Alabama passed a near-total abortion ban with no exceptions for rape or incest

[Atreus21]

It might be relevant if I were attempting to dehumanize the fetus but as I have already granted full personhood to the fetus for the purposes of this discussion, it is entirely irrelevant.

So I understand: You admit the fetus is a human being, yet completely support killing the child if the mother wants it?

It is absolutely an attack in every sense of the word:

Why pregnancy is a biological war between mother and baby | Aeon Essays

A ferocious biological struggle between mother and baby belies any sentimental ideas we might have about pregnancy

aeon.co

Competitive does not mean hostile, and it doesn't mean the pregnancy is attacking the mother. Do you think the pregnancy is trying to kill the mother?

If you're going to characterize the interplay between two biological systems as an attack, then we might just as well extend it outside the womb, as the same interplay exists there in a larger context. The article you cited gave examples of it.

We aren't talking about normal bodily functions. We are talking about one human living inside another human and stealing nutrients from the host.

Yes, and that's a normal bodily function. The uterus exists for that explicit purpose.

Now that you know pregnancy is absolutely an attack on the mother, are you willing to reconsider her right to defend herself? Or are you going to try to hand-wave away all the ways my link explained why it is absolutely an attack?

Your link established that the relationship is both competitive and cooperative, not that it's an attack on the mother.

 

[zinfamous]

Let me understand you then: You think any time society compels people it's tantamount to slavery?

Ah, so you see how you put words in his mouth, by intentionally changing the argument?

 

[Atreus21]

This is about your logic. You have previous stated your belief in that there is "no right to bodily autonomy." So clearly you are the one who believes the state can compel anyone to do anything because there is no such thing as bodily autonomy.

I've been answering your questions - you can oblige to answer one of mine. When society compels me to attend jury duty, or to pay taxes, am I being enslaved?

 

[abj13]

How many?

Up to 50%. This is why in places like the US, it is recommended to get an ultrasound to demonstrate the location of the pregnancy. See Lin EP, Bhatt S, Dogra VS. Diagnostic clues to ectopic pregnancy. Radiographics. 2008 Oct;28(6):1661-71.

Please cite them.

Perhaps you should rely on real medical texts instead of Wikipedia. Hilarious. Why don't you start searching Medline? Here's just three in the past two years:

Term Abdominal Pregnancy Revealed by Amnioperitoneum in Rural Area - PubMed

Abdominal pregnancy (AP) accounts for 1% of ectopic implantations. In sub-Saharan Africa, the high prevalence of sexually transmitted infections explains the increasing frequency of this pathology. In Cameroon it rose from 1/10000 deliveries (1995) to 3.3/10000 (2015). Authors herein report a...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Successful Management of Abdominal Pregnancy: Two Case Reports - PubMed

Abdominal pregnancy is a rare, life-threatening condition defined as pregnancy in the peritoneal cavity exclusive of tubal, ovarian, or intraligamentary locations. It can be primarily located in the peritoneal cavity or secondary to a ruptured ectopic pregnancy or tubal abortion. We present two...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Abdominal Pregnancy: A Case Report of a Viable Nondysmorphic Fetus - PubMed

Abdominal pregnancy is a rare form of ectopic gestation. It accounts for about 0.4% of all cases of ectopic pregnancy, and often associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Clinical presentation varies, and diagnosis is commonly challenging. Although ultrasound is helpful in early...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

But thanks, you've just refuted your false statement of "the child's condition is irrecoverable."

It clearly is. So how is in not muder/manslaughter again with your irreconcilable logic?

 

[ivwshane]

I've been answering your questions - you can oblige to answer one of mine. When society compels me to attend jury duty, or to pay taxes, am I being enslaved?

What does that have to do with your body? More importantly, each of those have a compelling reason for why they exist. So what is the compelling reason and benefit to society to remove a woman’s right to control her own body?

I’ve asked this question four times now.

 

[Atreus21]

Why do I get caught up with providing for a child? Lol, I think the question is why dont you? Besides, I want to know where you plan on getting funding for the foster care and adoption system for another 10k children per state each year.

Abortion proponents commonly use this argument, but apparently they do it dishonestly, since (as you admitted) they wouldn't mitigate their abortion stance even if the safety and well-being of the child were absolutely guaranteed with impeccable social services.

It's meant to divert from the central argument. That's all it is.

 

[ivwshane]

Abortion proponents commonly use this argument, but apparently they do it dishonestly, since (as you admitted) they wouldn't mitigate their abortion stance even if the safety and well-being of the child were absolutely guaranteed with impeccable social services.

It's meant to divert from the central argument. That's all it is.

It also highlights the anti choice crowd’s faux concern for the welfare of the child. I’m glad you agree it’s bull shit.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Also as far as the whole "womens rights" and "my body my choice" and other stupid absurdities - Can folks here at least come to the agreement that if a man doesn't wish to have a child that the woman can proceed if she wants but you shouldn't be able to demand child support if that is what you choose?

I get there is a certain narrative of "my body my choice" and "the mom has 51% of the vote while the dad has 49%" - but this should be a no brainer when it comes to pregnancies out of wedlock.

 

[Vic]

I've been answering your questions - you can oblige to answer one of mine. When society compels me to attend jury duty, or to pay taxes, am I being enslaved?

Society compensates you for those takings. Like I said earlier (and you ignored it as you've been ignoring - not answering - most of the arguments you don't like), even draftees get paid for their service.

And let's address a larger issue. If a person does not own themselves, then how can they own anything else?

 

[Atreus21]

Up to 50%. This is why in places like the US, it is recommended to get an ultrasound to demonstrate the location of the pregnancy. See Lin EP, Bhatt S, Dogra VS. Diagnostic clues to ectopic pregnancy. Radiographics. 2008 Oct;28(6):1661-71.

Perhaps you should rely on real medical texts instead of Wikipedia. Hilarious. Why don't you start searching Medline? Here's just three in the past two years:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed...]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29657689

Abdominal Pregnancy: A Case Report of a Viable Nondysmorphic Fetus - PubMed

Abdominal pregnancy is a rare form of ectopic gestation. It accounts for about 0.4% of all cases of ectopic pregnancy, and often associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Clinical presentation varies, and diagnosis is commonly challenging. Although ultrasound is helpful in early...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Those are abdominal pregnancies, which don't involve implantation in the fallopian tube, which is what I thought you meant by ectopic pregnancy.

But thanks, you've just refuted your false statement of "the child's condition is irrecoverable."

Yes, and amended it to "...99% of the time."

It clearly is. So how is in not murder/manslaughter again with your irreconcilable logic?

It's not manslaughter because it's generally excusable. Ectopic pregnancies are almost always lethal if not aborted.

 

[ivwshane]

Also as far as the whole "womens rights" and "my body my choice" and other stupid absurdities - Can folks here at least come to the agreement that if a man doesn't wish to have a child that the woman can proceed if she wants but you shouldn't be able to demand child support if that is what you choose?

I get there is a certain narrative of "my body my choice" and "the mom has 51% of the vote while the dad has 49%" - but this should be a no brainer when it comes to pregnancies out of wedlock.

Sure, if abortion wasn’t restricted and funded or at the very least required the man to pay for the abortion.

 

[Atreus21]

Society compensates you for those takings. Like I said earlier (and you ignored it as you've been ignoring - not answering - most of the arguments you don't like), even draftees get paid for their service.

Forgive me - 6 against 1 means I may not notice everyone's responses.

Whether compensated or not, it's still compulsion - I have no choice but to comply, or face punishment.

And let's address a larger issue. If a person does not own themselves, then how can they own anything else?

People do own themselves. But they abdicate some sovereignty by joining a society. People can't be part of society and still be aloof from it. Just as society can't hold itself aloof from us.

 

[fskimospy]

Also as far as the whole "womens rights" and "my body my choice" and other stupid absurdities - Can folks here at least come to the agreement that if a man doesn't wish to have a child that the woman can proceed if she wants but you shouldn't be able to demand child support if that is what you choose?

I get there is a certain narrative of "my body my choice" and "the mom has 51% of the vote while the dad has 49%" - but this should be a no brainer when it comes to pregnancies out of wedlock.

Absolutely not! That would be insane. It is a no-brainer that women should be able to have the courts enforce support of their children on men who try and duck it.

I have never understood why anyone tries to make this silly argument that because only women can have an abortion that men should somehow not have to support their children. The concept of people controlling their own bodies means exactly zero as to whether or not people have responsibilities towards their kids.

The good news is in all cases the responsibilities of both parents is exactly equal. If they have a kid, both owe the kid support. If they don't, nobody does.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Abortion proponents commonly use this argument, but apparently they do it dishonestly, since (as you admitted) they wouldn't mitigate their abortion stance even if the safety and well-being of the child were absolutely guaranteed with impeccable social services.

It's meant to divert from the central argument. That's all it is.

Not really, it's follow the bouncing ball consequences to your preferred abortion free country. Shit man, come up with funding for run of the mill social services for starters. You can't, you won't, it's why you're a pro-birther, not a pro lifer.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Sure, if abortion wasn’t restricted and funded or at the very least required the man to pay for the abortion.

Required the man to pay for the abortion? What is this, chivalry like paying for the first date? lol.

It's a mutual thing - if you want to demand paying 50% that's one thing, but consensual sex was a voluntary act on both parts.

But yeah ultimately I'm fine with those things. As I said earlier, personally I find it morally despicable - but my morals aren't yours so have at it.

 

[abj13]

I've been answering your questions - you can oblige to answer one of mine. When society compels me to attend jury duty, or to pay taxes, am I being enslaved?

No, you haven't answered many of the questions. You just post logical fallacy after logical fallacy and hope people won't call you out on them. This is yet another one. I believe in bodily autonomy, but with its limitations. As with everything in life, there is a spectrum. You believe in no autonomy those are your words. Period. No exceptions. You believe the state can compel anyone for any reason.

Taxes or jury duty are in exchange for other opportunities the state provides to me.

 

[Vic]

Abortion proponents commonly use this argument, but apparently they do it dishonestly, since (as you admitted) they wouldn't mitigate their abortion stance even if the safety and well-being of the child were absolutely guaranteed with impeccable social services.

It's meant to divert from the central argument. That's all it is.

I doubt that anyone here is an 'abortion proponent.' I would say that's a dishonest straw man on your part, but you have convinced me that you are intellectually incapable of separating the moral and legal arguments on this subject.

And you're flat out wrong BTW. Except in cases of rape, I would support a complete ban on abortion provided that the women were justly compensated, and the children's safety and well-being were reasonably guaranteed. Because with regards to the legal aspect of this subject, that is the central argument. The right to self-ownership.

 

[Atreus21]

Alright I gotta take a break fellas.

 

[Victorian Gray]

I note you avoided the question. Which extreme is worse? Forcing a 10 year old to give birth to a child, or tearing this:

to pieces, and then re-assembling each piece on a table to ensure the puzzle is complete.

You apparently intend to ignore the real world, happening right now, example of an 11 year old that I provided.

"After 23 weeks of pregnancy, she had to undergo a procedure similar to a caesarean section on Tuesday. The baby is unlikely to survive."

And you have no issues with this. Good to know.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Absolutely not! That would be insane. It is a no-brainer that women should be able to have the courts enforce support of their children on men who try and duck it.

I have never understood why anyone tries to make this silly argument that because only women can have an abortion that men should somehow not have to support their children. The concept of people controlling their own bodies means exactly zero as to whether or not people have responsibilities towards their kids.

The good news is in all cases the responsibilities of both parents is exactly equal. If they have a kid, both owe the kid support. If they don't, nobody does.

lol so you think it's reasonable to not only hold the life of the child in limbo - but also the dad's life? Do you understand how many fathers (especially black fathers) there are that can't hold down a job because they are forever plagued by child support payments? Fuck tons.

Want to know what happens when they can't pay child support? The jurisdictions will do things like suspend their drivers license (just as what would happen if you don't pay for your traffic tickets). Then what happens? They can't make it to work, get fired, etc...

Then it's just a lovely grind of trying to make money under the table. What a great plan - it must work so well for the children.... Except it fucking doesn't. Door swings both ways. If you want an abortion fine. If dad wants an abortion - fine. You still want the kid because it's your body? Fine, you can have it knowing that you accept responsibility based on YOUR choice.

 

[abj13]

Those are abdominal pregnancies, which don't involve implantation in the fallopian tube, which is what I thought you meant by ectopic pregnancy.

Ectopic by its very definition is anywhere outside the uterus. I suggest you actually read about the medical condition instead of making false statements about it.

It's not manslaughter because it's generally excusable. Ectopic pregnancies are almost always lethal if not aborted.

No. Your logic is once again arguing against your own statements. You find killing something you have given personhood to you as murder. Now you remove those rights because biology disagrees with your logic. Suddenly the life of something can be trumped by something else. There is no guarantee an ectopic pregnancy results in death. You've admitted it now.

 

[Vic]

Forgive me - 6 against 1 means I may not notice everyone's responses.

Whether compensated or not, it's still compulsion - I have no choice but to comply, or face punishment.



People do own themselves. But they abdicate some sovereignty by joining a society. People can't be part of society and still be aloof from it. Just as society can't hold itself aloof from us.

A person does not own something that can be taken from them without compensation. So it is reasonable that some abdication of individual sovereignty to society can occur through takings while at the same time recognizing that the right to private property ownership must upheld through just compensation when such takings occur.
Just like the draftee can be punished for draft dodging, or compensated for their service. In this way, both society's expectations and the individual's rights are upheld.

 

[nakedfrog]

Also as far as the whole "womens rights" and "my body my choice" and other stupid absurdities - Can folks here at least come to the agreement that if a man doesn't wish to have a child that the woman can proceed if she wants but you shouldn't be able to demand child support if that is what you choose?

I get there is a certain narrative of "my body my choice" and "the mom has 51% of the vote while the dad has 49%" - but this should be a no brainer when it comes to pregnancies out of wedlock.

Wow, women's rights are a stupid absurdity.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Wow, women's rights are a stupid absurdity.

I was clearly relating it to the concept as it pertains to abortion. Sorry you were unable to discern that connection.

 

[Vic]

Wow, women's rights are a stupid absurdity.

Well, they're just stupid THOTs that need to recognize white sharia, right? Isn't that what the alt-right say?