'Sanctuary city for unborn' ordinances take off in Texas despite pro-choice pushback." A report

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Servant31 said:
Saying that the mother has dominion over her body doesn’t recognize the rights of the child. The argument exists in a vacuum.
Click to expand...
I don’t think so. It’s just that the rights of the mother supersede the rights of the child while it requires use of her body. Or at least such is the opinion of the pro-choice crowd.
 
Hume said:
Don’t get out the shackles. Get out your wallet.
Click to expand...
Get out both!

Protection of the most vulnerable humans should be law; as should protection of mothers who want to keep their children in tough circumstances.
 
What is the difference between a near term unborn baby and the week born child? Mentally nil. So… do they not have bodily autonomy? Is the capacity to want bodily autonomy the benchmark for human rights? And does it have to be a conscious decision? It can’t simply be the baby struggling for life?

Or are rights earned only by breaking the plane of the end of the birth canal. ‘He’s almost out, toe still in… HE MADE IT! HE’S A PERSON NOW!’ that is arbitrary.

Every time in history we look at a human and say ‘Not a human! Not a person!’ it ends in tragedy. Haven’t we learned yet?
 
Jimbo said:
What is the difference between a near term unborn baby and the week born child? Mentally nil. So… do they not have bodily autonomy? Is the capacity to want bodily autonomy the benchmark for human rights? And does it have to be a conscious decision? It can’t simply be the baby struggling for life?

Or are rights earned only by breaking the plane of the end of the birth canal. ‘He’s almost out, toe still in… HE MADE IT! HE’S A PERSON NOW!’ that is arbitrary.

Every time in history we look at a human and say ‘Not a human! Not a person!’ it ends in tragedy. Haven’t we learned yet?
Click to expand...
We addressed this already with a discussion on the nature of lines. They have to be drawn somewhere.

In a 55mph zone, is the guy doing 56 materially faster or more dangerous than the guy doing 55? Of course not, but the line must go somewhere.

If you want to appeal to the growing pro-choice crowd, where is a better line than birth? Conception is a no-go, so where else? Using a week or detectable development are all inherently troublesome.

I guess we can both be glad that third trimester abortions represent such a small percentage of abortions nationwide, right?
 
Jimbo said:
Or are rights earned only by breaking the plane of the end of the birth canal. ‘He’s almost out, toe still in… HE MADE IT! HE’S A PERSON NOW!’ that is arbitrary.
Click to expand...
One of the fundamental principles of the Enlightenment - on which American is founded - is personal property. A woman’s body is, without debate, her most sacred property. If she doesn’t want to submit it to pregnancy for absolutely any reason, she shouldn’t have to.

As you mentioned things being arbitrary, when is a woman’s sacred right of control over her own body hijacked by her fetus?

The answer for most folks is “never”.
 
Fair point. But ‘historically low rates’ isn’t ‘low’. Deaths to abortion dwarf covid, heart attack, or stroke deaths.
 
Last edited:
Hume said:
One of the fundamental principles of the Enlightenment - on which American is founded - is personal property. A woman’s body is, without debate, her most sacred property. If she doesn’t want to submit it to pregnancy for absolutely any reason, she shouldn’t have to.

As you mentioned things being arbitrary, when is a woman’s sacred right of control over her own body hijacked by her fetus?
Click to expand...
It is also a fundamental property of the enlightenment that we help the weak before helping the strong.

Who is weaker or more defenceless than an unborn child in the crosshairs of Planned Parenthood?
 
Hume said:
I guess we can both be glad that third trimester abortions represent such a small percentage of abortions nationwide, right?
Click to expand...
Absolutely.
Hume said:
If you want to appeal to the growing pro-choice crowd, where is a better line than birth? Conception is a no-go, so where else? Using a week or detectable development are all inherently troublesome.
Click to expand...
Where is a better line than birth? Lots of places, because birth is as arbitrary as the color of your skin, and the cost is immeasurable: Death. We should use logic and science. I fail to see why conception is a non starter but birth is natural. That type of on again/off again humanity puts our basic, inalienable rights in the hands of simple man made governments. That’s a type of moral relativism that always leads us into tragedy.
 
Hume said:
As you mentioned things being arbitrary, when is a woman’s sacred right of control over her own body hijacked by her fetus?
Click to expand...
‘Hijacked’? A floating fetus jumped into her womb as she was driving down the road? 😉

Again, the fetus, a distinct human being, has a body itself. The mother has no right to actively kill it just to be rid of it; any more than I have a right to actively kill my children to be rid of the drain they present on my resources.

Does the mother have a right to avoid pregnancy? Of course! There is an easy way to do that…
 
Sure, birth control is the most common and obvious. But sometimes those methods fail.
 
I read again today, mothers, sad to say, mothers pressure their daughters to get abortions, boyfriends or spouses pressure them. The percentages are relatively high. This is way beyond saying so the woman won’t be constrained with having to bring up a child.
But even the pro-choice side is beginning to wake up to the issue. An article in The Daily Beast is headlined, “Coerced Abortions: A New Study Shows They’re Common.” The article is based largely on information from the Guttmacher Institute (a pro-abortion research center) but raises the topic of “reproductive coercion.” This is an interesting twist on the concept. Rather than looking at women who are coerced into having an abortion, it looks at women who are coerced or tricked first into getting pregnant, then also coerced into aborting the baby, identified as “reproductive control.”
Click to expand...
 
“Pressure” is a broad term. I guess every person who advises “I think you should abort…” can be said to have pressured the woman into abortion.
 
Jimbo said:
Where is a better line than birth? Lots of places, because birth is as arbitrary as the color of your skin,
Click to expand...
Well, no, it’s not arbitrary at all.

It’s a discrete event chronologically. I can tell you the birth dates of myself, my wife and all my children.
It’s a discrete event biologically - the child is no longer connected to the mother via the umbilicus.

There’s actually very little about the momentous occasion of birth that’s arbitrary.
 
Hume said:
It’s a discrete event chronologically. I can tell you the birth dates of myself, my wife and all my children.
It’s a discrete event biologically - the child is no longer connected to the mother via the umbilicus.
Click to expand...
Yep. Like the date we leave hospital. Or the date a tooth is lost. Or the date of the last breast feeding.

Human beings spend their first several months physically connected to mum. It’s a different duration for elephants. That’s the nature of it!
 
Rau said:
Human beings spend their first several months physically connected to mum. It’s a different duration for elephants. That’s the nature of it!
Click to expand...
Not just physically connected - we spend our first 9 months using moms body, leaving wear and tear in our wake that is usually permanent in some way and growing worse with each pregnancy.
It’s such a biologically stressful event for mothers that without modern medicine, many died doing it. Even today many still die - particularly in Texas.
 
Hume said:
Not just physically connected - we spend our first 9 months using moms body , leaving wear and tear in our wake that is usually permanent in some way and growing worse with each pregnancy.
It’s such a biologically stressful event for mothers that without modern medicine, many died doing it.
Click to expand...
This is the reality of human procreation
Hume said:
Even today many still die - particularly in Texas.
Click to expand...
This seems to be a commentary on US healthcare.
 
Hume said:
Sure. Mom didn’t want to procreate.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but stuff happens which yields a new set of circumstances.
Hume said:
The idea that pregnancy is a risk-free zone for women that doesn’t still kill them is cavalier and ill-informed.
Click to expand...
Not an idea I’ve seen promoted here. The risk of maternal deaths associated with maternity are quantifiable and quite low compared with other causes, and you are right to point out the US is not doing as well on this front as other modern countries.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top