• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:962]The right to intervene in someone's private life.

roguenuke said:
LOL, that really isn't how it would work though. There isn't much reason to believe that most who have sex would think to do this. That would make such a law pointless because it would rarely be used. Plus, it would provide a paper trail when it comes to affairs.

So then if they get married that contract should still hold up? That's bullshit. Even someone who marries a woman who has a child takes on responsibility for her kid if he is actively taking on the roll of father in that child's life.
Click to expand...
They would if they wanted to protect themselves. If they dont then I have no sympathy for them


Let's try it. If no one uses it then what is the problem?


The truth is the resistance comes because a lot of guys would use it
 
vegas giants said:
They would if they wanted to protect themselves. If they dont then I have no sympathy for them


Let's try it. If no one uses it then what is the problem?


The truth is the resistance comes because a lot of guys would use it
Click to expand...
I'd try it if it is done before she gets pregnant, so long as there is a caveat that if he takes any sort of role in the child's life, at any point, that contract is void and he has to pay child support.
 
roguenuke said:
I'd try it if it is done before she gets pregnant, so long as there is a caveat that if he takes any sort of role in the child's life, at any point, that contract is void and he has to pay child support.
Click to expand...
I can see that as a reasonable compromise
 
Ahlevah said:
Read what I wrote. I did not say anyone wanted to be dead. In fact, just the opposite. What is the implication for a person who says “I wish I’d been aborted”?Would you describe that person as someone who would prefer death over life? I would, and yet they’re still here. I don’t find them in the least bit credible.
Click to expand...
No ,I would not think that.

If one is aborted or miscarried it means they would not ever be born.

My mother had two miscarriages between my sister and I .

If I had either been miscarried or aborted I never would not know I ever existed in the womb.
 
Ahlevah said:
Me? No, although I’ve been called a “Jew” by Stormfront types on an unmoderated board. I just retired after 26 years in the gaming industry. I did study Russian in college.
Click to expand...
Thank you for clearing that up. I thought your signature line was in Russian and wondered if English might be a second language for you and we had a miscommunication because of translation. My FIL was European and he would say phases like “ out the light “ instead of “ turn of the light.”
 
minnie616 said:
Thank you for clearing that up. I thought your signature line was in Russian and wondered if English might be a second language for you and we had a miscommunication because of translation. My FIL was European and he would say phases like “ out the light “ instead of “ turn of the light.”
Click to expand...

Yes, the signature is "Navalny" in Cyrillic, as in Alexei Navalny, who has arguably been the greatest thorn in Vladimir Putin's side for several years. That's his fist in my avatar.
 
Ahlevah said:
I didn’t think she was referring to herself. I thought she was talking about people she’d encountered. But if what you say is true then I stand corrected—again, with apologies to her.
Click to expand...
What I said was "the **** that birthed me should have aborted all her pregnancies".
 
Ahlevah said:
Yes, the signature is "Navalny" in Cyrillic, as in Alexei Navalny, who has arguably been the greatest thorn in Vladimir Putin's side fo advocate reforms against corruption in Russia, r several years. That's his fist in my avatar.
Click to expand...
I agree. He has been an advocate against corruption in Russia, and a pain in the side for Vladimir Putin.
 
Last edited:
Ahlevah said:
I get that abortion is legal and the courts have given their blessing to it, but we as a society should stop sanctioning it. And I noticed that you didn't comment on the California juror instructions that define a fetus as a human being as early as six to seven weeks. Do you accept the former while rejecting the latter? If you do, then you're accepting the same fuzzylogic that defines the incongruity between killing a human being by a mother and killing a human being by a criminal.
Click to expand...

But as a society we overwhelmingly support it.

Any references to fetues in murder cases where a pregnant woman is killed are purely for charging purposes, always have been.
 
Josie said:
Of course not. I didn't meet the very specific (incorrect) criteria for what "pro-abortion" means. :)
Click to expand...
You should have at least got $50. I'm pretty sure from what you posted one could extrapolate from it arriving at the "specific criteria".
 
Aunt Antifa said:
But as a society we overwhelmingly support it.

Any references to fetues in murder cases where a pregnant woman is killed are purely for charging purposes, always have been.
Click to expand...
Actually, I would say we overwhelmingly support Roe vs Wade and choice.

In fact from Pew Research in 2021

About six-in-ten Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases


I would not support a county or law that did allow the choice of an abortion before a fetus is viable.

On the other side of the coin I would not support a country that forced a pregnant woman to have an abortion even if the fetus were so malformed that if survived birth it would cost the tax payers millions of dollars in medical expenses.

Each pregnant women with input from her doctor should be allowed to choose what she feels is the right decision under her circumstances.
 
weaver2 said:
Aren't most of the abortion threads posed by conservatives:
Is the normally developing ZEF alive?
Is the "It's my body , it's my choice" a good argument?
Lies of abortion supporters
Elective abortion limits
etc. simply opportunities for anti-abortion advocates to explain why they have the right to intervene and interfere in other people's most intimate and private lives?
Click to expand...
Either position one takes is fine depending on which type of society they want to live in.

To one side here, it is an innocent life/person deserving of governmental protection.
To the other side it is not, and the person it resides in is more deserving of governmental protection to rid themselves of it if they so choose.

Personally I do not believe the a government has any actual interest in the issue unless it can establish a need to increase/decrease it population.
 
Excon said:
Either position one takes is fine depending on which type of society they want to live in.

To one side here, it is an innocent life/person deserving of governmental protection.
To the other side it is not, and the person it resides in is more deserving of governmental protection to rid themselves of it if they so choose.

Personally I do not believe the a government has any actual interest in the issue unless it can establish a need to increase/decrease it population.
Click to expand...
The government is not doing anything to protect pro-choice advocates nor is it doing anything to protect the legality of abortion or of abortion clinics. Most of the governmental action is concentrated on lobbying legislators to pass laws restricting abortion.
 
weaver2 said:
The government is not doing anything to protect pro-choice advocates nor is it doing anything to protect the legality of abortion or of abortion clinics. Most of the governmental action is concentrated on lobbying legislators to pass laws restricting abortion.
Click to expand...
So what you are saying is that you do not understand what I wrote? Correct?
I ask because the Judicial branch of the Government did something to protect that choice.
Whether you agree that it was enough or not, regardless of what you think of what the Legislative branch is doing, in no way negates what I said.
 
Excon said:
So what you are saying is that you do not understand what I wrote? Correct?
I ask because the Judicial branch of the Government did something to protect that choice.
Whether you agree that it was enough or not, regardless of what you think of what the Legislative branch is doing, in no way negates what I said.
Click to expand...

The Judicial branch of government (SC) heard the case of Roe v Wade.

They reviewed several past Supreme Court precedents to determine that Doctors
and their pregnant patients have a right to privacy regarding a legal abortion within the first two trimesters of pregnancy.

States were given the compelling interest at viability and could ban abortions except in cases when the woman’s life / or irreparable damage might occur.
 
Aunt Antifa said:
Any references to fetues in murder cases where a pregnant woman is killed are purely for charging purposes, always have been.
Click to expand...

Right. When the state says killing fetus is murder it's murder. But when the state says killing a fetus is not murder it's not murder. Doublethink.
 
Ahlevah said:
Right. When the state says killing fetus is murder it's murder. But when the state says killing a fetus is not murder it's not murder. Doublethink.
Click to expand...
The state may charge murder if someone else kills a fetus but that same law explicitly excepts abortion.

Like I wrote, the laws are based on the rights of the woman/couple who lose the fetus and the state's interests...it doesnt acknowledge any rights for the unborn. It's not doublethink at all. It's about harm & loss done to the woman/couple.
 
Ahlevah said:
Right. When the state says killing fetus is murder it's murder. But when the state says killing a fetus is not murder it's not murder. Doublethink.
Click to expand...
Just like when the state says it's a crime for you to kill my dog against my will, but it's not a crime for her to be killed (humanely) with my authorization.
 
Excon said:
So what you are saying is that you do not understand what I wrote? Correct?
I ask because the Judicial branch of the Government did something to protect that choice.
Whether you agree that it was enough or not, regardless of what you think of what the Legislative branch is doing, in no way negates what I said.
Click to expand...
The SC does not protect. They make a judgement. Abortion could be made legal. After that it is up to Congress or some other legislative body body to actively protect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom