerly human bioborgs that are vastly experienced in both inter-dimensional travel and asymmetrical warfare.
A 1.08 civilization, according to this Nation Index Thingie
I don't normally use NS stats. But when I do, I prefer Dos Eckis I can STILL kill you.
Post responsibly.

User avatar
Neanderthaland
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8586
Founded: Sep 10, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Neanderthaland » Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:29 pm

Sundiata wrote:
Godular wrote:
Then it is free to go live the remainder of its natural life elsewhere, outside the woman's uterus, once it is removed.

To remove it is actively choosing to kill it.

You're the one who is always stressing that only intentions matter, and that we should completely blind ourselves to the consequences. You cannot, therefore, consider what the consequences of removing the fetus will be. We can only consider whether it's just to remove it.
Ug make fire. Mod ban Ug.

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9490
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:47 pm

Neanderthaland wrote:
Sundiata wrote:To remove it is actively choosing to kill it.

You're the one who is always stressing that only intentions matter, and that we should completely blind ourselves to the consequences. You cannot, therefore, consider what the consequences of removing the fetus will be. We can only consider whether it's just to remove it.

To be clear, I've only ever said that intentions matter as much as the outcome. Unfortunately, good means can also be used towards evil ends.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
Neanderthaland
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8586
Founded: Sep 10, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Neanderthaland » Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:52 pm

Sundiata wrote:
Neanderthaland wrote:You're the one who is always stressing that only intentions matter, and that we should completely blind ourselves to the consequences. You cannot, therefore, consider what the consequences of removing the fetus will be. We can only consider whether it's just to remove it.

To be clear, I've only ever said that intentions matter as much as the outcome. Unfortunately, good means can also be used towards evil ends.

To be clear, you were willing to sacrifice every single person on the planet rather than kill one.

That's not "equal weight." That's a clear preference. And you are now walking it back because it doesn't suit your argument anymore.
Ug make fire. Mod ban Ug.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Arisyan, Cannot think of a name, Deutsch-Francia, Duvniask, Ethel mermania, New San Andreas Republic, Ors Might, Port Caverton, The Front Range, The Jamesian Republic, Thomasi, Umeria, Untecna, Utquiagvik, Valyxias

Advertisement

Remove ads