Issues other than abortion

[laylow]

Guess i should add “what God does” to the list of those things irrelevant and out of the realm of the discussion of willful abortion.

Why would I expect anything different, he always gets off easy.

 

[Vonsalza]

How many times do I have to say this? A BABY IS NOT THE MOTHER’S BODY. This is a CLEAR AND PLAIN FACT.

Then when she detaches it from her body, do with it as you wish.

 

[Kei]

capital punishment is also morally repugnant.

Capital punishment is a form of justice against grave crime. Abortion kills the most innocent among us. There is no comparison.

 

[laylow]

I have already stated multiple times that in attempting to save the woman’s life a loss of the life of the babe is licit.
This not cancer or a stroke. It’s pregnancy. It is relatively uncommon nowadays for that to lead to death. In the case of complications then saving the life of the woman at the cost of the babe is licit, as already stated.

If it happens just one time, that specific woman’s right to life was taken.

 

[Kei]

No, it wasn’t, because nobody killed her. She died through natural complications, which, again, are reason for saving the life of the mother at the expense of the baby.

 

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

If they’re physically attached to my body in a way I don’t want and my detaching them would kill them?

Yes. I absolutely have the right to kill them.

Ok, then you DO believe that the unborn child is a human life.

Sure, that was my position, oh, 900 posts ago.

That fact just doesn’t override a woman’s control over her own body.

Now this is a different argument. I do not believe we have the right at any time to kill persons, which the unborn child is

The issue is when the supposed right to live conflicts with a woman’s established right to control her own body.

We default to the woman.

That has always been my position. Scroll up and put me to the test on that.

 

[laylow]

Capital punishment is a form of justice against grave crime. Abortion kills the most innocent among us. There is no comparison.

Common misconception. The majority of criminals have limited to non-existence of free will based on prior experiences, medical issues, trauma, etc. The privileged whom have never experienced these things just chalk it up to those people being ‘bad’ people. When digging deeper, most would sympathize with these broken humans. Should they be taken away from society to protect it’s members…yes. To be put to death…no…only if they choose it.

 

[Kei]

The crime committed is still grave regardless of factors affecting certain people. Certain factors may reduce the culpability of the person committing said crime but the crime would still be grave.

It’s also a generalization. Many on death row actually repent of what they have done.

 

[Sbee0]

You’ve done neither of these things. So I’ll repeat;

P: Fetal development requires a woman’s body
P: Women have control over their bodies
C: Ergo, women have control over fetal development.

I know logic and I know how it works. Like I said, C does not follow from P1 and P2. C is fallacious and “control” does not mean in C what it does in P. Honestly I don’t feel like repeating what I and others have said above many times so feel free to read and digest yourself. And it sure sounds to me like it ain’t me that’s getting frustrated.

 

[Elf01]

And we don’t buy the consent to sex = consent to pregnancy concept anymore. Women can get pregnancy 96 hours out of a month (and that’s being generous with the time frame). Whereas men can get a woman pregnant anytime, if they have a sperm count. Put the onus on the man to avoid getting a woman pregnant then.

It takes two to have consensual sex. If the woman feels the risk of getting pregnant is too high saying no is an option.

The only choice you have is to attack the truth value of the premises. So which one is untrue?
P: women have control over their bodies

That one is not true. You’ve even admitted that there is not an absolute right to control your body.

This happens every day. Child die all over the world from lack of food, clean water, medical care, etc. Convicted criminals (ones possibly innocent) are put to death. Kids are taken from their families and die due to lack of care. Yet, are the OP stated, only abortion is talked about.

These are important too, but imo don’t have the weight of abortion.

You are not good at this. A fertilized egg is a person (according to pro-life folk). Many fertilized eggs do not attach to the uterus wall, therefore they die. Humans are doing nothing to attempt to save these eggs, so apparently they are OK with their deaths?

It could certainly be a worthwhile area for research funding. However a natural death and being murdered are not the same. Every human being will die. The pro life argument is that no human being should be murdered.

Swing and a miss…

Live Science

Babies Are Born with Some Self-Awareness​

Babies are born with the ability to be aware of their bodies, new research suggests.

Did they acquire that awareness during the birth process?

On Capital Punishment:

Common misconception. The majority of criminals have limited to non-existence of free will based on prior experiences, medical issues, trauma, etc. The privileged whom have never experienced these things just chalk it up to those people being ‘bad’ people. When digging deeper, most would sympathize with these broken humans. Should they be taken away from society to protect it’s members…yes. To be put to death…no…only if they choose it.

I agree that every human being has the right not to be killed. Again it’s weight. To me abortion gets priority if I get the choice to end one or the other.

 

[Sbee0]

Sbee0:

capital punishment is also morally repugnant.

Capital punishment is a form of justice against grave crime. Abortion kills the most innocent among us. There is no comparison.

Different topic (and that’s not always true re capital punishment). I happen to think to be pro life is incompatible with supporting capital punishment.

BUt I digress.

 

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

You’ve done neither of these things. So I’ll repeat;

P: Fetal development requires a woman’s body
P: Women have control over their bodies
C: Ergo, women have control over fetal development.

I know logic and I know how it works.

Ok, fine.

Like I said, C does not follow from P1 and P2.

Why not?

C is fallacious

Nope, cannot comment directly on the conclusion. My old Dr. H. just but a big red X on your quiz paper…

and “control” does not mean in C what it does in P.

Yes it does. I made the argument. It means exactly the same thing. “Rules”. “Has authority over”. Standard understanding of the word “control”…

Honestly I don’t feel like repeating what I and others have said above many times so feel free to read and digest yourself.

You’re just not doing what you say you can do here… But for sake of graciousness, lets move on from this part of the debate to something you can do.

And it sure sounds to me like it ain’t me that’s getting frustrated.

No no. I’m having fun here. Really.

 

[Sbee0]

I agree that every human being has the right not to be killed. Again it’s weight. To me abortion gets priority if I get the choice to end one or the other.

I’d like to see both end. Their root cause honestly isn’t all that different.

 

[Elf01]

I’d like to see both end. Their root cause honestly isn’t all that different.

So would I, but given the choice and I could only end one of them abortion would easily be my choice.

The Death Penalty would be my number 2 priority. The most fundamental part of the right to life in my opinion is the right not to be killed.

Next I would give everyone access to good quality health care, food, shelter and clothing

 

[laylow]

The crime committed is still grave regardless of factors affecting certain people. Certain factors may reduce the culpability of the person committing said crime but the crime would still be grave.

It’s also a generalization. Many on death row actually repent of what they have done.

Surely the God you believe in would know the real culpability of the criminal? Surely he would be merciful? Why in this case are the religious willing to “play God” but turn it around and use that statement against something like medical aid in dying?

 

[Vonsalza]

That one is not true. You’ve even admitted that there is not an absolute right to control your body.

No I haven’t. As far as liberal philosophy goes (liberal in the classic sense - as opposed to statism), it’s kinda benchmark.

 

[Kei]

It is a different topic. I guess the pope would agree with you at least somewhat. But I am pretty sure that the rates of known repentance among death row inmates and those serving life sentences are much higher among the former, which ultimately is what really matters.
I think it is proper if certain conditions are met, personally, which is not to say that it should be done regularly. But I digress and wish to say no more on this topic with you since it is off topic. God bless.

 

[Elf01]

No I haven’t. As far as liberal philosophy goes (liberal in the classic sense - as opposed to statism), it’s kinda benchmark.

It’s always a person. It’s a question of degree. And until birth, the personhood of a fetus does not trump the personhood of its mother.

If the right to bodily autonomy was absolute then you would support the immediate separation. Your issue isn’t really bodily autonomy. It’s the abilities of the party who will die.

 

[Sbee0]

Why not?

Because P2 is talking about a woman’s body. That of course has nothing to do with your conclusion C, as a fetus is not a womans body nor part of it.

C is fallacious

Nope, cannot comment directly on the conclusion. My old Dr. H. just but a big red X on your quiz paper…

When C is fallacious, sure I can.

and “control” does not mean in C what it does in P.

Yes it does. I made the argument. It means exactly the same thing. “Rules”. “Has authority over”. Standard understanding of the word “control”…

Not true. First we do not have absolute control and dominion over our bodies. Suicide can be very much a crime. Thus right there, P2 is deemed false and C cannot possibly be its conclusion.

And second, women nourish but they do not control and own development of their unborn child. It is a separate entity on its own development path. He or she may turn out large or small, male or female, healthy or otherwise. Women don’t “control” any of that. Whatsoever. And so on.

Fallacial conclusion from two unrelated premises.

Honestly I don’t feel like repeating what I and others have said above many times so feel free to read and digest yourself.

You’re just not doing what you say you can do here… But for sake of graciousness, lets move on from this part of the debate to something you can do.

I believe that’s an apt demonstration of what is called argumentum ad hominem fallacy.

And it sure sounds to me like it ain’t me that’s getting frustrated.

No no. I’m having fun here. Really.

Good to hear. Ditto!

 

[laylow]

Because P2 is talking about a woman’s body. That of course has nothing to do with your conclusion C, as a fetus is not a womans body nor part of it.

It is 100% dependent on that woman’s body and that woman’s body alone. If that does not make it a part of it, then I don’t know what other definition would suffice.