...
I have loved ones with dyslexia and I am not insensitive to that.
You apparently have a much less severe case than those I am familiar with.
I am very fortunate because I have quite a good memory.
I had to memorize every word I learned to spell because I cannot sound them out.
I often double words when I write or I leave words out.
Even if I proofread before I hit send I often miss the doubled words or omitted words because my mind sees what I wanted to write not what I actually wrote.
I hope your loved ones don't get too discouraged by their dyslexia.
Please remind them that sometimes dyslexia can be thought of as a gift because a lot of people with dyslexia have talents in things other than reading, writing, and spelling.
Disagree. It's a human life we're talking about, not the choice to marry someone or smoke weed. I agree with libertarian philosophy 9 out 10 times but this issue is the one time I don't and the exact reason I don't claim libertarian as my lean. This isn't a choice that simply effects the decision maker (the mother). Another person is directly effected as well. And that person is at the mercy of the decision maker. A baby has no choice in who is carrying her therefore the carrier has the responsibility to carry until birth. Obviously, there are exceptions such as imminent death of the mother, imminent death of the baby.
Exactly...there are extenuating circumstances and bureaucrats like to paint legislation with a broad brush. On something like this...you can't be broad. There are issues that can arise...and in some states...it doesn't matter...still can't get an abortion. It is the reason I don't think politicians should decide abortion
Fetuses, zygote and embryos are not children...they live INSIDE the WOMB and are dependent on the woman for sustenance through the umbilical cord ATTACHED to the woman. Children don't have those same qualities.
Passengers on an aircraft flying above 12,000 feet are INSIDE the aircraft and are dependent on the aircraft for oxygen through cabin pressurization or oxygen masks if the latter fails.
Are they not human?
That is a bad analogy as the aircraft is not a living being.
Fair point, but I don't think that complete invalidates it. It may be a machine, but their lives still depend on it.
Why do they have to depend on a living being?
500,000 women die each year from pregnancy and labor.
5,000,000 women are premanently crippled each year from pregnancy and labor.
They do not care.
But they do not believe women have a right to life. There is no santity of life for woman. Women are not human life. Women are just organic incubators for men's children. Nothing else. Rapists have rights in procreation. Women don't. That's God's law - or natural law - in their opinion.
All their platitudes originate from men. Men wrote the Bible. Men made the rules. The standards. Men overwhelming dominate every legislative body making these women-are-our-babymaking-slaves rules. Many women are raised with those values of men ground into them from their earliest childhood. Men write the rules. Rules that say they decide what risks women take. They decide that women must risk death for their children.
All their hollow lofty words of "santity of human life" and "life begins at conception" really go back to the premise that men rule women and once a man inpregnates a woman - regardless of her age and whether she consented or not - from that moment on he has total power over her - including life and death. It is evil men who made their slogans and platitudes. Rapist men. Men who treated women like slaves.
500,000 women die each year from pregnancy and labor.
5,000,000 women are premanently crippled each year from pregnancy and labor.
They do not care.
Passengers on an aircraft flying above 12,000 feet are INSIDE the aircraft and are dependent on the aircraft for oxygen through cabin pressurization or oxygen masks if the latter fails.
Are they not human?
In the world maybe, in the US they'd all be disabled or dead in ~10 years.
How is it not a baby? Life begins at some point correct? So, by your theory, a mother can kill a fetus at any point up to and including minutes before birth?It's not a baby. And the ONLY one affected by this pregnancy IS the woman and HER life. NO one else. YOU certainly are not. The STATE certainly is not. The state isn't giving the woman a house, car, great paying job with paid vacations and health care and a good neighborhood and good schools and college for the woman and her offspring. ERGO, the state and YOU have no rights in this decision.
I understand that most libertarians are "pro-life". However, they way in which most of them deal with it ie let the states handle it, goes against what I believe is the correct way to handle it. Killing a baby is killing a baby. No matter what level of gov't handles it. And I do not believe our country should allow ANY level of gov't to dictate that killing a baby is okay. There are VERY few things I will advocate for Federal gov't to be involved in. This is one of those VERY few things.In all honesty, standing up for human rights IS the libertarian philosophy on this one.
Being pro-abortion and claiming to be a "libertarian" is no different than being pro-slavery and claiming to be a "libertarian." It's directly at odds with what the philosophy is about, especially the principle of non-aggression and equal human rights.
IMO, abortion is the murder of a human being in the early stage of it's developement. No civilized country should allow that. This is why it is so dangerous to trivialize sexual intercourse in the way our culture has. There are reactions to the action, one of which being pregnancy. Like I posted to another user, the woman has a responsibility to think of that before engaging in sex with someone. Like it or not, women have the burden in this deal. Men can get a woman pregnant and disappear without ever having to worry about the repercussions.Exactly...there are extenuating circumstances and bureaucrats like to paint legislation with a broad brush. On something like this...you can't be broad. There are issues that can arise...and in some states...it doesn't matter...still can't get an abortion. It is the reason I don't think politicians should decide abortion
IMO, abortion is the murder of a human being in the early stage of it's developement. No civilized country should allow that. This is why it is so dangerous to trivialize sexual intercourse in the way our culture has. There are reactions to the action, one of which being pregnancy. Like I posted to another user, the woman has a responsibility to think of that before engaging in sex with someone. Like it or not, women have the burden in this deal. Men can get a woman pregnant and disappear without ever having to worry about the repercussions.
Abortion can be legislated. It merely takes level headed politicians to do so. So, in other words, we'll never see it happen.
IMO, abortion is the murder of a human being in the early stage of it's developement. No civilized country should allow that. This is why it is so dangerous to trivialize sexual intercourse in the way our culture has. There are reactions to the action, one of which being pregnancy. Like I posted to another user, the woman has a responsibility to think of that before engaging in sex with someone. Like it or not, women have the burden in this deal. Men can get a woman pregnant and disappear without ever having to worry about the repercussions.
Abortion can be legislated. It merely takes level headed politicians to do so. So, in other words, we'll never see it happen.
Great post. Both for its candor and tone. I agree with you about the disconnect. It's as if people don't realize that a child is a very real possibility if unprotected and promiscuous sex is practiced.I hope you're wrong. I've thought a lot about the trivializing of sexual intercourse too. I contributed to it and to the general coarsening of society through casual swearing and etc., and now I regret it because I'm old enough to have both been a part of all that and to recognize the sad consequences of it.
It's very disheartening to read the posts in the Abortion forum here in which people state sincerely that just because you choose to have sex doesn't mean you choose to accept the biological reality that you could become a father or mother. The disconnect is bizarre.
So your solution instead is for innocent lives to be taken because politics is just too hard? That's the easy way out bro. You know I agree with you about politicians having ulterior motives. That doesn't mean we give up the fight.Bureaucrats always have ulterior motives.
North Dakota is a great example of why politicians shouldn't be involved in this at all. Abortion after 6 weeks is illegal regardless of the health of the child, or mother. Regardless whether she was raped.
They won't take the time and make common sense legislation so they shouldn't be involved in such a delicate matter.
So your solution instead is for innocent lives to be taken because politics is just too hard? That's the easy way out bro. You know I agree with you about politicians having ulterior motives. That doesn't mean we give up the fight.
How is it not a baby? Life begins at some point correct? So, by your theory, a mother can kill a fetus at any point up to and including minutes before birth?
The state has an obligation to protect all citizens. Not just one that made a poor choice to have sex with someone that wasn't going to stick around to help with the baby. It's called dealing with consequences of your actions. I understand that men get off easy in this deal. Totally understand. But that's the way it is. Women were blessed (or cursed depending upon who your talking to) with the ability to carry and give birth to other human beings. They need to think about that before they have unprotected sex with a partner.
So your solution instead is for innocent lives to be taken because politics is just too hard? That's the easy way out bro. You know I agree with you about politicians having ulterior motives. That doesn't mean we give up the fight.
I understand that most libertarians are "pro-life". However, they way in which most of them deal with it ie let the states handle it, goes against what I believe is the correct way to handle it. Killing a baby is killing a baby. No matter what level of gov't handles it. And I do not believe our country should allow ANY level of gov't to dictate that killing a baby is okay. There are VERY few things I will advocate for Federal gov't to be involved in. This is one of those VERY few things.
Great post. Both for its candor and tone. I agree with you about the disconnect. It's as if people don't realize that a child is a very real possibility if unprotected and promiscuous sex is practiced.
IMO, abortion is the murder of a human being in the early stage of it's developement. No civilized country should allow that. This is why it is so dangerous to trivialize sexual intercourse in the way our culture has. There are reactions to the action, one of which being pregnancy. Like I posted to another user, the woman has a responsibility to think of that before engaging in sex with someone. Like it or not, women have the burden in this deal. Men can get a woman pregnant and disappear without ever having to worry about the repercussions.
Abortion can be legislated. It merely takes level headed politicians to do so. So, in other words, we'll never see it happen.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?