|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On October 11 2016 07:13 biology]major wrote:
If you fail to see the argument of the other side then idk what to tell you. It's difficult to draw the line at where a fetus is human and gets constitutional rights, and it's even harder to evaluate if the fetus's right to life supersedes the woman's right to bodily autonomy. If you think these are cut and dry cases you are delusional. Better to be literally conservative in these situations where you don't really know what's right. Your position makes no sense to me.
I think it's very possible to have a reasonable anti-abortion position, and having some reasonable dialogue is definitely possible.
However, there are a lot of anti-abortion positions that I consider to be unreasonable such as forcing rape victims to carry pregnancies to term, or ruling out abortion when complications put the survival of the mother/child at risk. I'm willing to have the bodily autonomy discussion but I draw the line at forcing women to carry out pregnancies they didn't have a choice in in the first place, or forcing them to literally die for their pregnancy.
Not everyone holds unreasonable positions and there's definitely unreasonable people on the pro-choice side, but it still makes the discussion very hard to hold productively.
|
On October 10 2016 12:17 Danglars wrote:
Only Hillary could've whiffed the lay-up that could've put away his shots at the presidency.
The debater in me felt this deeply. She was trying to presidential, but missed a LOT of chances to put him down. Now, maybe she was just gambling she didn't need to, but it still pained me. He opened himself up a ton.
Now, I do think that part of it all is that she has a mind to the future, and Democrats will be using Trump to attack the Republican party for a long time now. So my basic argument, that Trump is not a normal candidate and we should not pretend this is a normal election, is somewhat counter to their interests. But I do think it is a disservice to democracy for us to not point out that he is aberrant.
|
With floodwaters from Hurricane Matthew on the rise, at least one North Carolina city appeared near chaos Monday, its police station shuttered and sporadic gunfire in the air, and authorities worried that more communities could end up the same way.
The storm is gone, but it left behind a water-logged landscape where flooding was expected to persist for the rest of the week. At least three rivers were forecast to reach record levels, some not cresting until Friday. In many areas the scene resembled a repeat of Hurricane Floyd, which caused $3bn in damage and destroyed 7,000 homes as it skirted the coast in 1999.
Officials were concerned that other cities could suffer the fate of Lumberton, a community of 22,000 people about 80 miles from the ocean.
The Rev Volley Hanson worried that stress from the lack of running water and electricity might push people over the edge. Robeson County, which includes Lumberton, had North Carolina’s highest violent crime rate in 2014.
“The cash is going to be running out. We’ve already got street vendors hawking water, Cokes and cigarettes. Cigarettes are at seven bucks a pack,” Hanson said. “It’s nuts here, and it’s going to get worse.”
The storm killed more than 500 people in Haiti and at least 22 in the US, nearly half of them in North Carolina. At least three people were missing.
The full extent of the disaster in North Carolina was still unclear, but it appeared that thousands of homes were damaged and more were in danger of flooding.
One silver lining may be that emergency planners now have sophisticated models that can precisely determine a river’s crest and pinpoint which buildings will be flooded. But even those models have their limits. They cannot predict when a levee or a dam will fail. A levee in Lumberton appeared to fail overnight, but officials later concluded that floodwaters had flowed around it.
About 1,500 people had to be rescued early Monday. Most of them were in knee-deep water, but some fled to rooftops as the brown waters swirled around them.
Rescuers still have not made it to all the submerged cars or figured out exactly how many people are missing or dead, county emergency management director Stephanie Chavis said.
Source
|
On October 11 2016 07:13 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2016 06:59 Ayaz2810 wrote:On October 11 2016 06:57 biology]major wrote:
Yeah the right will never let go of abortion, they actually have some ground there. There is no legitimate defense for being anti-gay outside of religion. Its a shame that they still think in 2016 that a woman should not have absolute and uncontested control over what happens inside her body. I dunno what kind of "ground" they could have. If you fail to see the argument of the other side then idk what to tell you. It's difficult to draw the line at where a fetus is human and gets constitutional rights, and it's even harder to evaluate if the fetus's right to life supersedes the woman's right to bodily autonomy. If you think these are cut and dry cases you are delusional. Better to be literally conservative in these situations where you don't really know what's right. Your position makes no sense to me.
None of that is particularly hard for me to come to grips with. This is why a discussion about the topic never plays out like people hope. You think that I see it as some morally complex thing when I don't. I meant what I said, excessive or not. Control belongs to her. End of story. That's how simple it is to me. Whether that makes me crazy or immoral or just an asshole, well that's up to you. And because someone will ask, yes I have children.
|
On October 11 2016 09:21 Ayaz2810 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2016 07:13 biology]major wrote:On October 11 2016 06:59 Ayaz2810 wrote:On October 11 2016 06:57 biology]major wrote:
Yeah the right will never let go of abortion, they actually have some ground there. There is no legitimate defense for being anti-gay outside of religion. Its a shame that they still think in 2016 that a woman should not have absolute and uncontested control over what happens inside her body. I dunno what kind of "ground" they could have. If you fail to see the argument of the other side then idk what to tell you. It's difficult to draw the line at where a fetus is human and gets constitutional rights, and it's even harder to evaluate if the fetus's right to life supersedes the woman's right to bodily autonomy. If you think these are cut and dry cases you are delusional. Better to be literally conservative in these situations where you don't really know what's right. Your position makes no sense to me. None of that is particularly hard for me to come to grips with. This is why a discussion about the topic never plays out like people hope. You think that I see it as some morally complex thing when I don't. I meant what I said, excessive or not. Control belongs to her. End of story. That's how simple it is to me. Whether that makes me crazy or immoral or just an asshole, well that's up to you. And because someone will ask, yes I have children.
Thank your parents then for not aborting you.
|
On October 11 2016 09:41 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2016 09:21 Ayaz2810 wrote:On October 11 2016 07:13 biology]major wrote:On October 11 2016 06:59 Ayaz2810 wrote:On October 11 2016 06:57 biology]major wrote:
Yeah the right will never let go of abortion, they actually have some ground there. There is no legitimate defense for being anti-gay outside of religion. Its a shame that they still think in 2016 that a woman should not have absolute and uncontested control over what happens inside her body. I dunno what kind of "ground" they could have. If you fail to see the argument of the other side then idk what to tell you. It's difficult to draw the line at where a fetus is human and gets constitutional rights, and it's even harder to evaluate if the fetus's right to life supersedes the woman's right to bodily autonomy. If you think these are cut and dry cases you are delusional. Better to be literally conservative in these situations where you don't really know what's right. Your position makes no sense to me. None of that is particularly hard for me to come to grips with. This is why a discussion about the topic never plays out like people hope. You think that I see it as some morally complex thing when I don't. I meant what I said, excessive or not. Control belongs to her. End of story. That's how simple it is to me. Whether that makes me crazy or immoral or just an asshole, well that's up to you. And because someone will ask, yes I have children. Thank your parents then for not aborting you.
Are you implying that he was born out of an unwanted pregnancy ? Or just being caustic because its easy to use Mike Pence logic?
|
On October 11 2016 09:43 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2016 09:41 biology]major wrote:On October 11 2016 09:21 Ayaz2810 wrote:On October 11 2016 07:13 biology]major wrote:On October 11 2016 06:59 Ayaz2810 wrote:On October 11 2016 06:57 biology]major wrote:
Yeah the right will never let go of abortion, they actually have some ground there. There is no legitimate defense for being anti-gay outside of religion. Its a shame that they still think in 2016 that a woman should not have absolute and uncontested control over what happens inside her body. I dunno what kind of "ground" they could have. If you fail to see the argument of the other side then idk what to tell you. It's difficult to draw the line at where a fetus is human and gets constitutional rights, and it's even harder to evaluate if the fetus's right to life supersedes the woman's right to bodily autonomy. If you think these are cut and dry cases you are delusional. Better to be literally conservative in these situations where you don't really know what's right. Your position makes no sense to me. None of that is particularly hard for me to come to grips with. This is why a discussion about the topic never plays out like people hope. You think that I see it as some morally complex thing when I don't. I meant what I said, excessive or not. Control belongs to her. End of story. That's how simple it is to me. Whether that makes me crazy or immoral or just an asshole, well that's up to you. And because someone will ask, yes I have children. Thank your parents then for not aborting you. Are you implying that he was born out of an unwanted pregnancy ? Or just being caustic because its easy to use Mike Pence logic?
No, I want to see if he would stand by his own logic if his mom 'chose' to abort him at any point for any reason. If he's not ok with that, then hes a hypocrite.
|
As always when the abortion debate comes up, the question of personhood of the fetus needs to be cleared up before you can make to start arguments about the bodily autonomy of the mother.
|
On October 11 2016 09:46 Nyxisto wrote:
As always when the abortion debate comes up, the question of personhood of the fetus needs to be cleared up before you can make to start arguments about the bodily autonomy of the mother.
Yeah, that's pretty much what it comes down to. Everyone agrees you shouldn't extinguish humanity.
|
On October 11 2016 09:44 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2016 09:43 Rebs wrote:On October 11 2016 09:41 biology]major wrote:On October 11 2016 09:21 Ayaz2810 wrote:On October 11 2016 07:13 biology]major wrote:On October 11 2016 06:59 Ayaz2810 wrote:On October 11 2016 06:57 biology]major wrote:
Yeah the right will never let go of abortion, they actually have some ground there. There is no legitimate defense for being anti-gay outside of religion. Its a shame that they still think in 2016 that a woman should not have absolute and uncontested control over what happens inside her body. I dunno what kind of "ground" they could have. If you fail to see the argument of the other side then idk what to tell you. It's difficult to draw the line at where a fetus is human and gets constitutional rights, and it's even harder to evaluate if the fetus's right to life supersedes the woman's right to bodily autonomy. If you think these are cut and dry cases you are delusional. Better to be literally conservative in these situations where you don't really know what's right. Your position makes no sense to me. None of that is particularly hard for me to come to grips with. This is why a discussion about the topic never plays out like people hope. You think that I see it as some morally complex thing when I don't. I meant what I said, excessive or not. Control belongs to her. End of story. That's how simple it is to me. Whether that makes me crazy or immoral or just an asshole, well that's up to you. And because someone will ask, yes I have children. Thank your parents then for not aborting you. Are you implying that he was born out of an unwanted pregnancy ? Or just being caustic because its easy to use Mike Pence logic? No, I want to see if he would stand by his own logic if his mom 'chose' to abort him at any point for any reason. If he's not ok with that, then hes a hypocrite.
Then say that, what you said was just a douche comment Im afraid. And yeah same story as always. Life at conception vs life at birth or 8 months or 2 terms or developed organs or head. No one is interested in agreeing on that because we all know the conception argument will never hold and everything else is unacceptable to the Christian right as far as choice goes.
|
If you were aborted you wouldn't know it, so why would you care if your mother picked that option? It's her choice.
|
On October 11 2016 10:16 JumboJohnson wrote:
If you were aborted you wouldn't know it, so why would you care if your mother picked that option?
This is not a good argument
|
On October 11 2016 10:26 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2016 10:16 JumboJohnson wrote:
If you were aborted you wouldn't know it, so why would you care if your mother picked that option? This is not a good argument
actually, it kinda is;
the question itself is unsound.
another answer might be Mu, aka I deny the premise of the question.
is that sufficiently clear?
|
Are contraceptives equally unpalatable from a religious right point of view, given that you can't make the "abortion is murder" argument there in the same way?
|
On October 11 2016 10:30 LegalLord wrote:
Are contraceptives equally unpalatable from a religious right point of view, given that you can't make the "abortion is murder" argument there in the same way?
varies by denomination iirc.
i'm not sure if they're equally unpalatable; but some are definitely classed as bad.
|
I am shocked to agree with Templar but "you don't care about being dead" is as bad as an argument as they come, because that's by definition true no matter how you die. Dead people are not in the habit of caring about things
|
On October 11 2016 10:26 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2016 10:16 JumboJohnson wrote:
If you were aborted you wouldn't know it, so why would you care if your mother picked that option? This is not a good argument
There are no good arguments for banning abortion, only religious ones.
|
On October 11 2016 10:33 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2016 10:26 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On October 11 2016 10:16 JumboJohnson wrote:
If you were aborted you wouldn't know it, so why would you care if your mother picked that option? This is not a good argument There are no good arguments for banning abortion, only religious ones.
It's a bad argument because "If someone killed you in your sleep you wouldn't know it, so why would you care if that person murdered you?".
|
I'll check back in when this thread gets off this topic. Of all the political arguments there are, abortion is the one with the lowest chance of changing anyone's mind because it's directly a moral question - both sides think the other side is flat out immoral for holding a differing view.
|
woah, both sides throwing quality points here, this "discussion" is really stunning. Add back some personal insults and we are at presedential debate level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
