Leaked/breaking:Roe v. Wade expected to be overturned

[BigRed]

If only that contract called the constitution was abided by. Alas, it is breached with impunity.

 

[jamil]

Is murder a matter for the central state?

Pretty much everyone agrees on murder. Polls have been consistent. ~15% of people think abortion should be illegal from conception in all but special cases like when the health of the mother is at stake. Laws that are unpopular tend to cause strife.

But anyway, murder is a state issue. States all have their own murder laws

 

[jamil]

Supreme Court leak over abortion rights didn’t sway voters: poll

The political environment has remained largely unchanged following a leak that indicated Roe v. Wade could be overturned, according to a new NBC poll.

nypost.com

This is encouraging. Maybe people think it’s more important to save the country than to let a single issue keep BSC’s in power.

 

[BigRed]

Supreme Court leak over abortion rights didn’t sway voters: poll

The political environment has remained largely unchanged following a leak that indicated Roe v. Wade could be overturned, according to a new NBC poll.

nypost.com

This is encouraging. Maybe people think it’s more important to save the country than to let a single issue keep BSC’s in power.

I do not know what "BSC" means.

I do know the last guy that "saved the country" killed over 750,000 while claiming to save a union of consent and creating a union of force.

 

[bwframe]

 

[Tombs]

Pretty much everyone agrees on murder. Polls have been consistent. ~15% of people think abortion should be illegal from conception in all but special cases like when the health of the mother is at stake. Laws that are unpopular tend to cause strife.

But anyway, murder is a state issue. States all have their own murder laws

If we're polling the public on the issue... I have a proposal.

There should be an image with answers labeled A-Z, with images of the development cycle at steps for the fetus, ending with a child outside the womb. No dates, no information, just images. Have the question be "At what point is this a human life?"

Send it out for the people of all the states to vote on.

I think we'd get a pretty acceptable answer out of that. In secular speak, moral issues are actually best decided by democracy.

 

[BigRed]

In secular speak, moral issues are actually best decided by democracy.

Until it delivers an answer centralizers do not want.

 

[actaeon277]

Supreme Court leak over abortion rights didn’t sway voters: poll

The political environment has remained largely unchanged following a leak that indicated Roe v. Wade could be overturned, according to a new NBC poll.

nypost.com

This is encouraging. Maybe people think it’s more important to save the country than to let a single issue keep BSC’s in power.

Or, everyone was pretty much either... Left/for abortion, or Right/against abortion.
There are those that don't meet those criteria, but they already weren't voting about abortion.

 

[jamil]

I do not know what "BSC" means.

I do know the last guy that "saved the country" killed over 750,000 while claiming to save a union of consent and creating a union of force.

Bat **** crazies.

As often as the term is needed I thought it needed it’s own shorthand.

 

[chipbennett]

yes. I think we are getting somewhere. We can drop the secular "at conception" part of the argument. I'd rather have a discussion than an internet debate.

Likewise!

I think the least risk case you're making is similar to Pascal's wager. I've called it the "just in case" argument. It's a rationale, and acceptable, in the absence of a more objective argument. None of us are really on solid, objectively moral, ground here. It is largely worldview dependent.

I agree with that, also. It is similar to Pascal's wager (and I even thought of that analogy, but decided not to present it, because that moves toward a religious line of reasoning). In the end, I thought "principle of least harm" was a more rational/secular basis for drawing one (of potentially several) conclusions from the logical construct I presented. And I readily admit that reasonable people can disagree, either on applicability of that principle, or on the manner of its application.

Anyway, whatever we call that argument, I would not say it's a "good" argument, where I'm saying that a "good" argument in this case leads to some objective and logical conclusion. Incidentally, I don't think anyone has a "good" argument in that sense.

That's likely true. What I would like to see, at the very least, is recognition/admission that our ultimate assumptions/decisions have the potential to risk violating the right to life of a living human to which that right has attached. But that seems to be a fundamental impasse. Those who favor abortion simply will not accept/admit either the logical construct or the conclusion (i.e. potential risk) drawn from it.

I could reason, and I have good argument, that for society's good, it should be a policy that has the closest consensus and at least acknowleges that at some point in a pregnancy, it's too late, and that the child has a right to live after that point. That's probably not acceptable to you personally. But I think the nation has enough division that this is just taking it to another order of magnitude.

From my perspective, it is the pro-abortion side that is the most adamantly, rabidly dogmatic in their reasoning - albeit from the opposite end of the spectrum. I think you might find far more anti-abortion proponents who will say something like, "from a religious perspective, I believe that humans have the right to life from the moment of conception - but scientifically, I can't prove that. So, I'm at least willing to discuss the possibility that we need a more empirical basis for assuming attachment of rights." I don't think you will find very many pro-abortion proponents who would say something similar (i.e. "I believe that a woman has the right to abortion up to and including birth, but...").

Also, the "least risk" argument fails to acknowledge that the mother, as the host, has at least some right to abort before some time that society says it's too late, morally. I don't think there's an objective reason to place the child's rights above the womans across the board.

I think that this is really just a derivation of the "when do rights attach" question. In terms of the "gray area" between "rights actually attach" and "society assumes rights attach", I don't think the risk of harm or violation of the rights of the mother ever come anywhere close to approaching the risk of harm or violation of rights of the gestating human. Other than ectopic pregnancy, there is very little risk of harm to the mother in that "gray area", especially given the state of modern technology/medical care.

We're both in agreement that there is a point during the pregnancy where it becomes immoral to favor the woman's rights over the unborn baby's rights. We disagree when that is.

In terms of personal belief, I'm sure that's true. But I think the range of our disagreement falls well within the area of "reasonable people can disagree." I'll discuss that disagreement with people who view it as the same. I tend to avoid arguing with those who don't (e.g. "pro-life people just want to control women's bodies" and similar).

 

[chipbennett]

What is it about a zygote’s stage of humanity that makes it of a moral importance above the Mother’s right to choose? I will agree that there is a stage when that becomes more apparent.

But I have to go back to what I originally said, I think that moral importance derives from your world view.

The mother's right to choose... what? Define the choice that the mother is making. In all cases, that choice is the choice to end the life of a separate human.

Why would any human ever have the right to make the choice to end the life of a separate human? There are certainly such justifications, but (outside of criminal punishment following due process) they tend to involve taking that life as an act of self-defense in response to a mortal threat.

 

[chipbennett]

Is murder a matter for the central state?

In general, no. Refer to the ninth and tenth amendments.

 

[chipbennett]

If we're polling the public on the issue... I have a proposal.

There should be an image with answers labeled A-Z, with images of the development cycle at steps for the fetus, ending with a child outside the womb. No dates, no information, just images. Have the question be "At what point is this a human life?"

Send it out for the people of all the states to vote on.

I think we'd get a pretty acceptable answer out of that. In secular speak, moral issues are actually best decided by democracy.

That didn't work so well for chattel slavery.

The whole point of the Declaration of Independence is that unalienable human rights are not subject to the whims of man, whether monarchy, autocracy, or democracy. Our founders wrote the constitution to establish a federal, constitutional republic, explicitly rejecting a democracy - because a democracy does not adequately protect the rights of the majority against the whims of the majority.

 

[KG1]

The mother's right to choose... what? Define the choice that the mother is making. In all cases, that choice is the choice to end the life of a separate human.

Why would any human ever have the right to make the choice to end the life of a separate human? There are certainly such justifications, but (outside of criminal punishment following due process) they tend to involve taking that life as an act of self-defense in response to a mortal threat.

This is the way I look at it. Is the mother's right to choose to terminate the living gestating human in her womb of greater moral importance? I don't think that choice is.

 

[churchmouse]

Okay. You asked for it.

lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipiscing elit dignissim pulvinar hac inceptos montes erat ultrices per nam lectus fames consequat tortor faucibus sociis and mi ultricies velit scelerisque laoreet at pellentesque pharetra ridiculus cras metus nibh imperdiet semper tempus et vestibulum orci varius id non tincidunt accumsan diam quam justo egestas ornare eleifend auctor mattis commodo platea vulputate porttitor neque libero euismod aliquam etiam malesuada rhoncus risus sed habitasse duis vel lacus feugiat lobortis penatibus aptent in a parturient ligula massa fusce dui porta phasellus ad posuere purus suscipit magna odio primis ullamcorper habitant vehicula ut iaculis aliquet mus arcu morbi interdum curabitur cursus placerat nulla blandit torquent ante vitae nascetur eget netus est sollicitudin sapien integer dapibus lacinia bibendum praesent dis molestie condimentum potenti dictum aenean pretium peparoni fringilla tellus sociosqu hendrerit eu tristique nostra nisl viverra nunc tempor augue nisi rutrum taciti mauris nec luctus urna turpis himenaeos elementum leo quis sagittis felis dictumst venenatis class quisque *** natoque nullam gravida litora sem convallis maecenas conubia sodales curae facilisi eros proin enim facilisis suspendisse tincidunt taciti placerat nostra nisi sit risus blandit sagittis consectetur dapibus facilisi dignissim diam lacinia cras pulvinar praesent tempor velit duis netus viverra dis nam feugiat porttitor nisl dictumst non in malesuada odio neque morbi vulputate suscipit lacus on sed faucibus urna torquent pretium suspendisse phasellus vehicula luctus vitae natoque quisque integer posuere turpis adipiscing montes aenean molestie mauris varius penatibus eu tortor consequat lorem etiam platea felis rhoncus pellentesque vestibulum libero eleifend interdum bibendum fringilla ultrices dolor sollicitudin imperdiet fusce augue curae habitant orci *** proin nibh maecenas leo sociosqu ligula hendrerit nullam enim litora massa lobortis nulla eget nec ullamcorper tristique elit auctor magna at semper amet id aliquam egestas dui laoreet tempus scelerisque purus accumsan per nunc sociis potenti ridiculus ad inceptos himenaeos sapien aptent elementum cursus condimentum iaculis dictum a primis ut eros tellus hac euismod nascetur ante vel est donec fames sem senectus ornare porta aliquet class mattis arcu convallis ipsum mus venenatis parturient pharetra mi curabitur conubia rutrum ultricies quis metus facilisis habitasse sodales gravida commodo quam lectus justo et eleifend taciti nostra amet elementum maecenas mi faucibus orci imperdiet sodales vulputate varius sollicitudin aliquam ultrices habitant netus himenaeos morbi facilisis ligula quis in posuere interdum quam id phasellus vehicula placerat viverra eros duis rutrum consectetur nec tortor gravida est augue sed purus condimentum vitae lacus ut vel lobortis ridiculus donec luctus proin torquent montes dolor tempor porttitor felis dignissim lacinia ad cursus fringilla malesuada accumsan sit habitasse at ullamcorper diam quisque feugiat commodo aptent litora nam hac sociosqu non lectus tellus iaculis praesent etiam dictumst mattis sagittis curae fames per sapien semper tincidunt leo libero euismod consequat metus ipsum eu bibendum elit integer nibh lorem nascetur turpis potenti parturient ultricies mauris pulvinar risus curabitur aenean class pharetra tempus et pretium urna nisi nunc auctor venenatis fusce rhoncus nisl hendrerit justo velit sociis *** senectus blandit dui conubia dictum scelerisque egestas magna adipiscing eget primis vestibulum facilisi tristique massa dapibus convallis molestie nulla aliquet a arcu erat nullam dis porta odio platea neque penatibus laoreet suscipit natoque sem mus ante pellentesque ornare suspendisse cras enim inceptos nisl elit tempor ultricies metus dui torquent hac sem habitasse dictumst purus convallis dolor aliquet vehicula sociis orci justo tristique nibh senectus adipiscing aptent ullamcorper facilisi hendrerit luctus sodales molestie mi rhoncus libero curabitur placerat dis porta massa tellus aliquam felis praesent tincidunt *** morbi est dictum penatibus donec lectus potenti quisque quam vel nulla sollicitudin mus cursus feugiat non interdum ornare ultrices faucibus netus eget himenaeos rutrum etiam sagittis vulputate proin lacinia varius pellentesque viverra sociosqu ligula nostra consectetur curae ridiculus enim dignissim blandit ante facilisis sit mattis urna litora primis platea arcu ipsum phasellus gravida taciti dapibus pretium maecenas magna duis bibendum in imperdiet odio aenean lorem leo commodo suspendisse semper a lobortis condimentum class risus cras fames malesuada venenatis erat porttitor elementum pizza diam integer tortor per suscipit consequat euismod nascetur scelerisque posuere inceptos velit montes laoreet parturient iaculis auctor fringilla ut nam augue nunc sed tempus at mauris eu nisi neque amet quis pulvinar vitae vestibulum pharetra ad eleifend et natoque lacus egestas conubia id sapien fusce nullam accumsan nec eros habitant luctus mi taciti natoque nostra at ut aliquet potenti tempus netus egestas litora integer quisque sagittis ornare semper himenaeos bibendum est ante adipiscing torquent per faucibus aliquam auctor dictum accumsan rutrum rhoncus ultrices porta nibh vehicula blandit tortor condimentum augue convallis tellus nam platea eleifend praesent cursus sodales molestie posuere fringilla nisi ad dolor senectus hendrerit sit enim nascetur aptent gravida sociis vel montes arcu conubia etiam feugiat odio commodo hac ultricies maecenas nec nisl sem sed phasellus penatibus scelerisque tristique nullam sollicitudin mus consectetur proin eget iaculis dignissim elementum diam erat elit lectus euismod leo nunc varius suscipit lobortis justo *** consequat eu curabitur et tempor class facilisi purus duis non dis lacinia parturient massa a pretium libero malesuada dapibus lorem dui porttitor id urna eros sociosqu suspendisse ipsum quis mauris habitasse vulputate donec pharetra felis fames orci placerat ridiculus nulla viverra dictumst aenean ligula metus laoreet amet risus primis fusce velit quam pellentesque mattis neque imperdiet vestibulum lacus turpis curae morbi facilisis sapien interdum tincidunt inceptos ullamcorper pulvinar cras vitae venenatis in habitant magna habitasse luctus ultricies fames scelerisque vel himenaeos quisque aptent facilisis nisl sociis consequat lectus risus vitae iaculis phasellus aenean suspendisse natoque a aliquam lacus elementum proin purus dolor lacinia nec convallis viverra eleifend sed nam pulvinar penatibus posuere hendrerit urna cras class vulputate dictumst turpis porta magna habitant hac nibh senectus interdum tristique consectetur mauris arcu sit eros rhoncus fringilla ridiculus potenti curabitur is vestibulum porttitor vehicula nascetur tortor libero massa pharetra gravida feugiat facilisi malesuada adipiscing parturient pellentesque varius sem orci tellus ante sodales etiam morbi lobortis laoreet semper rutrum placerat diam ligula suscipit nullam quis lorem amet nulla maecenas in felis litora leo sapien dictum at nisi inceptos augue blandit nunc accumsan ad tempor ut ornare ultrices gross.

HMOG.....

 

[drillsgt]

Until it delivers an answer centralizers do not want.

Yeah, CA found out about that when they voted down gay marriage.

 

[chipbennett]

This is the way I look at it. Is the mother's right to choose to terminate the living gestating human in her womb of greater moral importance? I don't think that choice is.

This is the problem I have with the arguments of many pro-abortion proponents (just to be clear: not looking at you here, Jamil; I'm speaking generally). They (intentionally or unintentionally) obfuscate the issue, either by denying the science ("it isn't human", "it isn't alive", "it's just a clump of cells", etc.), by denying the implication of denial of right to life of a living human, by couching a decision to end a human life as "the mother's right to choose", "ending the pregnancy", "having a medical procedure", etc.

 

[Ingomike]

I have to say that jamil and Chip are really fleshing this out very well…

 

[bwframe]

Womxn...

 

[KG1]

This is the problem I have with the arguments of many pro-abortion proponents (just to be clear: not looking at you here, Jamil; I'm speaking generally). They (intentionally or unintentionally) obfuscate the issue, either by denying the science ("it isn't human", "it isn't alive", "it's just a clump of cells", etc.), by denying the implication of denial of right to life of a living human, by couching a decision to end a human life as "the mother's right to choose", "ending the pregnancy", "having a medical procedure", etc.

I think a lot of pro-abortion proponents think that pro-life proponents are morally wrong to say that a mother who chooses to abort is morally wrong.

My point is that I do not accept the argument assigning greater moral importance to the mother who chooses to terminate the life of a living gestating human in the womb.