The War on Women begins ....

#251
#251
Orange_Crush said:
I never agreed to the thought that independent viiability is "the line". I heavily inferred otherwise. I believe as kiddiedoc does, that a human life is a human life with peronal genome, heartbeat, and brain activity.



I think you are incorrect. There are negligent murder charges on our legal books for a reason. In other words, whoever has the legal responsibility to care for a life has to care for that life, and if they don't, charges are pressed.

See the mother whose baby dies from neglect--i.e. leaving it in a hot car unattended. Or the son, who has accepted the repsponsibility to care for his mother, who allows her to die of hunger.

Since the pregnant mother is the only person that can possibly care for an unborn baby, I believe that she is the only person that can be held responsible to care for the life.

But in short... You are wrong per forced responsibility.

Note: Per umbilical cord, this is nothing more than debating method of care, as opposed to requirement of care.
Click to expand...

My question would be the same. Should a woman have a right to an abortion prior to that point being reached?

You said that whoever has the legal responsibility to care for a life must care for that life or face charges. That is not correct; they can transfer that responsibility.

In every instance you gave, the person willingly took on the responsibility. Had they not wished to be legally responsible, they had legal avenues in which to remove the responsibility.

I would agree that if a woman chooses to have a baby then she has a legal obligation to take care of the unborn baby. (She is willingly taken on that responsibility.)
 
#252
#252
PKT_VOL said:
Couldn't one say he same about letting the Mother die? If you accept there are two persons existing at that moment, and one is going to die, the situation changes. Both of the moral rules of thumb end up contradicting. One would need to then set up a rubric of value to decide who lives and who dies. Obviously, different people have different criteria in that situation.
Click to expand...
So how then does the mother's life suddenly become more valuable? This is where the right to life's argument falls short. Abortion is murder. Mom, in most cases, chose to get pregnant. too bad.
 
#254
#254
marcusluvsvols said:
I think that would depend on one's definition ofor personhood. To some it might just be a sentient being like you said...to me it seems like one could not be a person without being human... aliens for example while they could be much smarter than us would not have the same rights as humans as they are not citizens of earth right? In same way that a foreigner doesn't have the same rights as a citizen?
Click to expand...

What makes you "human"? There are two connotations when it used that way. First, something worthy of being valued and respected to the level of "human" (vs say the 4 beasts who tortured the guy last week). Secondly, the mere biological definition.

The former is a line of reasoning that ends in the concept of personhood. It's basically a intellectual justification for assigning value and worth to ourselves in the form of legal rights and moral duties. The question then becomes what criteria can we as humans separate ourselves from other animals and plants besides merely being biologically different? Or to put it in religious terms, what did God give us to make us different and valued compared to animals and plants? That criteria centers around a level of consciousness.

If that's the case, what happens when AI or aliens come around or into existence with a level of consciousness equal or superior to ours? If we deny them legal rights and moral duties, it seems our edifice comes crashing down. I'd be a dog-eat-dog world boy amongst ourselves and with them. If they are at least to our level of consciousness, that doesn't bode well for us.
 
#255
#255
luthervol said:
My question would be the same. Should a woman have a right to an abortion prior to that point being reached?
Click to expand...

That's up for debate, depending on what you base your morality. You and I may/probably won't agree on it.

Me, personally, due to the formation of morality that I have, I believe that conception is the moment. I believe that because of my interpretation of the Bible. You may or may not agaree with my moral basis, thus we will probablly be at an impasse there.

However, if I could get the liberal left to agree to laws that allowed abortion before 5 weeks from conception, but illegal afterward, I would consider it a victory.

luthervol said:
You said that whoever has the legal responsibility to care for a life must care for that life or face charges. That is not correct; they can transfer that responsibility.
Click to expand...

I spoke to that in my response. Abortion seems to be a special case where one can not reassign responsibility.

luthervol said:
In every instance you gave, the person willingly took on the responsibility. Had they not wished to be legally responsible, they had legal avenues in which to remove the responsibility.
Click to expand...

Yep. And again, abortion seems to be a special case. So what? If one believes the fetus to be a human life, and human life as valuable and worth protecting, then one would probaby believe that there is room in the law for special cases.

In one form or another, that special case already exists in the law, I believe. I know a girl that was arrested for child abuse because she took drugs while pregnant. The baby was born with severe developmental problems.

The "special case" is that she couldn't reassign her responsibility, and was still held responsible. The odd thing about our law is that she could kill the child in her womb with no repercussions, but he couldn't abuse it in the womb. She was still responsible, with no reassignment of responsibility b/c none is possible.

luthervol said:
I would agree that if a woman chooses to have a baby then she has a legal obligation to take care of the unborn baby. (She is willingly taken on that responsibility.)
Click to expand...

It is not willing; it is legally mandated that she is responsibe. Unless she decides to kill the child. Then she can legally escape responsibility. And so goes our legal system.
 
#256
#256
SpaceCoastVol said:
So how then does the mother's life suddenly become more valuable? This is where the right to life's argument falls short. Abortion is murder. Mom, in most cases, chose to get pregnant. too bad.
Click to expand...

Who said it suddenly becomes more valuable? You would be killing either the mother or the child. Believing abortion is wrong doesn't change the other concept that letting a woman die is wrong. Those two concepts would be in conflict.
 
#258
#258
PKT_VOL said:
Forced vs accepted is quite a difference.

How so?
Click to expand...

(Of course it's quite a difference That was my entire point.) The distinction I was trying to make is in the lengthy response above.

Cliff Notes: If we make abortion illegal, then it becomes a forced responsibility, which I am in favor of. IOW, that's really the crux of the debate. I believe that there is room in the law for the special case of preganancy (forced respponsibility), and see proof that the special case is already enforced in another context of the law.
 
#259
#259
PKT_VOL said:
Why? It's a philosophical question with happens to have legal ramifications. Their role would be subsequent to the philosophical debate.

On a side note, interesting you're from Buford. Not far away.
Click to expand...

Moved to Atlanta 30 yeas ago. Been in Buford the last 20.

I just think the Roe v. Wade decision was about as brilliant as one could hope for. The philosophical debate will continue.
 
#260
#260
If a woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the baby, which one of you people is willing to stand up and offer to raise him or her?
 
#261
#261
VolStrom said:
If a woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the baby, which one of you people is willing to stand up and offer to raise him or her?
Click to expand...

On one hand, why would it be our responsibility?

On another, I literally have three families in my church right now that would adopt it tomorrow (and we're a pretty small church). The only reason they haven't adopted yet is the tens of thousands of dollars it costs to adopt in America right now. Each is researching third world adoptions as I type.

Each family would pay the mother's hospital bills and sign the adoption papers in a minute.
 
#263
#263
PKT_VOL said:
What makes you "human"? There are two connotations when it used that way. First, something worthy of being valued and respected to the level of "human" (vs say the 4 beasts who tortured the guy last week). Secondly, the mere biological definition.

The former is a line of reasoning that ends in the concept of personhood. It's basically a intellectual justification for assigning value and worth to ourselves in the form of legal rights and moral duties. The question then becomes what criteria can we as humans separate ourselves from other animals and plants besides merely being biologically different? Or to put it in religious terms, what did God give us to make us different and valued compared to animals and plants? That criteria centers around a level of consciousness.

If that's the case, what happens when AI or aliens come around or into existence with a level of consciousness equal or superior to ours? If we deny them legal rights and moral duties, it seems our edifice comes crashing down. I'd be a dog-eat-dog world boy amongst ourselves and with them. If they are at least to our level of consciousness, that doesn't bode well for us.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting conversation that threatens a fork (that may possibly come back around and speak to the moral implications inherent to the abortion debate). I sincerely appreciate you bringing that to the table.

As such, if aliens came along and were vastly superior to us in levels of intellect and consciousness, would that necessitate increased levels of rights, protections, and/or reverence of life?

If I infer correctly, you are working from or to the point that the embryo/fetus has a lesser value on the scale due to consciousness, so does that scale of value/worth/rights/reverence travel equally in the other direction?
 
#264
#264
Orange_Crush said:
(Of course it's quite a difference That was my entire point.) The distinction I was trying to make is in the lengthy response above.

Cliff Notes: If we make abortion illegal, then it becomes a forced responsibility, which I am in favor of. IOW, that's really the crux of the debate. I believe that there is room in the law for the special case of preganancy (forced respponsibility), and see proof that the special case is already enforced in another context of the law.
Click to expand...

Couple of thoughts here.

1) Personhood would have to start at conception.

2) What if a female didn't know she was pregnant?

3) The female would have to be punished, severely, for abortion. Pro-lifers and some on VN tend to be against such.

4) Miscarriages would be legally problematic.
 
#266
#266
luthervol said:
She is willingly remaining pregnant which means she is willingly taking on the mandated responsibility of being pregnant.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And in the final trimester, she's is no longer willingly, perhaps? In other words, even under current federal law, there is already a time where the (ETA: pregnant) mother can't legally neglect her responsibility. It is a special condition under the law with forced responsibility.

So... The Debate is about when that forced responsibility begins, as opposed to whether it should exist at all?

(Maybe, for you, if doesn't. Maybe you're one that supports abortion right up until natural birth. But even so, your argument that the law doesn't force responsibility is proven false. You'd now have to find another avenue to discussion.)
 
Last edited:
#267
#267
luthervol said:
Moved to Atlanta 30 yeas ago. Been in Buford the last 20.

I just think the Roe v. Wade decision was about as brilliant as one could hope for. The philosophical debate will continue.
Click to expand...

Grew up a couple miles away from the Mall of Georgia. Currently, live 20 minutes away.
 
#268
#268
PKT_VOL said:
Couple of thoughts here.

1) Personhood would have to start at conception.

2) What if a female didn't know she was pregnant?

3) The female would have to be punished, severely, for abortion. Pro-lifers and some on VN tend to be against such.

4) Miscarriages would be legally problematic.
Click to expand...

1) As I've already mentioned, that's part of the debate. I freely admit that my opinion on this is religious in nature.

2) What if? Are you asking what if she didn't know she was pregnant so had an abortion? Or if she used drugs? The former makes no sense, so I take it that wasn't the question. If the latter, it's existing law in many states, so it's something for her lawyer to argue.

3) What punishing a woman for having an abortion? Why would I be against that if I feel it should be against the law? If I feel it is murder, of course I feel she should be punished. I guess you and the rest of VN are free to form your own opinions?

4) Interesting thought. How so? A woman could purposefully abort somehow and not be found guilty of abortion? Or she could naturally miscarry and be arrested? Are we coming from a place where we have absolutely NO faith in the legal system, or from a place where we think it can work through these issues?
 
#269
#269
Abortion will never be overturned. It's here to stay and the religious people that think otherwise are fooling themselves.
 
#270
#270
Orange_Crush said:
Exactly. And in the final trimester, she's is no longer willingly, perhaps? In other words, even under current federal law, there is already a time where the (ETA: pregnant) mother can't legally neglect her responsibility. It is a special condition under the law with forced responsibility.

So... The Debate is about when that forced responsibility begins, as opposed to whether it should exist at all?

(Maybe, for you, if doesn't. Maybe you're one that supports abortion right up until natural birth. But even so, your argument that the law doesn't force responsibility is proven false. You'd now have to find another avenue to discussion.)
Click to expand...

I support Roe v. Wade. I'm on record saying it was a brilliant decision. I like your first 5 weeks idea, but can go up to 10 or 15 weeks. Anything beyond that, you would have to start considering the circumstances.
 
#271
#271
luthervol said:
I support Roe v. Wade. I'm on record saying it was a brilliant decision. I like your first 5 weeks idea, but can go up to 10 or 15 weeks. Anything beyond that, you would have to start considering the circumstances.
Click to expand...

It wasn't an accusation. :hi:
 
#272
#272
The line between life start's at conception and making birth control illegal is not as broad as some of you may believe.

What do you say to a person who religiously believes contraception is murder?
 
#273
#273
luthervol said:
The line between life start's at conception and making birth control illegal is not as broad as some of you may believe.

What do you say to a person who religiously believes contraception is murder?
Click to expand...

I say we all have a seat at the table of discussion. (Unlike whomever it was earlier in the thread that basically tried to suppress debate if we're not all women.)

If that person believes that, they probably believe it on religious terms, and I would be happy to debate the issue from that perspective.
 
#274
#274
Orange_Crush said:
It wasn't an accusation. :hi:
Click to expand...

It was the "maybe you're one who supports abortion up to natural birth". I don't think 1 in a million support that, EXCEPT in some very unusual circumstance. If my wife were having our 4th child and something went wrong during delivery and the doctor said "only one can make it" I know what I would do.
 
#275
#275
luthervol said:
It was the "maybe you're one who supports abortion up to natural birth". I don't think 1 in a million support that, EXCEPT in some very unusual circumstance. If my wife were having our 4th child and something went wrong during delivery and the doctor said "only one can make it" I know what I would do.
Click to expand...

Understood. Again, it wasn't an accusation. I just realize that there are those who support such, so made allowances in my response. :hi:
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top