Abortion

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by xBiophagex, Jan 14, 2013.

  1. SSDD
    Offline

    SSDD Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    11,695
    Thanks Received:
    1,159
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,348
    I see that even though you claimed that you could present a sitiuation in which one person's dependence upon another would be analogous to the relationship between mother and child. Obviously, you can't so you begin the song and dance.

    It is you who must modify and modify. You claim that you can present one sort of situation and when it becomes evidence that you can't, then you begin modifying. My statement remains the same as when we first started. It is you who can't deliver on what you claimed to be "no problem".

    I am still asking for you to describe a situation in which through no actions of your own, you might find yourself connected to me and dependent upon my bodily systems for your survial. Either you can do that, or you can't. If you can't then you have no apt analogy to support your argument.

    I never said that I was pro life. In fact, I'm not. I am anti abortion on demand.
     
  2. SSDD
    Offline

    SSDD Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    11,695
    Thanks Received:
    1,159
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,348
    No, it is cherry picking and semantics because that is what it is.

    Your own dictionary.com disagrees with you.

    child
    noun, plural chil┬Ědren.
    1. a person between birth and full growth
    2. a son or daughter
    3. A baby or infant
    4. a human fetus.
     
  3. SSDD
    Offline

    SSDD Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    11,695
    Thanks Received:
    1,159
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,348
    Legally? That is about as weak an argument as semantics. There was a time when legally you could own another human being in this country. Was the law correct in its assumption that it was fine to own blacks because they were something less than human beings?

    Lots of things have been legal due to corruption or shortcomings in the law and judicial system. Simply saying "it
    s legal" is hardly a rational argument. If you can't justify the legal decisions that have been made, then you may as well say "just because" as "it's legal"
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. PratchettFan
    Offline

    PratchettFan Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    7,238
    Thanks Received:
    745
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Ratings:
    +1,706
    I have been perfectly consistent. Either the right to life supercedes the right to personal sovereignty or it does not. I hold that it does not and I do not change the position for the sake of convenience. You hold that it does, but only when you want it to. If it is not convenient for you, then it doesn't.

    As to "order of precedence", you haven't got a clue what you are talking about.
     
  5. Katzndogz
    Offline

    Katzndogz Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    65,658
    Thanks Received:
    7,428
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +8,375
    No matter how you feel about abortion, abortion is legal. If it is a sin, it is a sin personal to the person having or participating in the abortion. Examine who gets abortions. While conservatives might be forced to get an abortion when absolutely necessary and all other options are foreclosed, liberals get them as a matter of convenience. Estimates are that 70% of all black pregnancies end in abortion. The hispanic use of abortion is growing. Liberals are the self-proclaimed enemies of conservative values. It makes some sense that liberals should voluntarily reduce their numbers by abortion unimpeded. Conservatives should be having all the babies not liberals. Liberals should just pay for them. That's all. Just pay for them. Then they can kill themselves off to their heart's content.
     
  6. AmyNation
    Offline

    AmyNation Road Warrior Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2012
    Messages:
    9,021
    Thanks Received:
    1,013
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Currently stationed at the kitchen table
    Ratings:
    +1,020
    ^^^

    Abortions ok cuz black folk get them!

    Stay classy Katz.
     
  7. George Costanza
    Offline

    George Costanza A Friendly Liberal

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    5,188
    Thanks Received:
    1,089
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Location:
    Los Angeles area.
    Ratings:
    +1,196
    :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

    All right, people, everyone rise, throw back your white hoods, and let's all join in:

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ra3qnLXmJDM]Tom Lehrer - I Wanna Go Back to Dixie - YouTube[/ame]

    First, we need to know just exactly what you mean by "conservative valules." If this post is typical . . .

    I'm speechless. I am totally without speech.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. Father Time
    Offline

    Father Time I'll be Still Alive

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,130
    Thanks Received:
    437
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +437
    When they look for precedent they either look at other Supreme Court cases or the Constitution. Which is why you can't just overturn a court case with a law passed by Congress.

    The whole thing seems kind of iffy.
     
  9. Father Time
    Offline

    Father Time I'll be Still Alive

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,130
    Thanks Received:
    437
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +437
    My mistake in assuming she was quoting the whole definition.
     
  10. PratchettFan
    Offline

    PratchettFan Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    7,238
    Thanks Received:
    745
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Ratings:
    +1,706
    And back comes your desire for convenience. You are the one who said, "I stick to the law." But when the law is not in your favor it is suddenly a weak argument. Amazing.

    So, we are now not talking about law but about morality. Any position which does no support a persons right to the control of their own body is immoral. Any moral position which changes to fit a desired conclusion is hypocritical.

    Now, which way do you want to go, or do I just save time and assume it is whatever way fits your desires at the time? Because you really don't have a legal, philosophical or moral position. You just have the way you want things to be and you want that imposed upon everyone. I expect you would resent it if anyone were to do that to you.
     

Share This Page