What do you think must occur to realistically overturn Roe v Wade?

  • Thread starter Thread starter HeWillProvide
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
royal_archer said:
I didn’t say stop I said deter.
Click to expand...
I’d expect chemical abortions to soar if surgical abortions were curtailed. It’s much easier to deter the surgicals. Women would decide earlier, and probably would stretch the limit of the chemical effectiveness.

Just look how successful the war on drugs has been. The new technique for making meth doesn’t need that dangerous lab anymore, just some mixing bottles. Enforcement pressure stimulated demand for better techniques, and imagination and innovation came through. We can expect the same response to abortion restrictions.

Ain’t this a great country?
 
WillieWonka said:
I’d expect chemical abortions to soar if surgical abortions were curtailed. It’s much easier to deter the surgicals. Women would decide earlier, and probably would stretch the limit of the chemical effectiveness.

Just look how successful the war on drugs has been. The new technique for making meth doesn’t need that dangerous lab anymore, just some mixing bottles. Enforcement pressure stimulated demand for better techniques, and imagination and innovation came through. We can expect the same response to abortion restrictions.

Ain’t this a great country?
Click to expand...
So what is the harm of delcaring those baby killing drugs to be illegal?
 
It would probably deter people even more if the drugs were not only illegal, but if those who used it were also charged with murder…
I agree though. What we need is to change the hearts of people and educate them. They have to see abortion before they end it.
 
GeorgeSword said:
It would probably deter people even more if the drugs were not only illegal, but if those who used it were also charged with murder…
I agree though. What we need is to change the hearts of people and educate them. They have to see abortion before they end it.
Click to expand...
Declaring something illegal in many ways is just checking a box. But it is a box that has to be checked prior to following action. The government has to say that killing babies is wrong.
 
Yes, but charging people with murder for doing it would also be a big deterrence, I think.
 
royal_archer said:
Declaring something illegal in many ways is just checking a box. But it is a box that has to be checked prior to following action. The government has to say that killing babies is wrong.
Click to expand...
And when the government is the people?
 
WillieWonka said:
And when the government is the people?
Click to expand...
Then the people must be taught. Just because people approve of it doesn’t make it right. You are alive, I am alive, and so others deserve this opportunity as well.
 
GeorgeSword said:
Then the people must be taught. Just because people approve of it doesn’t make it right. You are alive, I am alive, and so others deserve this opportunity as well.
Click to expand...
The people know everything you know. Most just disagree with your conclusions.
 
royal_archer said:
I guess that some of us just have not been assimilated to the all knowing borg.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Very true. Too many people have a notion that if only their opponents knew what they knew they would agree with them. But their opponents do know everything they know, and they still don’t agree.

Few on either side bother to examine why.
 
HeWillProvide said:
Aside from a lot of prayer, what specific steps do you think must be taken by society, pro-lifers and/or otherwise, to have Roe v Wade overturned and have abortion outlawed?

Do you think those who want two gay people to get “married” are taking a bigger stand on that issue than we pro-lifers are taking on abortion?
Click to expand...
Abortion is the backstop of our society’s birth control ethos.

Mass chronic use of birth control generates a culture-wide habitual expectation of “risk-free nookie.”

When that expectation is frustrated, the desire to kill the little one is enormous.

So, they kill.

To reverse Roe v. Wade, they’re going to have to stop use of artificial birth control.

We don’t need pro-life budgets in our churches.

We need anti-ABC budgets.
 
Peter_Dawson said:
Abortion is the backstop of our society’s birth control ethos.

Mass chronic use of birth control generates a culture-wide habitual expectation of “risk-free nookie.”

When that expectation is frustrated, the desire to kill the little one is enormous.

So, they kill.

To reverse Roe v. Wade, they’re going to have to stop use of artificial birth control.

We don’t need pro-life budgets in our churches.

We need anti-ABC budgets.
Click to expand...
Catholics have embraced ABC just like everyone else. They don’t think there’s anything wrong with it, and they base that on their life experience and conscience rather than theory. Where’s the budget going to come from? Start preaching against ABC and I predict a dwindling Sunday collecetion.
 
GeorgeSword said:
I disagree. They don’t seem to know basic human morals.
Click to expand...
They know what you think. They know what your morals are. They simply disagree. Morals are a question of judgement, and theirs differs from yours.

They know all about eggs, sperm, DNA, conception, gestation, and the belief in immortal souls. They simply don’t regard a single cell as a human being deserving of life. You do.
 
They began as a single cell. So did you. Do you think you have the right to life, or not? Let us assume that an embryo is not human life as some would allege… and that it becomes human life at some point. I am not saying I believe this, but simply for the point of argument, does it not have the right to live?
 
GeorgeSword said:
They began as a single cell. So did you. Do you think you have the right to life, or not? Let us assume that an embryo is not human life as some would allege… and that it becomes human life at some point. I am not saying I believe this, but simply for the point of argument, does it not have the right to live?
Click to expand...
Your opposition says an instance of the human species develops over time into an organism deserving protection of its life. At this point they refer to it as a human being. That point can be anywhere from immediately after conception to one month after birth.

They fully understand the biological and develpmental processes involved, and are fully aware of the results of various medical testing and monitoring techniques.
 
WillieWonka said:
They know what you think. They know what your morals are. They simply disagree. Morals are a question of judgement, and theirs differs from yours.

They know all about eggs, sperm, DNA, conception, gestation, and the belief in immortal souls. They simply don’t regard a single cell as a human being deserving of life. You do.
Click to expand...
You say that as if such a view is compatible with a civilized society. Some feel human sacrifice, slavery, torcher, serial killing, genocide, etc are with in their moral bounds. That does not make these acts moral. We as a society have a right and an obligation to stop those with these harmfull points of view from acting on them.
 
royal_archer said:
You say that as if such a view is compatible with a civilized society. Some feel human sacrifice, slavery, torcher, serial killing, genocide, etc are with in their moral bounds. That does not make these acts moral. We as a society have a right and an obligation to stop those with these harmfull points of view from acting on them.
Click to expand...
I didn’t mention civilized society. If you disagree with the accuracy of my description of the pro-abrtion view, please feel free to provide a more accurate description.
 
WillieWonka said:
I didn’t mention civilized society. If you disagree with the accuracy of my description of the pro-abrtion view, please feel free to provide a more accurate description.
Click to expand...
I didn’t say your description was innaccurate. I was just noting the relation to the views of other anti social beliefs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top