CDZ Its rough, but I can compromise and outlaw most abortions.

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Toronado3800, Jun 4, 2017.

  1. sakinago
    Offline

    sakinago Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Messages:
    2,359
    Thanks Received:
    263
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +956
    Sure you are, the chicken fetus is living. It doesn't just all of a sudden spring to life when it hatches. Again I don't think you know how biology works. You're also killing a chicken when it stops laying eggs and you decide to make a stew out of it.
     
  2. Chuz Life
    Offline

    Chuz Life Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2015
    Messages:
    4,262
    Thanks Received:
    544
    Trophy Points:
    195
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +2,735

    While abortion has a moral aspect or component, at the end of the day, it is purely a secular,legal and Constitutional issue.

    That is why it will be decided Federally and not State by State. I agree with and I Appreciate your views on the moral aspects , for the most part.

    I just wish more people would look at the issues more objectively. . . The way the courts are required to deal with it, for example.
     
  3. sakinago
    Offline

    sakinago Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Messages:
    2,359
    Thanks Received:
    263
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +956
    Except when it comes to life. You can't kill someone and call it a personal decision. The decision for reproductive choices starts when you choose to participate in the act of reproduction and wether or not you use contraceptives. Just because the church is against abortion doesn't make it an issue that can't involve to government. And you don't have to be a part of the church to be against abortion. There is no separation of church and state outside of the first amendment, which states congress shall make no law concerning the establishment of religion or the free excersise there of. It's not a right if it violates someone else's right, I.e. Life.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. forkup
    Offline

    forkup Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,963
    Thanks Received:
    241
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +854
    My view is simple. "I don't know what's right" So I don't presume to impose my views onto other people. Perfectly happy being a coward here.
     
  5. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    42,413
    Thanks Received:
    9,155
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +25,159
    The importance of the right to privacy is that it ensures each individual be allowed to decide for himself the issue of abortion in accordance with his own good conscience and good faith, absent unwarranted interference from government.
     
  6. forkup
    Offline

    forkup Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,963
    Thanks Received:
    241
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +854
    First you have to consider if a fetus is life? Then you have to remember that sometimes it's not consensual. Than you have to consider that pregnancy does have an inherent risk to it. It is not straightforward so why not let individuals decide. You nor I, have to live with their decision.
     
  7. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    42,413
    Thanks Received:
    9,155
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +25,159
    Prior to birth, an embryo/fetus is not a person, and not entitled to Constitutional protections:

    ‘[T]he unborn have never been recognized in the law as persons in the whole sense." Id., at 162. Accordingly, an abortion is not "the termination of life entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection." Id., at 159. From this holding, there was no dissent, see id., at 173; indeed, no member of the Court has ever questioned this fundamental proposition. Thus, as a matter of federal constitutional law, a developing organism that is not yet a "person" does not have what is sometimes described as a "right to life."’

    Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)

    Consequently, the issue isn’t when life begins, but when one becomes a person – and as a settled, accepted fact of law, one is not a person until after he is born.

    As an aside, it is perfectly appropriate and consistent to oppose abortion while at the same time recognizing and defending the right to privacy, and to oppose efforts by the states to compel woman to give birth against her will through force of law, in violation of the Constitution.
     
  8. sakinago
    Offline

    sakinago Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Messages:
    2,359
    Thanks Received:
    263
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +956
    There is no violation of the constitution, as a matter of fact abortions were illegal under common law when the constitution was written, and long after. It's not an issue that all of a sudden arose in the 70s. There is a protection under the constitution specifically of LIFE, never once personhood which is an utterly abstract term, that has ZERO settled definition. And if youre banking on settled law, then shut up about any existing law in the US. Immigration laws, accept and enforce, drug laws accept and enforce.

    How can you settle a law on an abstract such as personhood? And then still call it double murder when a pregnant women is murdered? If it's not a person, it's not a person...no murder. So the inconsistent law is somehow settled law?
     
  9. Toronado3800
    Offline

    Toronado3800 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,194
    Thanks Received:
    322
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +557
    You know, a disagree button would save a bunch of words which usually come out sounding more angry than anything.

    Essentially I disagree as previously stated. Federal or nothing with me. I'm an American not an Illinoisonian or whatever. But I respect your POV and wish I could just give a polite thumbs down or whatever.
     
  10. Toronado3800
    Offline

    Toronado3800 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,194
    Thanks Received:
    322
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +557
    I don't think I agree with the logic.

    "If abortion is wrong shouldn't the people performing the abortions be picking up the slack" (caring for the kids they did not abort?)

    The world would (probably) be a better place if christians against abortions had to take in every child they saved by outlawing abortion. Its fitting since the christians who obviously value the existence of the fetus's soo greatly had to care for them for the next 18 years.

    Abortion doctors are (right or wrong) saving christians the trouble of trying to care for the precious lives they are trying to save.

    Have any of the anti-abortion folks chimed in to say the potential lives they are trying to save are worth paying to raise.

    Anyone say, "preventing murder of the innocents is worth any cost."

    Heck, think of the lobbying costs I'm saving the pro-life fellows which they could convert to child care.

    These are precious lives folks and "murders" I am willing to prevent if you all help fund the raising of the innocents just by changing some tax laws.
     

Share This Page