Baby Lives Matter

Discussion in 'Abortion' started by pjohns, Jul 18, 2020.

  1. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    FoxHastings said:
    Because they are BORN.


    Here's the question you keep ducking:
    Why do you want to give a fetus more rights than anyone else ?



    NO, I NEVER said "The Constitution doesn't provide a right to kill at will, so no I don't think women should have the right to kill at will."""


    YOU DID.


    It's such a silly statement but no, women do not have a right to kill at will and no one said they did.....and , AS USUAL, you can't prove anyone said that :)



    Translated : " I can't address or refute anything in your post"
     
  2. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    FoxHastings said:
    No, they're not....don't you know how the government works !?

    Democrats want children taken care of and Mitch McConnell and the Repubs don't....so they block everything the Democrats try to do that's good for BORN children and the US.



    YES, they do...Republicans are the ones who want to cut funding to entities like Welfare, WIC, SNAP....entities that aid CHILDREN.



    Biden did not create the mess at the border......and your darlin' Trump had four years to straighten it out and he didn't...another of his failures :)

    Guess those "precious lives" weren't so precious afterall....
     
  3. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nope, a fetus has no rights and you have NEVER proven they do.






    What! So only women who have been raped have rights !!?????

    OMGAWD!



    A decent society should always be on the side of protecting EVERY PERSON'S rights....even women, even pregnant women...


    In case you didn't know, getting pregnant is not a crime and does not deserve punishment.

    Also, in case you didn't know , having sex isn't a crime and doesn't deserve punishment..
     
    Ritter likes this.
  4. Whaler17

    Whaler17 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,801
    Likes Received:
    301
    Trophy Points:
    83
    If you would read you would learn.



    Rights that rival a child in utero's basic right to life? Well Duhhh, yeah!



    You went off half cocked again. There is a conflict of rights. Both the child in utero's rights and the woman's rights cannot both be protected!
    Agreed! A child is never punishment!
     
  5. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    16,378
    Likes Received:
    7,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Looks like you were wrong to say we were completely in charge, weren't you. That did not take long. By the way how is that 'repeal and replace' promise the GOP and Trump made in 2016 coming,. It was made when the GOP was just as 'in charge' as we are now? Is the immigration reform bill with DACA protection ( the best one ever!) still coming to anyone's desk soon?
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2021
    FoxHastings likes this.
  6. Whaler17

    Whaler17 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,801
    Likes Received:
    301
    Trophy Points:
    83
    LOL, Democrats are such a fraudulent bunch. Lead their voters around by the nose saying crap they don't mean constantly. In the end all they really care about is leaving office filthy rich, which they somehow do!

    Why would the DACA bill come back up? The Democrats are in now no need to pander so hard anymore.
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2021
  7. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have read and have never seen any proof from you that a fetus has rights....just some blather about the UVVA which NEVER gives a fetus rights.


    What? Explain again why you think only raped women have rights....
    BTW, WHY do you make exceptions for abortion for raped women ????

    Stating " """ A decent society should always be on the side of protecting EVERY PERSON'S rights....even women, even pregnant women..."""


    ..is "going off half cocked" ??? Really ? You don't believe in rights !!!


    Gestating one through FORCE is...
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2021
  8. Ritter

    Ritter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2015
    Messages:
    8,944
    Likes Received:
    3,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It is if you do not want it.
     
  9. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's responses like this that makes it seem as if you are not really reading the posts. I specifically and explicitly pointed out about how two sets of rights work and interact. I pointed out how even if the unborn have actual rights, how it does not change or trump those of the woman's bodily autonomy.

    You probably have some extra context in mind, but you have failed to make it clear. By the way the above is written and lacking any context from your previous posts, you have basically claimed that the woman has no bodily autonomy even over her blood and organs, when compared to saving a life, unless she has been raped or incest occurs.

    And what difference does incest make? Odds of birth defects? Did you realize that a women over 50 (who might not have undergone menopause, not even looking at the fact that women even older have gotten pregnant) have similar odds of birth defects as first generation (i.e. no previous inbreeding) sibling procreation. So if you are willing to allow abortion due to a certain level of chance of birth defect that comes from incest, then you should be willing to allow it for that same level of chance even without incest. Otherwise you are hypocritical.

    Which you need to show how it trumps the rights of others. I already addressed examples of how the right to life of one can be trumped by the rights of others in various conditions in my previous posts. You for some reason decided to not address that, giving me and others the impression that you have no argument against that presented, and choose to ignore it.

    Under that principle, then we don't allow people to correct damage that occurred to them when they engage in activities such as skiing, boxing, hang gliding, etc, when they know could result in such. And this especially holds true when the woman in question took the steps (condoms, BC, IUD, etc) to prevent pregnancy.

    Again, there is a entire post, 334, as well 342 for that matter, in which you have failed to address the actual points presented. Basically you are creating strawmen by arguing points that I did not necessarily bring up. I wonder how many of the points of this post are you going to ignore.
     
  10. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There is no real proof one way or the other. There are two basic thoughts when it comes to rights. Either that they are granted and defined by governments, or that they are inherent and are either recognized or ignored by governments. The argument can just as easily be made that blacks never had rights in the US until granted, as it can be made that they always had those rights and they were ignored and violated. Likewise, the argument can be made that a fetus does have rights that are ignored and possibly violated. Neither school of thought is invalid nor is either objectively provable. The only objective point that can be made is whether any given rights are included within the laws of a given government. But noting that a government doesn't recognize the unborn having rights is not instant proof that they don't have rights that are being ignore. This is why the best argument is showing that bodily autonomy rights trump any possible rights that a fetus might have.

    I have $10 riding on a bet that you will twist this around into something I didn't say, and use a lot of words in all caps to claim I am wrong, with nothing to prove such.
     
  11. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Correct, on the assumption that a ZEF has rights. And this by far is not the only situation where there are conflicts of rights where one has to trump the other. But if we are going to make the claim that right to life trumps other rights, then in order to save lives, we are allowed to forcibly take blood, bone marrow and spare organs from people against their will.

    Then we will just give you the children. After all they are not punishments.
     
  12. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    16,378
    Likes Received:
    7,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yet another example of an unkept promise Trump made in 2016 that he never kept in 2017 with the same 'total control' of the executive and legislative branches of the federal govt that you expect suddenly will work for Biden.
     
  13. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which I do when I explain that the fetus , even IF deemed a person with rights, has NO right to use another's body to sustain their lives....which looks to me like they have no rights and will have no rights.
     
  14. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I disagree. It might look like that, but let's alter the situation a bit. Artificial womb technology is nowhere near ready, but it's making great strides. I don't expect to see it, but I'm willing to bet it will be viable in my grandchildren's lifetime if not sooner. So if a ZEF is in an artificial womb (assume for the sake of argument one outside a body), does the mother have a right to abort it? Or the father? Or does its right to life now not come into conflict with other rights? Looking at how only one right can't be enforced due to another's right taking precedence is not the same as having no rights.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2021
  15. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    FoxHastings said:
    Which I do when I explain that the fetus , even IF deemed a person with rights, has NO right to use another's body to sustain their lives....which looks to me like they have no rights and will have no rights.

    Sorry, one has to be born to have rights...….


    Right now I am correct….I really don't care what happens in the future although I'm sure there will be laws in place, written contracts,etc. to oversee the use of artificial wombs.....although why a woman couldn't abort her fetus no matter where it is a mystery to me, it's still her's and it hasn't been born yet.
     
  16. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Where is your proof of that, as opposed to the claim that the unborn have rights that are ignored by the government? Right now all you are doing is trying to claim an opinion as objective fact. As noted before, both the idea that rights are natural and the idea that rights are only bestowed by governments are opinions and have no objective basis. Now if you want to make the claim that the US does not recognize any supposed rights of the unborn, then you have an objective statement, which also covers the potential of existing rights in either opinion. Mind you this doesn't change that the right of bodily autonomy supercedes almost any other right.

    No, right now you have an opinion, unless you change you stance to one of recognition as opposed to possession, or lack thereof in this case.

    Quite simple. It's not just hers. It's his and hers. The only reason right now she gets to make the decision is her bodily autonomy and the ZEF is in her body. It's the same reason that if she had a child being gestated by a surrogate via IVF, she can't choose to abort it, because that would violate the surrogate's bodily autonomy.
     
  17. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Is a surrogate an artificial womb? I thought an artificial womb is what you were talking about..

    I would think that if a woman used a surrogate ( or an artificial womb) then there would be a legal contract in place.... a contract that would give everyone involved an "out" (if they're smart) and delineate everyone's obligations....break the contract? Get sued...

    But right now, in the real present world, protecting women from having their right to bodily autonomy stripped from them is what I care about.

    .
     
  18. Whaler17

    Whaler17 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,801
    Likes Received:
    301
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Sure he/she does. The woman placed the child in utero there in the first place!
     
  19. Whaler17

    Whaler17 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    27,801
    Likes Received:
    301
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I never thought it would work for Biden, Democrats are far too greedy to work with one another. That is why I am not all that freaked out that these liars and cheats are in charge. Your effort on universal health care is like trying to get a bunch of bank robbers to agree that they should give the money to someone who wasn't in on the job.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2021
  20. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113


    Consent to one act is not consent to any other act.


    Consent to have sex does not obliterate a person's rights.

    Consent can be withdrawn.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2021
    Ritter likes this.
  21. Ritter

    Ritter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2015
    Messages:
    8,944
    Likes Received:
    3,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Hate to break it to you, but pregnancy is not - as shocking as it may sound - the result of a woman picking a fetus from the fetus-tree to then swallow it and let it grow inside her.
     
    FoxHastings likes this.
  22. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You haven't answered why you make an exception for a pregnancy due to rape....
     
    Ritter likes this.
  23. Ritter

    Ritter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2015
    Messages:
    8,944
    Likes Received:
    3,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What would you do if a woman you respect and hold dear came to you asking for advice with tears in her eyes? Would you shame her? Try to convince her to have the child against her will? Or would you be there for her?

    She is unwillingly pregnant and is afraid to have an abortion because she is afraid of being judged. She feels shame and comes to you because she trusts you.

    Would you lose your respect and love for her if she chose abortion when you told her to choose birth?
     
  24. Ritter

    Ritter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2015
    Messages:
    8,944
    Likes Received:
    3,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The rights of two individuals can never be in conflict with one another. If there is a conflict, it is not a right.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2021
    FoxHastings likes this.
  25. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    16,378
    Likes Received:
    7,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You do like to distract and change the subject don't you. Neither party can get much done or keep any promises that require legislation. The nation will stagnate regardless of which party has 'complete control'. Congress is no longer a functioning body.

    You are wasting my time.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2021

Share This Page