Abortion intended to wipe out black. Hilarious

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
Incidentally, my wife is due in two months.

Equivocating an accidental pregnancy to an automobile accident is only accurate if you went out and tried to get into an automobile accident.

Just because you tried and succeeded in wrecking your car doesn't mean that everybody else that gets in a collision intended to the same way you did.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,153
0
0
Just because you tried and succeeded in wrecking your car doesn't mean that everybody else that gets in a collision intended to the same way you did.

He shouldn't be argiing that the one is foreseeable and the other is not. So you're correct, insofar as pointing out the flaw in his logic, which he has opened himself up to in the way he argued the point. However, I would point out that there is a distinction which weakens your analogy.

In both cases there is foreseeability. However, the foreseeability differs by degree. When you drive, it is possible, though very unlikely, that you will get into an accident in a given case.

When you have sex *without birth control*, the probability of pregnancy is orders of magnitude higher than getting into a car crash. Your analogy is closer if you posit the case of the person who gets pregnant in spite of using birth control, but that is presumably the rarer case of abortions.

No one is deemed "negligent" by the mere act of driving, but one might reasonably be considered negligent for having sex without using birth control, assuming you did not want to get pregnant. The better analogy is not to the simple act of driving, but to driving negligently or recklessly. Having sex without protection ~= to driving while [intoxicated/sleepy/distracted/texting] etc.

Incidentally, I am pro-choice for the first two trimesters because I do not want the government intruding into highly personal decisions about sex and reproduction. However, I think it's a tough issue and that both sides have reasonable points when the points are argued in the most persuasive manner.

- wolf
 

Robsasman

Senior member
Dec 7, 2008
565
0
76
I am pro-choice for the first two trimesters because I do not want the government intruding into highly personal decisions about sex and reproduction. However, I think it's a tough issue and that both sides have reasonable points when the points are argued in the most persuasive manner.

- wolf

This is all that has to be said, it boggles my mind that anyone would try to tell anyone else what to do with their body. Mind your own fucking business.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
I figure it was so mother would have a shot in life after education instead of being burdened with a child, section 8 housing sentence and men, in general, who do not stick around. With 70% out of wedlock Mr Preacher needs to direct his sermon to this irresponsibility IMO like Cosby and Obama before he was told to STFU by Black Preachers.
 
Last edited:

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
No one is deemed "negligent" by the mere act of driving, but one might reasonably be considered negligent for having sex without using birth control, assuming you did not want to get pregnant.
I can understand how it might seem that way, but the idea is actually untenable under scrutiny.

Negligence is the breach of a duty owed to another party that causes damage. If you think that having unprotected sex is negligent, you are invited to explain 1.) what duty you think is owed, 2.) to which party that duty is owed, and 3.) what damage it causes to that party.

Let me give you a hint: the party to which any duty is owed must actually exist.

Moreover the general resolution to a set of circumstances resulting from negligence is to restore the status quo ante. Abortion does precisely that.
 

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
To Court Blacks, Foes of Abortion Make Racial Case

They showed a movie in a high school.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/27/us/27race.html?hp

This is just plain stupid. The abortionists aren't targeting blacks, they're targeting everyone, not just blacks.:eek:

You do know there are more blacks in America than there are native Americans. The same cann't be said for the rest of the Americas. I suppose the blacks will say they had no part in the slaughter of our native americans brothers sisters and children . I am so sick of the Black race card . When will the crying stop. The American Indian now theres a people you can point to and say . How in the world did they survive. They wouldn't work as Slaves. All other races did. Its funny If I were a black man I would be outraged at whats happening in Africia. But its not about race when it comes to American blacks and Africia. The American blacks just don't give a rats ass about roots. As Usa Russia EU China walk all over africians . Playing the race cards is a game nothing more . Until Black america stands up and says stop raping africia and stealing its resources.
 

SagaLore

Elite Member
Dec 18, 2001
24,036
21
81
This is just plain stupid. The abortionists aren't targeting blacks, they're targeting everyone, not just blacks.:eek:

Not any more they don't. But Planned Parenthood's founder did have that intention at the start.