AshG
Easy target
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,374
- Likes
- 7,402
If im honest I like the ruling if it were done on the appropriate level. It’s a decent compromise between the two extremes. But a right to privacy in no way is a right to an abortion.
And I am even more sorry that people want to justify killing another human to erase a mistake.I am so sorry that so many of you had a bad experience with the elective abortions you were required to have. They never should have been forced on you.
I am so glad we trust the government to determine who gets to count as a viable human.The way that the law historically looks at the right to privacy actually does kind of jive (so long as you believe a non-viable fetus is not a human with rights) with the right to abort. The right to privacy is not explicitly mentioned in the constitution, but it is implied. Right to privacy was first explained by SCOTUS Brandeis as "the right to be let alone" but it's not a concept that is clearly defined.
And I am even more sorry that people want to justify killing another human to erase a mistake.
"My bad" doesnt seem like it would fly in court, but that's just me.
The problem is that a large contingent of scientifically illiterate individuals want to blanket eradicate a word they only partially understand.
I do not believe in abortion as birth control. I do believe in it as a life saving operation that doctors should not have to sweat over performing to save their patient's life or ability to have future children.
I am so glad we trust the government to determine who gets to count as a viable human.
Remind me on where we are supposed to stand on the governments application of the death penalty?
Because I am against both. But I have a rather rare case of being consistent.
I think i remember correctly only about 5 to 7% of abortions are for that reason...most are used as birth controlThe problem is that a large contingent of scientifically illiterate individuals want to blanket eradicate a word they only partially understand.
I do not believe in abortion as birth control. I do believe in it as a life saving operation that doctors should not have to sweat over performing to save their patient's life or ability to have future children.
Yep how is it that an MD can be texting while driving, hits a pregnant woman who is on her way to get an abortion by the MD, she loses the baby as a result of the accident and the MD is charged with vehicular homicide…….and she probably sues the MD for her “loss”I am so glad we trust the government to determine who gets to count as a viable human.
Remind me on where we are supposed to stand on the governments application of the death penalty?
Because I am against both. But I have a rather rare case of being consistent.
Imagine white liberals arguing in favor of a practice that terminates black pregnancies 4x more often than white pregnancies...
Agreed, but you are specifying a tiny percentage of abortions to justify the wholeThe problem is that a large contingent of scientifically illiterate individuals want to blanket eradicate a word they only partially understand.
I do not believe in abortion as birth control. I do believe in it as a life saving operation that doctors should not have to sweat over performing to save their patient's life or ability to have future children.
You are still letting a third party determine the viability of the human, and then justifying the killing of the baby on the desires of that third party.Nobody said you gotta trust the government to determine it. IDK when it is, so who am I to tell others when it is or to advocate to the government that they should prohibit it?
I don't think libertarianism speaks to the death penalty, but a general distrust of government leads many libertarians to oppose it.
If only there was a group of trusted individuals that knew about health that could issue some type of allowance for people to take otherwise illegal/controlled substances or actions. It would be even better if there was a subset of that group that specialized in female reproductive health.I wasn't justifying the whole, but simply stating the way things work. Are we actually a Republic if the laws are not equally effective for all citizens?
If only there was a group of trusted individuals that knew about health that could issue some type of allowance for people to take otherwise illegal/controlled substances or actions. It would be even better if there was a subset of that group that specialized in female reproductive health.
Oh wait, doctors can issue prescriptions for otherwise illegal drugs and authorize medical procedures that arent allowed on street corners. And better yet OBGYs specialize in female reproductive health.
Our republic doesnt treat all under it the same, that's the issue. These humans have no rights for the simple fact that a third party said they dont. It's wrong.
I am fine with that. You are at least theoretically paying associated medical costs and some increase in food consumption.Cool. Issue SSN at conception and allow them to count immediately towards child tax credits and dependent status.