Abortion insanity

[Lursa]

We're debating what should be legal. You keep citing legal rights but those are exactly what are in question.

It's sad that you believe I'm not proving that in my posts...you dont even see it...what you suggest would do to women in our society. Such blind bias. Such misogyny.

I was very clear in my post what women would lose, suffer, if our Constitutional protections were removed. The unborn suffer no pain or awareness. The causing of pain, suffering, indignity, disrespect holds no moral High Ground over "concern" for the unborn.

Not only that...what authority that Americans are obligated to follow says that the unborn have rights?

 

[Atreus21]

It's sad that you believe I'm not proving that in my posts...you dont even see it...what you suggest would do to women in our society. Such blind bias. Such misogyny.

Spare me.

I was very clear in my post what women would lose, suffer, if our Constitutional protections were removed. The unborn suffer no pain or awareness. The causing of pain, suffering, indignity, disrespect holds no moral High Ground over "concern" for the unborn.

Not only that...what authority that Americans are obligated to follow says that the unborn have rights?

Answer my question and I'll answer yours. My question was: If murder will be committed whether it's legal or not, why should it remain illegal?

 

[Lursa]

Because you choose to place an unbearable burden on women, when our rights are protected by the Constitution. Whether the procedure would take place or not isnt the issue...the legal restrictions on women...equal citizens under the law...would be terrible, painful, even equal to enslavement. It would reduce ALL women to 2nd class citizens again, not equal to men, with our rights subordinated to the unborn...which has no rights.

So again, the Constitution thankfully protects women from what you suggest, all those rights violations, destroying bodily autonomy and medical privacy, up to and including death, whether it deters actual abortions or not.

It's sad that you believe I'm not proving that in my posts...you dont even see it...what you suggest would do to women in our society. Such blind bias. Such misogyny.

I was very clear in my post what women would lose, suffer, if our Constitutional protections were removed. The unborn suffer no pain or awareness. The causing of pain, suffering, indignity, disrespect holds no moral High Ground over "concern" for the unborn.

Not only that...what authority that Americans are obligated to follow says that the unborn have rights?

Spare me.

What I described in your posting is undeniable. See: the fact that you are asking the question below.

Answer my question and I'll answer yours.

Already did in the posts you responded to. I have more I can add but you havent even acknowledged you registered the ones I posted. Please address those before asking for more.

And then answer this: what authority that Americans are obligated to follow says that the unborn have rights?

 

[Atreus21]

What I described in your posting is undeniable. See: the fact that you are asking the question below.
Already did in the post you responded to. I have more I can add but you havent even acknowledged you registered the ones I posted. Please address those before asking for more.

You game me a sermon on how hard women would have it if abortion were restricted, and then started lobbing insults. Give me a straight answer to a yes or no question.

Should murder remain illegal if it's going to be committed anyway? Just yes, no, or I don't know.

 

[Lursa]

You game me a sermon on how hard women would have it if abortion were restricted, and then started lobbing insults. Give me a straight answer to a yes or no question.

Should murder remain illegal if it's going to be committed anyway? Just yes, no, or I don't know.

I answered that clearly. You didnt understand what you read. Here, try again:

Because you choose to place an unbearable burden on women, when our rights are protected by the Constitution. Whether the procedure would take place or not isnt the issue...the legal restrictions on women...equal citizens under the law...would be terrible, painful, even equal to enslavement. It would reduce ALL women to 2nd class citizens again, not equal to men, with our rights subordinated to the unborn...which has no rights.

So again, the Constitution thankfully protects women from what you suggest, all those rights violations, destroying bodily autonomy and medical privacy, up to and including death, whether it deters actual abortions or not.

Women would still suffer horribly due to the laws and restrictions placed on them AND the abortions would still occur illegally, as they have thru all human history.

So your question is answered, even if you cant understand it. Now answer mine: What authority that Americans are obligated to follow says the unborn have a right to life?

 

[Atreus21]

I answered that clearly. You didnt understand what you read. Here, try again:

Women would still suffer horribly due to the laws and restrictions placed on them AND the abortions would still occur illegally, as they have thru all human history.

So your question is answered, even if you cant understand it. Now answer mine: What authority that Americans are obligated to follow says the unborn have a right to life?

Nothing in my question has anything whatsoever to do with abortion. We're talking about ordinary murder, or any other crime if that makes it easier.

If people are going to commit theft/rape/murder/pick one whether those acts are legal or not, should they be illegal? For God's sake. Yes or no or I don't know.

 

[Lursa]

Nothing in my question has anything whatsoever to do with abortion. We're talking about ordinary murder, or any other crime if that makes it easier.

If people are going to commit theft/rape/murder/pick one whether those acts are legal or not, should they be illegal? For God's sake. Yes or no or I don't know.

You dont get it. Laws against murder imposes no rights violations on law abiding people. Neither does rape. Neither does theft. Etc.

Laws against abortion impose many Constitutional rights violations on women....whether the result is legal or not.

Laws dont prevent crime. In the case of abortion, you are discussing violating women's rights in order to protect something with NO rights. Of course the protection of women supersedes the protection of the unborn...under the Constitution. Legally.

So it is justifiable to create laws against murder, rape, theft since upholding those laws doesnt violate law abiding citizen's rights. Laws against abortion however, violate women's rights. And therefore are not justifiable. It is unconstitutional.

Now do you get it? I have answered your question several times now.

So, now please answer mine: what authority that Americans are obligated to follow says the unborn have a right to life?

 

[Atreus21]

You dont get it. Laws against murder imposes no rights violations on law abiding people. Neither does rape. Neither does theft. Etc.

Laws against abortion impose many Constitutional rights violations on women....whether the result is legal or not.

Laws dont prevent crime. In the case of abortion, you are discussing violating women's rights in order to protect something with NO rights. Of course the protection of women supersedes the protection of the unborn...under the Constitution. Legally.

So it is justifiable to create laws against murder, rape, theft since upholding those laws doesnt violate law abiding citizen's rights. Laws against abortion however, violate women's rights. And therefore are not justifiable. It is unconstitutional.

Now do you get it? I have answered your question several times now.

No, you keep drawing analogies to abortion to talk about what you want to talk about, rather than give an honest answer.

The answer, as you and I both know, is no. It doesn't follow that Act X should be legal just because Act X will be committed regardless of its legality. We make things illegal to dis-incentivize certain behavior. Therefore abortion being illegal would serve, by intent, to dampen its practice. That is my answer to the OP.

It's astonishing to see how determined some people are to avoid answering straightforward questions. This is supposed to be a forum for adult debate, not evasion.

So, now please answer mine: what authority that Americans are obligated to follow says the unborn have a right to life?

You already know my answer as we've exhaustively covered this ground before: The same authority which says that any human being has a right to life. For me that's a combination of God, science, and society.

 

[Lursa]

No, you keep drawing analogies to abortion to talk about what you want to talk about, rather than give an honest answer.

The answer, as you and I both know, is no. It doesn't follow that Act X should be legal just because Act X will be committed regardless of its legality. We make things illegal to dis-incentivize certain behavior. Therefore abortion being illegal would serve, by intent, to dampen its practice. That is my answer to the OP.

It's astonishing to see how determined some people are to avoid answering straightforward questions. This is supposed to be a forum for adult debate, not evasion.



You already know my answer as we've exhaustively covered this ground before: The same authority which says that any human being has a right to life. For me that's a combination of God, science, and society.

Nope, you are wrong. You refuse to acknowledge the facts about American's rights.

OTOH if you just want to make it about something being 'right and wrong,' you'd have to prove that having an abortion was wrong.

It's certainly not a crime. If you want to say that making something illegal because society believes it's wrong, whether it would stop that behavior or not...then you have to prove that it's wrong. Why would society stop doing something it doesnt consider wrong?

 

[Lursa]

So, now please answer mine: what authority that Americans are obligated to follow says the unborn have a right to life?

You already know my answer as we've exhaustively covered this ground before: The same authority which says that any human being has a right to life. For me that's a combination of God, science, and society.

Thank you. Americans are NOT obligated to follow any of those things, esp not when exercising their rights. (science and society are not authorities and God is only an authority to those that follow a religion).

So you are entitled to your opinion but obviously, not to have it imposed on others.

 

[Atreus21]

Nope, you are wrong. You refuse to acknowledge the facts about American's rights.

OTOH if you just want to make it about something being 'right and wrong,' you'd have to prove that having an abortion was wrong.

It's certainly not a crime. If you want to say that making something illegal because society believes it's wrong, whether it would stop that behavior or not...then you have to prove that it's wrong. Why would society stop doing something it doesnt consider wrong?

Well it wouldn't. That's the mission of any pro-lifer, just as it was with abolitionists. Society must be shown the truth of what abortion entails, and be convinced of its evil and horror.

 

[Atreus21]

Thank you. Americans are NOT obligated to follow any of those things, esp not when exercising their rights. (science and society are not authorities and God is only an authority to those that follow a religion).

So you are entitled to your opinion but obviously, not to have it imposed on others.

What authority informs you of the right to life of other human beings?

 

[Lursa]

Well it wouldn't. That's the mission of any pro-lifer, just as it was with abolitionists. Society must be shown the truth of what abortion entails, and be convinced of its evil and horror.

What does abortion 'entail?' Everyone knows the unborn is killed.

How does the unborn experience any 'horror?' (Btw, your answers will show just informed you are on the facts of this issue, including the medical facts.)

There are no negative effects of abortion on society. If there are, please list some.

 

[Lursa]

What authority informs you of the right to life of other human beings?

Legally? The Constitution.

Morally? The imposition of pain and suffering on another person. The imposition of laws that, horrifically, would force women to remain pregnant against our will. The violation of a woman's rights that harm her and make her no longer equal to men.

 

[Atreus21]

What does abortion 'entail?' Everyone knows the unborn is killed.

How does the unborn experience any 'horror?' (Btw, your answers will show just informed you are on the facts of this issue, including the medical facts.)

There are no negative effects of abortion on society. If there are, please list some.

2nd trimester abortions entail tearing a baby into individual pieces and re-assembling them on a table like a puzzle. Then inserting a forceps into the uterus to find the baby's skull, crush it, and vacuum out the remains.

We used to consider killing innocent human beings as the very essence of a "negative effect on society." One innocent person has been deliberately and violently removed from contributing to society. That strikes me as pretty negative.

 

[Atreus21]

Legally? The Constitution.

So then you were pro-life or at least non-committal on abortion before Roe, and pro-choice after?

Morally? The imposition of pain and suffering on another person. The imposition of laws that, horrifically, would force women to remain pregnant against our will. The violation of a woman's rights that harm her and make her no longer equal to men.

Just out of curiosity: All pain and suffering? Or unjust pain and suffering? Surely you can't be opposed to all pain and suffering, else we can't inflict any punishment at all on criminals.

 

[Lursa]

So then you were pro-life or at least non-committal on abortion before Roe, and pro-choice after?

Nope you are poorly informed. Abortion was not always illegal in the US and when RvW was decided, abortion was legal in some states. Abortion has always been constitutional...but it wasnt examined in the courts as a right until RvW.

Just out of curiosity: All pain and suffering? Or unjust pain and suffering? Surely you can't be opposed to all pain and suffering, else we can't inflict any punishment at all on criminals.

Not bothering to answer outside the scope of this topic. Pregnancy is not a crime, nor is abortion. No woman should be forced to suffer from either against her will.

 

[Lursa]

2nd trimester abortions entail tearing a baby into individual pieces and re-assembling them on a table like a puzzle. Then inserting a forceps into the uterus to find the baby's skull, crush it, and vacuum out the remains.

Such abortions...which are more like after 16 weeks, not 12, are rare and even more rarely 'elective.' They are done mostly for medical reasons, as 97.5% of all abortions take place earlier.

Here ya go: by law, if the unborn is big enough to be dismembered (at about the 16 week point), the law demands that the Dr administer lethal/anesthetic injection. The unborn feels no pain, has no awareness.

Would you rather that a woman, in most cases grieving the loss of a baby she wanted at that point...be subjected to MORE internal damage by not dismembering the unborn? Why do you think they dismember it? For fun?

We used to consider killing innocent human beings as the very essence of a "negative effect on society." One innocent person has been deliberately and violently removed from contributing to society. That strikes me as pretty negative.

That's not an answer. This is the question, please try again: There are no negative effects of abortion on society. If there are, please list some.

Or if you want to, admit there arent any.

 

[Atreus21]

Nope you are poorly informed. Abortion was not always illegal in the US and when RvW was decided, abortion was legal in some states. Abortion has always been constitutional...but it wasnt examined in the courts as a right until RvW.

Okay, so your authority was not just the Constitution, but state laws as well. How did you first arrive at support for abortion?

Not bothering to answer outside the scope of this topic. Pregnancy is not a crime, nor is abortion. No woman should be forced to suffer from either against her will.

Honestly I was just curious. At any rate, you cited "the imposition of pain and suffering on another person." If you could be convinced that the unborn was a person, or if the Constitution changed the legal definition of person to include the unborn, would you then oppose abortion?

 

[Atreus21]

Such abortions...which are more like after 16 weeks, not 12, are rare and even more rarely 'elective.' They are done mostly for medical reasons, as 97.5% of all abortions take place earlier.

97.5% of blacks aren't enslaved. 97.5% of Jews weren't gassed. Citing percentages in this context is just trying to wave it away by saying these things rarely occur. Pregnancies resulting from rape are exceedingly rare, yet abortion advocates don't seem to care about low incidence then.

Here ya go: by law, if the unborn is big enough to be dismembered (at about the 16 week point), the law demands that the Dr administer lethal/anesthetic injection. The unborn feels no pain, has no awareness.

So if I killed a 4 year old painlessly in his or sleep, no problem?

Would you rather that a woman, in most cases grieving the loss of a baby she wanted at that point...be subjected to MORE internal damage by not dismembering the unborn? Why do you think they dismember it? For fun?

At that size? Because there's no other way of removing it from the womb. That doesn't make it less horrifying.

That's not an answer. This is the question, please try again: There are no negative effects of abortion on society. If there are, please list some.

Or if you want to, admit there arent any.

I don't know how else to answer. Killing innocent people is harmful for society. It's axiomatic, and I can't think of how to defend it if you don't agree.

 

[Lursa]

Okay, so your authority was not just the Constitution, but state laws as well. How did you first arrive at support for abortion?

Based on the horror of the idea that anyone could force a woman to remain pregnant against her will and all the pain and suffering and disrespect and invasion of her bodily sovereignty that would mean.

It's unconscionable today esp. when abortion is so much safer:

Abortion is 14 times safer than pregnancy​

​

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Getting a legal abortion is much safer than giving birth, suggests a new U.S. study published Monday.​

​

Researchers found that women were about 14 times more likely to die during or after giving birth to a live baby than to die from complications of an abortion.​

Abortion safer than giving birth: study

Getting a legal abortion is much safer than giving birth, suggests a new U.S. study published Monday.

www.reuters.com

Honestly I was just curious. At any rate, you cited "the imposition of pain and suffering on another person." If you could be convinced that the unborn was a person, or if the Constitution changed the legal definition of person to include the unborn, would you then oppose abortion?

The unborn and born can never be treated equally...not practically, not legally, not ethically. So I will always side with woman. One reason being the moral: women are conscious of the pain and suffering and indignity and disrespect and forced sacrifice of their futures.

If you can explain how unborn and women can be treated equally under the law, feel free to explain it.

I value the unborn but I value all born people more.

 

[Lursa]

97.5% of blacks aren't enslaved. 97.5% of Jews weren't gassed. Citing percentages in this context is just trying to wave it away by saying these things rarely occur. Pregnancies resulting from rape are exceedingly rare, yet abortion advocates don't seem to care about low incidence then.

Dont see any point here either.

Btw, I do note that you never, in this response, acknowledge that the unborn suffer no pain during abortions. Why not?

So if I killed a 4 year old painlessly in his or sleep, no problem?

You are moving the goal posts. I stated my position on morality being with the woman who does feel those things...for 9 months... compared with the unborn which would not.

At that size? Because there's no other way of removing it from the womb. That doesn't make it less horrifying.

Why on earth would I care what you find horrifying? I find it horrifying that you dont care if it would damage the woman internally more. The only person it matters to is the woman that has to suffer it. Who cares what you think?

I don't know how else to answer. Killing innocent people is harmful for society. It's axiomatic, and I can't think of how to defend it if you don't agree.

It's not...that's the point and that's why you cant find an answer for it.

 

[maquiscat]

Should murder be made legal by the same logic?

Murder is a legal term. Any killing outside of what the law makes illegal is not murder. Thus the death penalty is not murder not is an accidental discharge of a firearm. There are plenty of conditions which can make a homicide, intended or accidental, not murder.

 

[maquiscat]

Because you choose to place an unbearable burden on women, when our rights are protected by the Constitution. Whether the procedure would take place or not isnt the issue...the legal restrictions on women...equal citizens under the law...would be terrible, painful, even equal to enslavement. It would reduce ALL women to 2nd class citizens again, not equal to men, with our rights subordinated to the unborn...which has no rights.

So again, the Constitution thankfully protects women from what you suggest, all those rights violations, destroying bodily autonomy and medical privacy, up to and including death, whether it deters actual abortions or not.

He has a point. While you and I agree with the OPs conclusion of abortion should be legal, that doesn't mean that the argument given isn't faulty. One has to justify why something should be legal or illegal. The argument that something will happen whether legal.are.not.is a faulty argument.

 

[Scrabaholic]

Thank you. Americans are NOT obligated to follow any of those things, esp not when exercising their rights. (science and society are not authorities and God is only an authority to those that follow a religion).

So you are entitled to your opinion but obviously, not to have it imposed on others.

Also, some of us Christians believe that God is pro choice.