Arkansas Passes Near-Total Abortion Ban — And A Possible 'Roe V. Wade' Test W:135

[Gondwanaland]

Oh, but there is. See below.
I'm an atheist. Nice hole you got there.


I don't believe in any god. Keep digging bud.

Like, I literally even have the Atheist symbol in my bloody avatar. How slow can one be?

 

[Antiwar]

No, it is both a moral and a legal term. You're the sort of sad person who wouldn't call the Holocaust murder because Hitler made it legal.

Is your position that all abortions are unethical?

 

[Gondwanaland]

Is your position that all abortions are unethical?

Certainly.

 

[Dragonfly]

Atheist symbol

What??? What’s the atheist symbol?

 

[bongsaway]

Oh, but there is. See below.
I'm an atheits. Nice hole you got there.


I don't believe in any god. Keep digging bud.

Are you going to send your god after me?

 

[bongsaway]

Just as soon as you admit you were fractally about the length of pregnancy.

I was incorrect, you were correct. That was easy. Now can you show us the stats of women getting abortions at forty weeks?

 

[AGENT J]

Certainly.

you are welcome to that position but since ethics and morals are subjective it doesn't matter much

 

[Gondwanaland]

What??? What’s the atheist symbol?

Atheism Universe Symbol | Atheism

See more 'Atheism' images on Know Your Meme!

knowyourmeme.com

 

[Gondwanaland]

Are you going to send your god after me?

Yes, I'll send my Atheist God after you. Dumbass.

 

[Gondwanaland]

I was incorrect, you were correct. That was easy.

There that wasn't so hard was it?

Now can you show us the stats of women getting abortions at forty weeks?

I don't particularly care to as that was not the actual point the person was making. The person was inquiring about YOUR (IIRC it was you) moral position based on what you said.

 

[Antiwar]

Certainly.

How about RU486?

You'd force a minor girl impregnated by her incestuous father to have his baby, huh?

You'd force a family that finds out in the third trimester that their baby will live a very short life on life support to give birth, huh?

A mother that will likely die giving birth ...

 

[southwest88]

Southwest88 said:
Has anyone ever been sentenced to slavery under the 13th?

Beats me. But that isn't the point.

Latches, then. Or find an argument that actually cuts.

 

[southwest88]

And Dredd Scott specifically held that blacks were not US citizens. What's your point? A bad decision is a bad decision.

The pregnant woman is a person, but so is the fetus.

quote from southwest88:

Yep, slavery was once a thing in the US. One Civil War later, slavery is formally forbidden in the US, & the principle enshrined in the Constitution. How, exactly, is the question of chattel slavery like the abortion question in the US?
end southwest88 quote/

It has everything to do with it when you base your morality on legality.

See above.

Dredd Scott was repudiated by force of arms, & then by amendment of the Constitution. It was a bad decision, since revoked, & a more equitable understanding put in its place. Abortion is a declining issue in the US, but if it's any comfort, if a more equitable understanding is found, & is medically feasible, I'm sure that we'll put that in place too.

A fetus is not a person (in the legal sense), not in US law; not, TMK, in British law. Not in ethics - @ least, not in what I remember of Christian theology.

So my morality is not solely attached to the legality of abortion under Roe in the US. It was a common understanding in Christianity that a fetus is not ensouled until the birth of the child. Birth is the dividing line between fetus & baby.

 

[Dayton3]

How about RU486?

You'd force a minor girl impregnated by her incestuous father to have his baby, huh?

You'd force a family that finds out in the third trimester that their baby will live a very short life on life support to give birth, huh?

A mother that will likely die giving birth ...

No one is suggesting banning any of those.

 

[Antiwar]

No one is suggesting banning any of those.

Did you follow the discussion?

 

[Dayton3]

Did you follow the discussion?

Always

 

[Lursa]

So women in the United States did not have "human and equal rights" in the United States prior to 1973?

That's news to lots of people I would wager.

In the states where abortion was illegal? We did not.

Any response?

 

[Lursa]

Are you claiming the United States was an "oppressive dictatorship hyper-religious type environment" prior to 1973?

That would be news to millions.

For any woman denied an abortion, yes it was.

Any response?

 

[Dayton3]

Any response?

Nothing you would accept. You are very dogmatic about abortion. I'm at least flexible on it.

 

[Antiwar]

Always

I asked a certain commenter what their ethical position is regarding the scenarios I described because they said abortion is always unethical.

 

[Lursa]

Nothing you would accept. You are very dogmatic about abortion. I'm at least flexible on it.

I believe in choice, how can one be more flexible than that? I dont want to use force of law to make women do anything.

And your statements regarded laws...you should be able to defend them. You even said you have taught the Const. It's a discussion...'back and forth exchange of arguments, questions, etc.'

 

[Dayton3]

I believe in choice, how can one be more flexible than that? I dont want to use force of law to make women do anything.

And your statements regarded laws...you should be able to defend them. You even said you have taught the Const. It's a discussion...'back and forth exchange of arguments, questions, etc.'

If it is a "discussion" then it is inferred you must be willing to consider views other than your own.

Your first sentence in the above post shows you are unwilling to do that. So what is he point?

 

[Lursa]

If it is a "discussion" then it is inferred you must be willing to consider views other than your own.

Your first sentence in the above post shows you are unwilling to do that. So what is he point?

I do...that's why I ask questions and build on the argument/discussion. It's you that ends up declaring you're right and then leaving the discussion. You get easily offended, like about your teaching credentials.

As for my other sentence...It was a question...why didnt you challenge it if you disagree? It was my argument for your specific comment. Why didnt you answer or discuss it? Here:

Nothing you would accept. You are very dogmatic about abortion. I'm at least flexible on it.

I believe in choice, how can one be more flexible than that? I dont want to use force of law to make women do anything.

 

[Noodlegawd]

https://www.npr.org/2021/03/10/9755...-ban-as-lawmakers-push-for-supreme-court-case



And here's the kicker:



I know plenty here think there's no way RvW will ever be overturned, but I don't share that optimism.



The current justices that are pushing towards death need to retire now while Biden has the ability to place a new justice who's not a religious whack-a-doodle.

What makes him think the Supreme Court will take up the case?

 

[Lursa]

What makes him think the Supreme Court will take up the case?

Just IMO, they keep making the restrictions more and more ridiculous for that reason. But their own federal district courts have been knocking them down as unconstitutional before they get to SCOTUS anyway.