Don't get pregnant in Texass

[Lutherf]

Great, more melodrama on your part. And yes, overpopulation is a problem. Especially if a child is not wanted or can be cared for in the first place. But it seems some are more focused on quantity over quality.

Well, if overpopulation is a problem and if rights only come from government then I figure it's fine for government to redefine who has rights and just kill off that part of the population that isn't wanted....just like the Nazis and all other genocidal maniacs do.

 

[Gordy327]

Well, if overpopulation is a problem and if rights only come from government then I figure it's fine for government to redefine who has rights and just kill off that part of the population that isn't wanted....just like the Nazis and all other genocidal maniacs do.

If you figure it's fine, then what's the problem? Why are you whining?

 

[Lursa]

What the heck are you talking about? Yes, even animals have and RECOGNIZE basic rights. Try to take a ball away from a puppy. That's HIS ball and he knows it. Why do birds make nests? It's so they have a place to lay their eggs and then care for them even BEFORE the baby bird is born. Birds recognize life before they can physically see that life. The right to communicate is a natural right. Even PLANTS communicate with color and fragrance. It's how they get pollinated. I don't know if you're one of those absolutist atheists or what but if you can't comprehend that certain rights are completely natural and exist whether government is involved or not then you're missing out on a big part of not just humanity but life as a whole.

Holy shit, that's instinct and desire...not a recognition of personal rights? OMG that's hilarious. Birds make nest out of nesting instincts.

Are you saying our rights are "instinct?" Great...please provide citations for any of your post that those things are rights. And then tell me why we're allowed to or able to eat other animals and plants, or kill them will little regard?

 

[Gordy327]

Holy shit, that's instinct and desire...not a recognition of personal rights? OMG that's hilarious. Birds make nest out of nesting instincts.

Are you saying our rights are "instinctive?" Great...please provide citations for any of your post that those things are rights.

I thought it was hilarious too. Not to mention obviously desperate.

 

[fireflygmf]

Great, more melodrama on your part. And yes, overpopulation is a problem. Especially if a child is not wanted or can be cared for in the first place. But it seems some are more focused on quantity over quality.

I've read and re-read this. What is 'quantity' and 'quality' referring to? Children?

 

[Lutherf]

I've read and re-read this. What is 'quantity' and 'quality' referring to? Children?

That's exactly what he's referring to.

 

[Lursa]

Pregnancy isn't just some random "physiological condition". It's the way we get more humans. Unless we treat nascent life as the life that it is we run the very serious risk of damaging the prospects of a future for our species.

Now you're moving the goal posts and moving them straight into slave owner territory. Women are not obligated to produce children...not for you, not for the state. What you just wrote indicates the state should have the right to take away a woman's decision to reproduce, period. "If we need more kids, then the state has the right to demand that.' Does the state have that right? Because that's what you just implied in that post.

Btw, even in the 40+ yrs of RvW, more women BY FAR chose to have babies instead of abortions. So you are just making up a misogynistic, "state as dictator," excuse.

 

[Gordy327]

I've read and re-read this. What is 'quantity' and 'quality' referring to? Children?

Nope. "Life."

That's exactly what he's referring to.

Wrong again. Unlike some, I can look at a bigger picture and not tunnel vision on a fetus.

 

[Mr Person]

What the heck are you talking about? Yes, even animals have and RECOGNIZE basic rights. Try to take a ball away from a puppy. That's HIS ball and he knows it. Why do birds make nests? It's so they have a place to lay their eggs and then care for them even BEFORE the baby bird is born. Birds recognize life before they can physically see that life. The right to communicate is a natural right. Even PLANTS communicate with color and fragrance. It's how they get pollinated. I don't know if you're one of those absolutist atheists or what but if you can't comprehend that certain rights are completely natural and exist whether government is involved or not then you're missing out on a big part of not just humanity but life as a whole.

How the **** do you turn birds having the instinct to build nests as a pregnancy develops into birds recognizing "rights"?

That's a result of evolution: the ones without that strong instinct saw their offspring die before the offspring could reproduce. Probability over time is all that is.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Behind every dead teenage American girl who was just trying to get medical care for pregnancy complications, is a boy who refused to keep it in his pants or use birth control.
You'll never hear from him.
You'll never even know his name.
He will never ever be held accountable.
Not in today's MAGA America.

 

[Lutherf]

Holy shit, that's instinct and desire...not a recognition of personal rights? OMG that's hilarious. Birds make nest out of nesting instincts.

Are you saying our rights are "instinct?" Great...please provide citations for any of your post that those things are rights. And then tell me why we're allowed to or able to eat other animals and plants, or kill them will little regard?

Let's address this first.

Whether we're talking about an "instinct" or a "natural right" the effect is the same. Whether you believe in God, Darwin, Gaia or, in true Epicurean fashion, that there is no truth other than that which we can validate through our senses, there IS, without question, a natural pursuit of survival and a natural process of reproduction. Whether you think of those functions as "rights" or "instinct" is immaterial to the FACT that they are part of the nature of life...all life. Humans, having more control over their survival than other species, have constructed a whole mess of facilities that improve their chance of survival. Some of those facilities are material and some are social but all of them have been created with the purpose of improving chances of survival and that is the basis of all rights.

From time to time one person or group will decide that their own survival is more important than the survival of any other person or group and that's where we run into conflict. Governments are formed, primarily, for the purpose of deciding whose rights are protected and whose are rejected. The "rights" created by government are civil rather than natural and serve only to protect or reject the fundamental (natural) rights of the people that come into contact with the government. By denying the existence of natural rights you are denying the most basic purposes of ALL life. When the basic purpose of life is denied than all manner of atrocities tend to happen. That's where the human created destruction of the environment comes from and it's where genocides come from.

With regard specifically to the matter of abortion, the idea that a pregnant woman should have exclusive and unlimited right to ALL decisions related to her unborn child MUST be tempered with the understanding that the life inside her is distinct and unique. The life inside her is human and even in the first moments after conception is pursuing independent survival which, as I have said before, is the most fundamental purpose of life and the basis for all other rights.

There is one other issue that comes up with this whole "pursuit of survival" matter and that is the issue of sacrifice. There are times that the pursuit of survival of the species comes into conflict with the pursuit of survival of the individual. We all must, at times, decide who should sacrifice when others are in need and what level of sacrifice is prudent. A pregnant woman, without question, does sacrifice for her unborn child. It's important to acknowledge that sacrifice but the mere fact that sacrifice is occurring DOES NOT mean that the rights of the person she is sacrificing for are immaterial.

 

[Lursa]

Let's address this first.

Whether we're talking about an "instinct" or a "natural right" the effect is the same. Whether you believe in God, Darwin, Gaia or, in true Epicurean fashion, that there is no truth other than that which we can validate through our senses, there IS, without question, a natural pursuit of survival and a natural process of reproduction. Whether you think of those functions as "rights" or "instinct" is immaterial to the FACT that they are part of the nature of life...all life. Humans, having more control over their survival than other species, have constructed a whole mess of facilities that improve their chance of survival. Some of those facilities are material and some are social but all of them have been created with the purpose of improving chances of survival and that is the basis of all rights.

From time to time one person or group will decide that their own survival is more important than the survival of any other person or group and that's where we run into conflict. Governments are formed, primarily, for the purpose of deciding whose rights are protected and whose are rejected. The "rights" created by government are civil rather than natural and serve only to protect or reject the fundamental (natural) rights of the people that come into contact with the government. By denying the existence of natural rights you are denying the most basic purposes of ALL life. When the basic purpose of life is denied than all manner of atrocities tend to happen. That's where the human created destruction of the environment comes from and it's where genocides come from.

With regard specifically to the matter of abortion, the idea that a pregnant woman should have exclusive and unlimited right to ALL decisions related to her unborn child MUST be tempered with the understanding that the life inside her is distinct and unique. The life inside her is human and even in the first moments after conception is pursuing independent survival which, as I have said before, is the most fundamental purpose of life and the basis for all other rights.

There is one other issue that comes up with this whole "pursuit of survival" matter and that is the issue of sacrifice. There are times that the pursuit of survival of the species comes into conflict with the pursuit of survival of the individual. We all must, at times, decide who should sacrifice when others are in need and what level of sacrifice is prudent. A pregnant woman, without question, does sacrifice for her unborn child. It's important to acknowledge that sacrifice but the mere fact that sacrifice is occurring DOES NOT mean that the rights of the person she is sacrificing for are immaterial.

Nope, cuz that's wrong and I'm not reading the rest. You are running hard and fast from the actual issue being discussed. Just answer the questions in posts 81 and 107. No one else has had to BS their way around rights to do so, whether we agreed on the outcome or not.

 

[Lutherf]

Nope, cuz that's wrong and I'm not reading the rest. You are running hard and fast from the actual issue being discussed. Just answer the questions in posts 81 and 107. No one else has had to BS their way around rights to do so, whether we agreed on the outcome or not.

Damn! I keep forgetting the rule of DP that all liberal thought is perfect and all thought to the contrary is utter bullshit. Must be my old age that's catching up with me. Anyway, thanks for setting me straight once again.

 

[Gordy327]

Must be my old age that's catching up with me. Anyway, thanks for setting me straight once again.

No, you're just wrong and relying on absurd hypotheticals and emotions. But you're welcome.

Damn! I keep forgetting the rule of DP that all liberal thought is perfect and all thought to the contrary is utter bullshit.

Really? I just check the forum rules and that one isn't there. Perhaps you can point it out? Or perhaps you have nothing left to offer other than snark?

 

[CLAX1911]

Absolutely disgusting laws. Maternal deaths up 61%. Paxton is a criminal sleeze. Makes me sick.

Well I'm the wake of the election there has been this movement called the 4B movement where women are abstaining from promiscuity and hookups. If this continues which I have no reason to think that it will the people that will benefit the most are women who use sex to cope with trauma.

Essentially women with participated in hookup culture are saying they need to end hookup culture I don't see how that's a bad thing.

 

[Hari Seldon]

Well I'm the wake of the election there has been this movement called the 4B movement where women are abstaining from promiscuity and hookups. If this continues which I have no reason to think that it will the people that will benefit the most are women who use sex to cope with trauma.

Essentially women with participated in hookup culture are saying they need to end hookup culture I don't see how that's a bad thing.

Never heard of it. Doesn't change the issue of pregnant women with life threatening issues not getting the proper care or any care if there is a chance it results in an abortion.

 

[CLAX1911]

Never heard of it.

I don't know it's Roots but I've been hearing about it ever since Donald Trump was re-elected.

Doesn't change the issue of pregnant women with life threatening issues not getting the proper care or any care if there is a chance it results in an abortion.

I'm not sure that's happening. I live in Texas where so-called elective abortion is completely banned but they make exceptions for what they call non-elective abortion where your life is being threatened and continuing the pregnancy will cause injury or potential death to the mother.

So I'm not sure about where this law you're talking about exists but it certainly isn't here.

 

[Lursa]

Damn! I keep forgetting the rule of DP that all liberal thought is perfect and all thought to the contrary is utter bullshit. Must be my old age that's catching up with me. Anyway, thanks for setting me straight once again.

GIving up? If you cant stick to the actual debate and cant provide basic definitions when asked, too bad. I'm not going with your personal "ideas" on rights.

Since you are making stuff up (and wrong as a matter of fact, rights are not instincts ) why on earth should any woman that doesnt know your fantasy be stuck submitting to it? You are trying to debate based on nonsense.