L
LovelyLadybug
Guest
He’s pro-abortion. He is Catholic, supposedly, but isn’t allowed to receive communion because of his pro-abortion views.
- Status
H
Hume
Guest
I’m pro-choice. Abortion saddens me substantially. I wish to see it minimized without forcing the hand of the woman involved.
It’s why I’m pro-contraceptives and very in favor of paid maternity leave and free healthcare for mom and baby. Things that take the financial fear away from women concerning pregnancy.
And I’m no longer Catholic. I’m a weak deist. Effectively an atheist but I concede that the basis of our law requires the concession of some sort of god via apriori axiom.
When I attend, I abstain from communion out of respect.
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
This was the statement I asked you to confirm. It says nothing about infanticide.
As someone who has stood at the bedside of my spouse with an ethicist from the Diocese at my side, making the decision that life support be withdrawn and comfort care only until his natural death, is it your conclusion that I committed homicide? I mean, if comfort care is infanticide, then, I killed my husband.
Can you see the difference in the situations?
Because, I find the idea of rib crushing chest compressions (if you don’t break a rib you are not doing it right), electro-shock (it is not like TV, it is extremely paiful and brutal), a child suffering because the law says I will go to jail if I don’t do these things, repugnant.
There is not one thing immoral about providing comfort care to those who are dying.
T
tafan2
Guest
Ok, hypothetically, no one is willing to raise the baby?
2nd question:
And late term unborn babies?
2nd question:
And late term unborn babies?
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Currently, 17 countries prohibit all abortions:
H
Hume
Guest
To the first, I think it’s very important that we stay within reality as we know it. And in reality as we know it there are always people willing to take a baby particularly in an adoption context where babies are preferred. And then there’s always the social service of dropping off the baby at a police department or a fire department or some Municipal service that takes unwanted babies.
To the second, we have to draw the line somewhere and it’s most rationally drawn at Birth. A woman must always be in command of her body. For us pro-choicers, that’s non-negotiable.
But I’ll happily concede that if a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy after gestation has reached as point of viability, there’s more of a moral consequence for her. Its undesirable.
Perhaps you guys could establish a system where a woman who wants to abort after, say 25 weeks can do so in a Catholic hospital and she just surrenders it to you guys.
To the second, we have to draw the line somewhere and it’s most rationally drawn at Birth. A woman must always be in command of her body. For us pro-choicers, that’s non-negotiable.
But I’ll happily concede that if a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy after gestation has reached as point of viability, there’s more of a moral consequence for her. Its undesirable.
Perhaps you guys could establish a system where a woman who wants to abort after, say 25 weeks can do so in a Catholic hospital and she just surrenders it to you guys.
H
Hume
Guest
That’s a great resource. Thank you.
U
upant
Guest
not even close, I assume you provided care until it was no longer effective. the VA gov would allow the child to die without care. he would allow the kid to die because the parents don’t want the baby. what is different from a normal birth? the child is wanted.
this isn’t comfort-care, every baby born will die on its own without care. can every baby born be given comfort-care and be left to die if the parents and doctor agrees?
this is infanticide. this is murder.
what do you call killing a newborn child
the gov explained that these scenarios arise in cases of children with “severe deformities.” is a severe deformity a reason to let a child die? can a person kill their child because they don’t want to be burdened with their care?
where have we seen this scenario before?
why do we have to draw a line? the baby is alive at conception. the abortionists want a line to appease their conscience. at birth just fits the abortionist argument.
the real line was crossed when the people engaged.
your body autonomy is just an excuse for murder. should one be allowed to commit suicide? starve themselves to death because they don’t want to be heavy? do drugs for enjoyment even to the point of OD’ing? you evaded this above
there is no body autonomy. you can’t do what you want to your body. society does object and makes laws to stop the behavior.
U
upant
Guest
interesting that the website calls killing a child reproductive health care, people really are gullible.
H
Hume
Guest
We have to determine the best point where the agency and autonomy of the fetus is no longer overshadowed by a woman’s right to govern her own body.
Birth is just arguably the best one.
Enjoying sex is not a waiver of bodily autonomy.
As long as they don’t harm others and do so with full consent - arguably yes. Folks should be able to do most anything they want - free from my god, free from yours, subject to their own.
Bodily autonomy is actually one the the hallmarks of law. You are yours. You are your most valuable property.
This goes for women too. Even pregnant women.
Last edited:
U
upant
Guest
but we don’t, there is no reason to unless it is an excuse for killing the baby
not the enjoyment but the engagement without proper planning (NFP) is. where is personal responsibility? killing a baby is not the answer to a lack of personal responsibility. the line was crossed when they didn’t plan.
why just most things? what is your limit? in reality, they can’t, what one should and what one can is different. society imposes its rule and can do the same for abortion.
it isn’t complete, it is what society allows and what society limits, it is not your body.
what about self-harm? you didn’t address it again
H
Hume
Guest
Sure we do. The woman doesn’t want an unwelcome guest inside her body. Eat her groceries, drinking her water, leaving its waste for her liver and kidneys to clean up.
I don’t blame her. Pregnancy at least marginally harms every woman. Some are harmed greatly. Some are even killed by it, in 2020.
There are lesser considerations, also valid. Like the financial considerations. Unwanted children help keep impoverished women in poverty. And as a societal consideration, unwanted children are much more likely to have criminal records.
It’s not a risk-free state. I don’t blame some women for wanting out.
I agree that women and men should both do their best to reduce the likelihood of unwanted pregnancy - especially with the most effective methods like IUDs and condoms if not prohibited for ideological reasons.
But again, at no point does someone surrender the most fundamental right of bodily autonomy. Even if they have sex.
Just responsibly leaving it open to uncertainty.
Sure, we were among the very last to make slavery illegal. Oddly, we’re trying to re-enslave women to their wombs.
Of course not. As I said earlier to Harrystotle, liberty and bodily autonomy isn’t the end, it’s the beginning. The starting point. The null. We can and do create additional laws atop it, like not killing people (thereby robbing them of their liberty).
It’s not like you can stop them, sadly.
What are you going to do with a suicide? Throw their corpse in jail?
H
humbleseeker
Guest
Talk about going off topic. Wasn’t this thread about Joe Biden? If anyone is interested in debating Hume, or their position regarding abortion, just use the search function. This all has been debated before. I don’t think anyone is changing their minds.
U
upant
Guest
it is legalized murder,
but abortion is killing people
but it is illegal and that is the point. a person doesn’t have autonomy over their body, only what society allows.
good point
H
Hume
Guest
And pro-life laws are legalized slavery.
Forcing a woman to carry a baby against her will enslaves and endangers her.
Self-harm isn’t illegal where I live. Are you from the US? Or is there a state law that forbids it in your state?
H
Hume
Guest
Among the regulars? Probably not. I just do it for the gallery and for the fun of it. In truth.
Brain games when I’m stuck at home with a sick kid.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
A baby is not a “clear bodily threat” to the mother except in 1-2% of cases, and even then the baby isn’t intentionally attempting to kill the mother. It isn’t a premeditated act on the part of the baby, as it is on the part of “someone [who] presents a clear bodily threat to you, [where] you have the right in virtually all jurisdictions to end that threat” because of malevolent intent.HarryStotle:
Not bodily. Just mom.
Apropos “bodily autonomy”.
If someone presents a clear bodily threat to you, you have the right in virtually all jurisdictions to end that threat - up to and including lethal force if that’s what it takes.
“Stand your ground” laws, for example.
You don’t have a right to use lethal force on someone who might inadvertently or unintentionally pose a threat to you, which is the case with the baby in the womb.
In any case, the mother is the one, by consensual agreement, placed that baby there in the first place, so the mother created the very “ground” upon which she attempts to justify killing another human being who was placed there by her consent.
Perhaps the baby in the womb has a stronger “stand your ground” case because the baby was placed into jeopardy by the irresponsible act of the mother (in most cases, rape being the exception).
Last edited:
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Joe Biden might be reading the thread.
H
Hume
Guest
Pregnancy and birth are almost invariably damaging to a woman. We only count it when the damage is “serious”.
A woman doesn’t owe “peeing on herself just a little when she laughs too hard” to a child she does not want, Harry. Her body is hers. She owes nothing to anyone for it.
The mother may have agreed to sex, but not pregnancy. Either way, that does not waive her right of bodily autonomy.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Life is “invariably damaging” to every human being, a la the law of entropy. You haven’t made your case.HarryStotle:
Pregnancy and birth are almost invariably damaging to a woman. We only count it when the damage is “serious”.
Given that we have wandered far far afield from the thread topic, I am hereby abandoning the derailment.
- Status