Zone1 Let it be said that legalized abortion on demand cheapens/ devalues life.

[Chuz Life]

That just means the argument still exists, it has just moved down to the State level.

Which could very well be brought back to the SCOTUS again, when someone challenges the Constitutionality of a Statewide ban.

Which I believe this court is pretty much counting on happening.

 

[martybegan]

.

Gives me the CHOICE to live in a state where it's illegal to kill unborn children.


.

It also just means people in those States who want abortion on demand have to fight at the State level, just like those who want restrictions in abortion on demand States have to fight at that State's level.

 

[martybegan]

Which could very well be brought back to the SCOTUS again, when someone challenges the Constitutionality of a Statewide ban.

Which I believe this court is pretty much counting on happening.

Didn't Dobbs decide that?

Most of the lawsuits trying to overturn bans at the State level are challenges based on the State Constitutions, not the federal one.

 

[forkup]

Which could very well be brought back to the SCOTUS again, when someone challenges the Constitutionality of a Statewide ban.

Which I believe this court is pretty much counting on happening.

It was this court that overturned Dobbs in the first place. And I really would like you to answer post 37. Since I'm very curious how you sustain the premise of the entire OP in light of it.

 

[Chuz Life]

Just to make sure I understand your point clearly:
You’re saying that legalized abortion contributes to a culture that devalues life. And the article you linked describes a man who killed his girlfriend because she wouldn’t get an abortion.

Wouldn't that suggest he valued his own comfort over her life — and that her refusal to abort (i.e. to preserve the pregnancy) didn’t protect her from violence?

I’m not sure that case supports your argument as intended. If anything, it shows that criminal acts come from people disregarding others’ autonomy, not because abortion is legal.

Out of curiosity, how would you interpret stories like these?

Josseli Barnica: died of sepsis after being denied care during a miscarriage in Texas.

Nevaeh Crain: a teen who died after three ER visits where she was sent home each time.

Yeni Glick: suffered permanent damage after care was delayed for a non-viable pregnancy.

Porsha Ngumezi: died in ICU after her miscarriage care was delayed due to fear over abortion law.


And it’s not just isolated cases. Here’s a broader analysis:

Rates of pregnancy-linked sepsis and deaths grow in Texas

ProPublica’s first-of-its-kind analysis is the most detailed look yet into a rise in life-threatening complications for women experiencing pregnancy loss under Texas’ abortion ban.

www.texastribune.org

I’m open to hearing how you square these outcomes with the idea that banning abortion affirms the value of life. Because from this angle, it seems like it’s creating serious risks for women, sometimes fatal ones. That's "data" too isn't it.

I can barely read all that on my phone, let alone respond to all of it.

I can respond at least to the part about the guys who kill their pregnant partners because they refuse to get an abortion.

Do you not see how little those guys value their own prenatal child's life?

To the point that they will kill the mom for not doing him the favor of killing the child?

 

[Chuz Life]

Didn't Dobbs decide that?

Most of the lawsuits trying to overturn bans at the State level are challenges based on the State Constitutions, not the federal one.

Right, but where are THOSE cases appealed to?

 

[martybegan]

Right, but where are THOSE cases appealed to?

They probably end at the State Courts. At that point it would be up to the Legislature of the State to either fix the ban law to address the State Constitutional issue, or Amend the State Constitution.

 

[Chuz Life]

It was this court that overturned Dobbs in the first place. And I really would like you to answer post 37. Since I'm very curious how you sustain the premise of the entire OP in light of it.

Dobbs was overturned?

Really?

 

[Chuz Life]

They probably end at the State Courts. At that point it would be up to the Legislature of the State to either fix the ban law to address the State Constitutional issue, or Amend the State Constitution.

Just as this court is revisiting so many other cases and even overturning some, they can and eventually will do the same with Dobbs.

And or, I will just die working towards that goal.

After near 40 years of fighting for the basic human rights of the children you likely deny. . . I'm used to the challenge.

 

[martybegan]

Just as this court is revisiting so many other cases and even overturning some, they can and eventually will do the same with Dobbs.

And or, I will just die working towards that goal.

After near 40 years of fighting for the basic human rights of the children you likely deny. . . I'm used to the challenge.

I don't deny anything. to me a 12 week ban on birth control abortions is a reasonable compromise.

What I don't fight is peoples right to push for either of the other positions, total bans vs. abortion to the last second.

I can be against things and not think people can't have the viewpoint I am against.

 

[Chuz Life]

I don't deny anything. to me a 12 week ban on birth control abortions is a reasonable compromise.

What I don't fight is peoples right to push for either of the other positions, total bans vs. abortion to the last second.

I can be against things and not think people can't have the viewpoint I am against.

I think a person's rights should begin when their life does. It's just not something I think I have the right to arbitrarily "bargain" with. . . especially with anyone who refuses to accept that it's a human life, child, etc.

I've offered to "compromise" along those lines before, figuratively, of course, I can't make the laws.

But, figuratively, I've been frustrated enough to offer; "just admit you are killing children, and you can have all the abortions you want."

 

[martybegan]

I think a person's rights should begin when their life does. It's just not something I think I have the right to arbitrarily "bargain" with. . . especially with anyone who refuses to accept that it's a human life, child, etc.

I've offered to "compromise" along those lines before, figuratively, of course, I can't make the laws.

But, figuratively, I've been frustrated enough to offer; "just admit you are killing children, and you can have all the abortions you want."

I would bend more towards a full ban on birth control abortions, but I live in NY so in reality I would be accepting of a 12 week ban on birth control abortions.

I don't call it killing a child, but you are killing a human life. I also get disgusted by the ones who rationalize it with the whole "lump of tissue" or "parasite" arguments.

 

[forkup]

I can barely read all that on my phone, let alone respond to all of it.

I can respond at least to the part about the guys who kill their pregnant partners because they refuse to get an abortion.

Do you not see how little those guys value their own prenatal child's life?

To the point that they will kill the mom for not doing him the favor of killing the child?

It seems a bit odd that you're unable to respond to my post because you’re reading on your phone except, conveniently, for the part that lets you highlight something in your favor. If the format is truly unreadable, that would apply across the board, wouldn’t it?

As for the article you cited: if your point is simply that some people have no regard for life, then sure, I wouldn’t disagree. Your article certainly supports that.

But that’s not really the claim you're making. You're trying to tie this tragic case to the idea that abortion itself “cheapens life.” That’s a much bigger claim, and it only works if restricting abortion doesn’t also lead to tragedy.

But it does.

Women have died because abortion bans made doctors hesitate. Some were denied care even when their pregnancies were no longer viable. These are preventable tragedies too. So if your framework is that we should judge a policy by its worst outcomes, then you have to account for the tragedies on both sides.

You can't just point to the fire on someone else’s side of the street while ignoring the one burning behind you.

 

[Chuz Life]

I would bend more towards a full ban on birth control abortions, but I live in NY so in reality I would be accepting of a 12 week ban on birth control abortions.

I don't call it killing a child, but you are killing a human life. I also get disgusted by the ones who rationalize it with the whole "lump of tissue" or "parasite" arguments.

That human life has biological parents. Doesn't it?

 

[martybegan]

That human life has biological parents. Doesn't it?

It sure does. I know it's a semantics fight, but to me a child is born, a fetus isn't, both are human lives.

Abortion kills it no matter what you call it.

 

[Chuz Life]

It seems a bit odd that you're unable to respond to my post because you’re reading on your phone except, conveniently, for the part that lets you highlight something in your favor. If the format is truly unreadable, that would apply across the board, wouldn’t it?

As for the article you cited: if your point is simply that some people have no regard for life, then sure, I wouldn’t disagree. Your article certainly supports that.

But that’s not really the claim you're making. You're trying to tie this tragic case to the idea that abortion itself “cheapens life.” That’s a much bigger claim, and it only works if restricting abortion doesn’t also lead to tragedy.

But it does.

Women have died because abortion bans made doctors hesitate. Some were denied care even when their pregnancies were no longer viable. These are preventable tragedies too. So if your framework is that we should judge a policy by its worst outcomes, then you have to account for the tragedies on both sides.

You can't just point to the fire on someone else’s side of the street while ignoring the one burning behind you.

The stories and images I shared are abortion related. If you think none of them, combined or otherwise, supports the conclusion that legalized abortion devalues human life, vote #2.

If you think you can convince me that legalized abortion doesn't devalue human life. . . Give it your best shot but I don't see you undoing that which I've already seen.

 

[Chuz Life]

It sure does. I know it's a semantics fight, but to me a child is born, a fetus isn't, both are human lives.

Abortion kills it no matter what you call it.

Is it also just semantics when someone is convicted of murder under a fetal HOMICIDE law?

 

[martybegan]

Is it also just semantics when someone is convicted of murder under a fetal HOMICIDE law?

Fetal homicide law, not just homicide law, which includes what we call children.

 

[Chuz Life]

Fetal homicide law, not just homicide law, which includes what we call children.

Again.

That is only semantics to you?

Nothing more?

 

[forkup]

The stories and images I shared are abortion related. If you think none of them, combined or otherwise, supports the conclusion that legalized abortion devalues human life, vote #2.

If you think you can convince me that legalized abortion doesn't devalue human life. . . Give it your best shot but I don't see you undoing that which I've already seen.

I’ve already explained, more than once, why the stories you’ve shared don’t logically demonstrate that legalized abortion “cheapens” life. So far, I haven’t seen you directly engage with that point.

That said, I’m under no illusion that this conversation will change your mind. Based on your username, posting history, and avatar, it’s fair to assume your views on this issue are firmly held, and likely have been for some time.

My goal here isn’t to convince you personally. It’s simply to highlight where the reasoning doesn’t hold up for the benefit of those who are following along and care about the strength of the arguments being made. Whether or not we agree, I’d welcome a discussion that engages the points honestly.