Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Sex-selective AbortionFollow

#52 Jun 15 2012 at 12:20 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
11,703 posts
Belkira wrote:
Nadenu wrote:
Belkira wrote:
I don't know. Aside from what has already been said about what this says about society and gender roles etc etc, I'm ok with this. I don't find it "reprehensible" that a woman use gender when deciding whether or not to abort. It just doesn't seem like that big a deal to me... Does that make me a bad person? Smiley: lol

Nah, you're ok. I didn't think it was that bad either. People are going to have their reasons for abortion. This is just one of them.

Since we agree, we should get married. Smiley: inlove


We could both get pregnant then have abortions together while saying our vows. It'll be epic.


I think planned parenthood had a facility where you can do that all in one sitting.
____________________________
What if the bird will not sing?
Nobunaga answers, "Kill it!"
Hideyoshi answers, "Make it want to sing."
Ieyasu answers, "Wait."
Timelordwho answers "Just as Planned."
#53 Jun 15 2012 at 12:55 AM Rating: Good
Belkira wrote:
I don't know. Aside from what has already been said about what this says about society and gender roles etc etc, I'm ok with this. I don't find it "reprehensible" that a woman use gender when deciding whether or not to abort. It just doesn't seem like that big a deal to me... Does that make me a bad person? Smiley: lol


I don't like it, but I don't find it reprehensible either. While significantly more expensive, I'd prefer to grow embryos in a test tube and then put all the female ones inside me, if I wanted a girl that badly. Which, if I could afford to do, I totally would if my first kid was a boy. I only want two kids, and the boyfriend and I both really want a daughter. Y'know, when we get around to getting married and popping out crotch fruit.
____________________________
Proudmoore US server:
Popina, 90 Priest
Digits, 86 Shaman
Thelesis, 85 Mage
Willowmei, 85 Druid
Necralita, 85 DK
Shrika, 72 Warlock
Jaquelle, 54 Paladin
Grakine, 32 Hunter
The MMO-Zam's FB group. Please message me first so I know who you are.
#54 Jun 15 2012 at 1:45 AM Rating: Decent
******
21,715 posts
Just going to drop this here for amusement's sake.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6vYraQfxqM
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#55 Jun 15 2012 at 7:02 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
14,829 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
Just going to drop this here for amusement's sake.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6vYraQfxqM
Smiley: lol....and unshaven clown.
____________________________
LOOK here.
#56 Jun 15 2012 at 7:14 AM Rating: Good
******
41,289 posts
I especially love when people go on about how they want government as small as possible and out of our lives ... except on things they don't agree with. "Stay out of my life but not other peoples' uteruses!"
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#57 Jun 15 2012 at 7:16 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
14,829 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
I especially love when people go on about how they want government as small as possible and out of our lives ... except on things they don't agree with. "Stay out of my life but not other peoples' uteruses!"
Don't believe it when you're told size doesn't matter.
____________________________
LOOK here.
#58 Jun 15 2012 at 7:19 AM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,003 posts
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
While significantly more expensive, I'd prefer to grow embryos in a test tube...

Oh brave new world that has such people in it.
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
I'm biased against statistics

#59 Jun 15 2012 at 8:46 AM Rating: Good
Sage
****
4,041 posts
Demea wrote:
However, I'm curious how you ultra-liberal hippies feel about the issue of sex-selective abortion in theory.


I'm pro-abortion in all cases. Did you really have to ask?

gbaji wrote:
Obviously, the woman can simply lie


As if, in this hypothetical, theoretical situation, it would never be the man pressuring the abortion because he'd prefer a ball-catcher to a sandwich-maker.
#60 Jun 15 2012 at 9:05 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Guenny wrote:
prefer a ball-catcher to a sandwich-maker.

Aren't those the same thing?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#61 Jun 15 2012 at 9:49 AM Rating: Good
Sage
****
4,041 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Guenny wrote:
prefer a ball-catcher to a sandwich-maker.

Aren't those the same thing?


Not sure what that says about Joph Jr (and Sr for that matter), but okay.
#62 Jun 15 2012 at 10:12 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Whoosh? Smiley: um
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#63 Jun 15 2012 at 10:27 AM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
28,585 posts

I especially love when people go on about how they want government as small as possible and out of our lives ... except on things they don't agree with. "Stay out of my life but not other peoples' uteruses!"


Mindhumbingly terrible example. Wanting to make all abortion illegal is one of the very few logically and ethically defensible positions of the US Right.. I disagree with it, but it's a simple, straightforward, well contained argument. Life begins at conception, human rights begin when life does, abortion is therefore murder. Doesn't contradict the idea of small government *at all*. If anything it affirms personal civil rights by granting them at an earlier point in the human lifespan.

Let's be honest, the opposing position, the one which I support, is wholly arbitrary. It's made up. There's no scientific evidence around when "life" begins. There's nothing to indicate it happens at birth or conception or at 28 weeks of pregnancy. There are no real ethical reason it's ok to end a pregnancy that differ at all from the ethical reasons for killing a newborn infant. Women want control of their bodies, and I support that. That's the best I can do when justifying the Left's position. Compared to "human life is inviolate and all life has inherent rights" it's a massively weak argument. It's a terrible idea that a woman who was raped should have to carry a pregnancy to term, but it's ABSOLUTELY not more terrible than murdering an innocent. So we pretend that's not what occurs. We just arbitrarily decide, being too cowardly to articulate the real position: women should have the right to kill their own children while those children reside inside of their bodies. That's really the realpolitik case, though. Women will end these pregnancies regardless of legal consequence, restricting access to doing so safely doesn't benefit society.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#64 Jun 15 2012 at 11:34 AM Rating: Good
******
21,715 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
We just arbitrarily decide, being too cowardly to articulate the real position: women should have the right to kill their own children while those children reside inside of their bodies.


Even when worded so harshly, I find it hard to disagree with the premise.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#65 Jun 15 2012 at 12:01 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The kid has the right to live, just not inside me. If he can move out and get his own place, he's free to go peacefully. Otherwise, I gotta evict by force.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#66 Jun 15 2012 at 12:02 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
Jophiel wrote:
The kid has the right to live, just not inside me. If he can move out and get his own place, he's free to go peacefully. Otherwise, I gotta evict by force.
Or call pest control?
#67 Jun 15 2012 at 12:03 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
The kid has the right to live, just not inside me. If he can move out and get his own place, he's free to go peacefully. Otherwise, I gotta evict by force.
Or call pest control?

Zygotes check in; they don't check out?
#68 Jun 15 2012 at 12:11 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Are you your own straight man these days?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#69 Jun 15 2012 at 12:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Are you your own straight man these days?
People's sexual preferences are nobody's business but their own.
#70 Jun 15 2012 at 12:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I need to know if you're having any naturally occurring children you might abort.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#71 Jun 15 2012 at 1:01 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
14,829 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I need to know if you're having any naturally occurring children you might abort.

The unnaturally occurring children you can do what you'd like with. They might be valuable some day as a collectors item though so I'd stick it in the basement for now.
____________________________
LOOK here.
#72 Jun 15 2012 at 1:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
They'll grow up and teach their children that sex-selective abortions are perfectly okay. Is that what you want?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#73 Jun 15 2012 at 1:32 PM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,511 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I need to know if you're having any naturally occurring children you might abort.
Who needs naturally-occurring when you've worked for Monsanto?
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#74 Jun 15 2012 at 1:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
Sweetums wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I need to know if you're having any naturally occurring children you might abort.
Who needs naturally-occurring when you've worked for Monsanto?
All my future offspring will be RoundUp Ready and drought resistant. Smiley: schooled
#75 Jun 15 2012 at 3:00 PM Rating: Good
******
21,715 posts
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I need to know if you're having any naturally occurring children you might abort.
Who needs naturally-occurring when you've worked for Monsanto?
All my future offspring will be RoundUp Ready and drought resistant. Smiley: schooled


Careful, you might yield more bushels per acre quintuplets.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#76 Jun 15 2012 at 4:11 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I need to know if you're having any naturally occurring children you might abort.
Who needs naturally-occurring when you've worked for Monsanto?
All my future offspring will be RoundUp Ready and drought resistant. Smiley: schooled


Careful, you might yield more bushels per acre quintuplets.
My reproductive habits are banned throughout Europe and caused farmer suicides in India.
#77 Jun 15 2012 at 6:24 PM Rating: Good
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,511 posts
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I need to know if you're having any naturally occurring children you might abort.
Who needs naturally-occurring when you've worked for Monsanto?
All my future offspring will be RoundUp Ready and drought resistant. Smiley: schooled


Careful, you might yield more bushels per acre quintuplets.
My reproductive habits are banned throughout Europe and caused farmer suicides in India.
You could also sue people for unauthorized use of your jizz
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#78 Jun 15 2012 at 6:27 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
Sweetums wrote:
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I need to know if you're having any naturally occurring children you might abort.
Who needs naturally-occurring when you've worked for Monsanto?
All my future offspring will be RoundUp Ready and drought resistant. Smiley: schooled


Careful, you might yield more bushels per acre quintuplets.
My reproductive habits are banned throughout Europe and caused farmer suicides in India.
You could also sue people for unauthorized use of your jizz

...after I accidentally loosed on their property. This just keeps sounding better.
#79 Jun 15 2012 at 6:47 PM Rating: Good
Hey, if Monsanto can get away with it, why not you too?
____________________________
Proudmoore US server:
Popina, 90 Priest
Digits, 86 Shaman
Thelesis, 85 Mage
Willowmei, 85 Druid
Necralita, 85 DK
Shrika, 72 Warlock
Jaquelle, 54 Paladin
Grakine, 32 Hunter
The MMO-Zam's FB group. Please message me first so I know who you are.
#80 Jun 15 2012 at 6:58 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
It's somewhat scary that this is probably the only political issue on which Smash and I more or less agree (even with the cynical "people lie to themselves about why they hold positions because the truth is uncomfortable to admit" part).

Smasharoo wrote:
Women want control of their bodies, and I support that.


Yup. That's the starting point of a pro-choice position.

Quote:
We just arbitrarily decide, being too cowardly to articulate the real position: women should have the right to kill their own children while those children reside inside of their bodies.


My personal position is that she has that right (to some degree) until the child *could* survive outside her body. Hence my strong issues with what appear to be elective late term abortions being performed (under the guise of "health of the mother" no less!). Prior to that point, I think that the rights of the child to live should gradually gain against the rights of the woman to control her body. Um... Obviously, the specifics of that sort of equation and how you apply it are pretty arbitrary though. Which is why I'm ok with different states having slightly different rules as long as they are within those bounds. I have issues with both extremes though and unfortunately that's usually where our debates end out.


I also happen to believe that because most people delude themselves about what they're really supporting when they take a pro-choice position, they allow for actions which they will insist constantly that they don't like and shouldn't be allowed. It's somewhat strange to watch, and interesting to see the string of justifications and rationalizations from people who just can't (or wont) acknowledge what criteria they really agree with. It's easy to say "a woman should have the right to control her own body". It's much harder to say at what point that right should end. But all rights have limits. They are not absolute. We just sometimes claim they are so as to make us feel better or something.

Edited, Jun 15th 2012 5:59pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#81 Jun 15 2012 at 7:27 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,625 posts
Oh, that's right. I forgot that gbaji knows my thoughts and opinions better than I do, myself.

Gbaji, can you tell me what my position on this issue is again? I forget...

Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
Kurt Vonnegut (1922-2007) wrote:
I am eternally grateful.. for my knack of finding in great books, some of them very funny books, reason enough to feel honored to be alive, no matter what else might be going on.
#82 Jun 15 2012 at 8:22 PM Rating: Good
******
21,715 posts
Belkira wrote:
Oh, that's right. I forgot that gbaji knows my thoughts and opinions better than I do, myself.

Gbaji, can you tell me what my position on this issue is again? I forget...

Smiley: rolleyes


Hey, if Kate Beckinsale is OK with republicans controlling her vagina, you should be too, tiny.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#83 Jun 15 2012 at 8:41 PM Rating: Default
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
35,691 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
women should have the right to kill their own children while those children reside inside of their bodies


Why stop there? And why the sexist approach? The man should have a say in this as well. After all, the mother isn't the only one who will be charged with taking care of the thing once it's outside. I say pass a bill (or whatever it is you guys do) on retroactive abortion. And why not? Isn't it our god-given right to end the life we create? Aren't we made in God's image, and doesn't God giveth and taketh away?

On a more serious note, I don't support ending a life without a good reason. As for when the thing is actually considered life, I guess it depends on personal definitions. Is it life when cellular growth occurs (are plants alive?) or is brain activity needed? Are you alive if you don't have a defined personality yet? I mean, children don't develop their identities until around age four or five.

As for me, I draw the line at brain activity. If there's no brain activity, it's not alive. You can grow an ear in a Petri dish, but the ear isn't alive. If the fetus hasn't developed a brain or there's no measurable brain activity, is it anything more than an ear with a body attached to it? I mean, we could argue that the fetus would eventually grow a brain and become alive, but then we'd be basing it on assumptions (I don't know the legal term, guys, it's super early in the morning here). If we can justify not carrying out an abortion because of what the fetus might be, where do we draw the line? Say a couple want to have a kid. They try real hard, but nothing happens. They find that something was wrong with the calendar or whatever and make ready for another go, but then have a change of heart. Wouldn't that be an abortion of something that might have been? Pre-conception abortion?

I don't know. I just don't think that parents should be allowed to abort life if they aren't satisfied with the result for whatever reason. Unless the child is severely brain damaged or otherwise handicapped to a point where euthanasia, which I'm a supporter of, by the way, might be considered. But like I said, it depends on whether the fetus is alive or not and I guess that's morally up to each person to decide. Legally, I don't know what the US law says, but it's something about so and so many weeks, right?

I'm just glad I don't have to sort out that mess.

Edited, Jun 16th 2012 4:42am by Mazra
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#84 Jun 15 2012 at 9:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
I also happen to believe that because most people delude themselves about what they're really supporting when they take a pro-choice position, they allow for actions which they will insist constantly that they don't like and shouldn't be allowed.

I don't know about "shouldn't be allowed". As compared above, it's like the usual Nazi rally argument for free speech. Or publishing materials I find objectionable. Or religious practices I think are harmful. You accept that there'll be some actions that you personally disagree with but which are an unavoidable consequence of the greater freedom.
Quote:
It's easy to say "a woman should have the right to control her own body". It's much harder to say at what point that right should end. But all rights have limits. They are not absolute.

Again, just like speech or religion or the freedom from search & seizure or keeping arms or...

...well, I hope you didn't think you were saying anything new.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#85 Jun 15 2012 at 11:07 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
11,703 posts
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
Belkira wrote:
I don't know. Aside from what has already been said about what this says about society and gender roles etc etc, I'm ok with this. I don't find it "reprehensible" that a woman use gender when deciding whether or not to abort. It just doesn't seem like that big a deal to me... Does that make me a bad person? Smiley: lol


I don't like it, but I don't find it reprehensible either. While significantly more expensive, I'd prefer to grow embryos in a test tube and then put all the female ones inside me, if I wanted a girl that badly. Which, if I could afford to do, I totally would if my first kid was a boy. I only want two kids, and the boyfriend and I both really want a daughter. Y'know, when we get around to getting married and popping out crotch fruit.



Why not just grow it to term in a controlled setting? You'd be able to monitor and direct the development, and you can run a batch and pick the optimal progeny.

____________________________
What if the bird will not sing?
Nobunaga answers, "Kill it!"
Hideyoshi answers, "Make it want to sing."
Ieyasu answers, "Wait."
Timelordwho answers "Just as Planned."
#86 Jun 16 2012 at 1:55 AM Rating: Good
That sounds a bit too futuristic freaky to me... >.>
____________________________
Proudmoore US server:
Popina, 90 Priest
Digits, 86 Shaman
Thelesis, 85 Mage
Willowmei, 85 Druid
Necralita, 85 DK
Shrika, 72 Warlock
Jaquelle, 54 Paladin
Grakine, 32 Hunter
The MMO-Zam's FB group. Please message me first so I know who you are.
#87 Jun 16 2012 at 11:13 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
11,703 posts
Yeah and efficient. You could even have the development process bill for the chosen offspring at a premium and use the surplus to subsidize the raising of the non-selected children, should they be kept to term, should abortive control be limited. Optimized offspring for the contracting agents with second tier (but still technically designer/enhanced) children available for people who don't want to roll the dice.

There are some agencies operating today, that practice this to a rudimentary level. albeit using a surrogates rather than a facility, with lesser eugenic control.
____________________________
What if the bird will not sing?
Nobunaga answers, "Kill it!"
Hideyoshi answers, "Make it want to sing."
Ieyasu answers, "Wait."
Timelordwho answers "Just as Planned."
#88 Jun 16 2012 at 1:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,625 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
Why not just grow it to term in a controlled setting? You'd be able to monitor and direct the development, and you can run a batch and pick the optimal progeny.



That sounds a lot like picking from a litter of puppies... I like puppies.

This could be a goldmine.
____________________________
Kurt Vonnegut (1922-2007) wrote:
I am eternally grateful.. for my knack of finding in great books, some of them very funny books, reason enough to feel honored to be alive, no matter what else might be going on.
#89 Jun 16 2012 at 10:16 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,809 posts
As much as I want to engage in this conversation, it wasn't too long ago we had this same exact conversation and all of my points have already been said. I'll wait for now.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#90 Jun 16 2012 at 10:50 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
Almalieque wrote:
As much as I want to engage in this conversation, it wasn't too long ago we had this same exact conversation and all of my points have already been said. I'll wait for now.
You could pretty much pop in and post this in any new thread you're interested in, and you'd be right.
#91 Jun 17 2012 at 2:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
11,703 posts
Belkira wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
Why not just grow it to term in a controlled setting? You'd be able to monitor and direct the development, and you can run a batch and pick the optimal progeny.



That sounds a lot like picking from a litter of puppies... I like puppies.

This could be a goldmine.


Yes, yes it is. You are now in charge of selling this idea, because that sounds way nicer than than how I put it.
____________________________
What if the bird will not sing?
Nobunaga answers, "Kill it!"
Hideyoshi answers, "Make it want to sing."
Ieyasu answers, "Wait."
Timelordwho answers "Just as Planned."
#92 Jun 17 2012 at 11:41 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,809 posts
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
As much as I want to engage in this conversation, it wasn't too long ago we had this same exact conversation and all of my points have already been said. I'll wait for now.
You could pretty much pop in and post this in any new thread you're interested in, and you'd be right.


If that were the case, then every thread would have a noticeable population arguing in agreement with my points. Given the fact that isn't true, I would have to disagree with your notion.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#93 Jun 17 2012 at 10:39 PM Rating: Good
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,511 posts
Almalieque wrote:
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
As much as I want to engage in this conversation, it wasn't too long ago we had this same exact conversation and all of my points have already been said. I'll wait for now.
You could pretty much pop in and post this in any new thread you're interested in, and you'd be right.


If that were the case, then every thread would have a noticeable population arguing in agreement with my points. Given the fact that isn't true, I would have to disagree with your notion.
gbaji's words may be legion, yet he's but one man
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#94 Jun 18 2012 at 4:07 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I also happen to believe that because most people delude themselves about what they're really supporting when they take a pro-choice position, they allow for actions which they will insist constantly that they don't like and shouldn't be allowed.

I don't know about "shouldn't be allowed". As compared above, it's like the usual Nazi rally argument for free speech. Or publishing materials I find objectionable. Or religious practices I think are harmful. You accept that there'll be some actions that you personally disagree with but which are an unavoidable consequence of the greater freedom.


The delusion part comes in when people adamantly insist that they *don't* accept those things, but support actions which cause/allow them to happen anyway. I would have great respect for someone saying "I believe in an absolute right for a woman to choose to abort a pregnancy, so I'm perfectly fine with elective late term abortions". What I don't respect is people saying "Oh no! I don't agree with elective late term abortions at all. That's horrible!", but then turning around and opposing any law or action which might actually prevent elective late term abortions by insisting that it violates a woman's right to choose.

To me, you either believe that said right includes elective late term abortions, or it does not. But it seems like a hell of a lot of people spend a lot of effort avoiding facing that aspect of the issue at all.

Quote:
Quote:
It's easy to say "a woman should have the right to control her own body". It's much harder to say at what point that right should end. But all rights have limits. They are not absolute.

Again, just like speech or religion or the freedom from search & seizure or keeping arms or...


And in all those other areas we do tend to allow for reasonable infringement of those rights, openly and honestly. We accept the whole "speech infringed so you can't yell fire in a crowded theater" case pretty universally. Same with reasonable search, reasonable gun control laws, etc. But in the area of abortion, it's much more common for people to argue blindly and blanketly about a "right to choose" regardless of situation. When asked about a given exception case, they'll say "Oh. Of course we shouldn't allow abortion in that case", but when it comes to actually passing laws, they fall in line with the "oppose this law because it infringes on women's rights!" and end out doing exactly the opposite of what they claim is the right thing to do.

Quote:
...well, I hope you didn't think you were saying anything new.


It's not new so much as a new application of an old thing. The same "say one thing, but look the other way while the opposite happens" logic that applies to late term abortion certainly appears to be present in this issue as well. I'm seeing the same people doing pretty much the same thing in this case. You honestly didn't notice nearly unanimous statements that choosing to abort based on sex is wrong at the start of this thread, followed by a rapid walking away from any action which might actually prevent exactly that from happening? On some issues (and this is one of them) supporting your "side" becomes more important than personal morality. That's what I'm seeing happen here.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#95 Jun 18 2012 at 4:27 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Well, your bit of self-righteous pride seems to hinge on "some people" doing whatever you say "some people" do so congratulations on being better than some unnamed mass of "some people", I suppose.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#96 Jun 18 2012 at 4:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Double post pwnt.

Edited, Jun 18th 2012 5:28pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#97 Jun 19 2012 at 12:28 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Well, your bit of self-righteous pride seems to hinge on "some people" doing whatever you say "some people" do so congratulations on being better than some unnamed mass of "some people", I suppose.


Gbaji's the Manny Pacquiao of defeating strawmen. It's going to be equally weird when, in a stunning upset, one of those strawmen is awarded the decision victory over him.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#98 Jun 19 2012 at 1:13 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
14,829 posts
gbaji wrote:
[The same "say one thing, but look the other way while the opposite happens" logic that applies to late term abortion certainly appears to be present in this issue as well. I'm seeing the same people doing pretty much the same thing in this case. You honestly didn't notice nearly unanimous statements that choosing to abort based on sex is wrong at the start of this thread, followed by a rapid walking away from any action which might actually prevent exactly that from happening? On some issues (and this is one of them) supporting your "side" becomes more important than personal morality. That's what I'm seeing happen here.
I honestly didn't notice.

If there was anything one could call unanimous about the replies it would be that most had stated that didn't like the taste of weeding out girls but that ultimately it's not a legal issue that should impinge on a woman's right to choose.

I am the only one that admitted to coming back with a second thought. It wasn't a changing of my mind and simply wasn't 'walking away', but clarifying for myself, that i can refrain from passing judgement even when it means throwing my sex under the proverbial bus.

I know it's hard, all us liberals sound the same. But do try and measure us each individually.
____________________________
LOOK here.
#99 Jun 19 2012 at 4:10 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
30,870 posts
Elinda wrote:
If there was anything one could call unanimous about the replies it would be that most had stated that didn't like the taste of weeding out girls but that ultimately it's not a legal issue that should impinge on a woman's right to choose.


I think that the predominant angle on that was a belief that it would be too difficult to determine the motivation for the abortion in the first place. Which is what that was the exact point I responded to. We already have laws that act based on the motivation of someone seeking some good or service, so IMO that's not a good rationale to avoid a law in this case.

Quote:
I am the only one that admitted to coming back with a second thought. It wasn't a changing of my mind and simply wasn't 'walking away', but clarifying for myself, that i can refrain from passing judgement even when it means throwing my sex under the proverbial bus.

I know it's hard, all us liberals sound the same. But do try and measure us each individually.


Lol. Yeah. It is hard sometimes. But I was trying to narrow this down to just the one aspect of this (can we pass a law which targets just the cases where it's known that someone is aborting because of the sex of the fetus?). I think we can and perhaps even should.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 44 All times are in CDT
Aethien, Almalieque, DSD, Kuwoobie, lolgaxe, Nadenu, Anonymous Guests (38)