Why are Abortion supporters against dueling?

Discussion in 'Abortion' started by kazenatsu, Jul 26, 2020.

  1. Monash

    Monash Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2019
    Messages:
    4,517
    Likes Received:
    3,138
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh, for F... sake. How about the fact that dueling is an activity that per se requires the active and willing co-operation of two adult parties. Abortion on the other hand is a decision ultimately made by one person and one person alone.
     
    FoxHastings likes this.
  2. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

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

    Next week we'll discuss abortion and organic gardening!!!

    Abortion and your favorite car !!

    Abortion and The Great British Baking Show !!!
     
  3. edna kawabata

    edna kawabata Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,475
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Pro-choice here and pro dueling.....but with swords!

     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2020
  4. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,633
    Likes Received:
    11,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is precisely the reason why abortion is morally worse than dueling. Because there are two parties, and one of the parties did not consent.

    Why should pro-choicers be against dueling, since they supposedly say abortion is all about choice and consent?
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2020
  5. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,633
    Likes Received:
    11,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    With fetuses??


    I can start that thread if you want.
     
  6. Monash

    Monash Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2019
    Messages:
    4,517
    Likes Received:
    3,138
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    How do you know all pro-choicers as you call them are against dueling?Hhave you asked all of them? There might be lots who'd be happy to face you at 20 paces with a pistol. Not saying there are mind you, I don't know. Point is neither do you.
     
    FoxHastings likes this.
  7. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,141
    Likes Received:
    7,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male


    Here we go.
     
    FoxHastings likes this.
  8. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is only one party in an abortion, the pregnant one.


    YOU HAVE NEVER PROVEN THAT A FETUS IS A PERSON WITH RIGHTS AND UNTIL YOU DO YOUR ARGUMENTS ARE NULL AND VOID.



    Just another illogical inane attempt at getting attention...and trying to prove something, anything, when one has no facts to back them up :) :) really a hilarious thread..

    Abortion rights are about the right of bodily autonomy....nothing to do with dueling, washing ones car, which football team one supports, which tomato variety one plants...

    Next week we'll discuss abortion and organic gardening!!!

    Abortion and your favorite car !!

    Abortion and The Great British Baking Show !!!:roflol::roflol::roflol:


    Anything but the facts...
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2020
  9. edna kawabata

    edna kawabata Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,475
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Now I will try to take your comment seriously.

    A duel is between two adults with equal rights voluntarily entering into an act that will solve a disagreement, but one or the other is actually the better swordsman as Harvey demonstrated, so in the end it is an unequal contest. To solve that it is better left to the courts.
    Then on abortion, you have admitted in the past that the fetus has fewer rights than the woman. The woman's rights take precedence over the fetus until viability. So it is apples and oranges.

    Now a question for the pro-lifers. Why do so many support the death penalty?
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2020
  10. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,633
    Likes Received:
    11,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But a fetus does not have no rights.
    And we are not talking about the same type of rights either. We are talking about the fetus's right to life, whereas continuation of the pregnancy is most likely not going to kill the woman. These two type of rights are not equal, even if the fetus and woman both had underlying equal rights.

    The woman is the one that caused the situation to arise, and created the ethical dilemma, whereas the fetus has no moral culpability for the situation it now finds itself in.

    It's the same reason why a bank robber does not have the right to shoot in self-defense when the guard reaches for his gun. Those who would claim this is self-defense are not stepping back and seeing the bigger picture.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2020
  11. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

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


    A fetus has no rights AND YOU HAVE NEVER PROVEN THEY DO.


    HOW TF does a fetus "find" anything much less the "situation it's in"
     
  12. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,633
    Likes Received:
    11,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We have already discussed this in other threads.
    I will give you the very short synopsis. It is because pro-lifers are against killing of innocent life. And because the anti-abortion position can be about pro-justice, rather than actual "pro-life" technically speaking. The example I gave is the difference between not giving a homeless person food and a blanket, versus lighting that homeless person's box on fire while he is sleeping. Both actions could result in an end outcome of death, yet they are totally not equivalent, since one directly infringes on his rights. That is, there is a right not to be killed, which is stronger than the right to life, broadly speaking.
     
  13. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,633
    Likes Received:
    11,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You have never proven a woman has more rights than her fetus.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2020
  14. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,633
    Likes Received:
    11,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It was just a manner of speaking. I have already explained in the past that consciousness of the situation and knowledge of the ethical dilemma is irrelevant.
     
  15. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    FoxHastings said:
    A fetus has no rights AND YOU HAVE NEVER PROVEN THEY DO.


    Yes, I have, you just can't accept the FACT that only BORN persons have rights.
    Right now a woman can kill her fetus, it has no rights.



    YOU and other Anti-Choicers want to give fetuses MORE rights than anyone else....an assinine idea...
     
  16. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

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

    Then quit bringing it up...
     
  17. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,633
    Likes Received:
    11,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think there was a thread about this, somewhere in the past. here it is: racism, classism, sexism, and now... 'Bornism'
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2020
  18. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    UNcherry picked post: FoxHastings said:
    Yes, I have, you just can't accept the FACT that only BORN persons have rights.
    Right now a woman can kill her fetus, it has no rights.
    YOU and other Anti-Choicers want to give fetuses MORE rights than anyone else....an assinine idea...




    Oh, was it one of your silly threads that went nowhere? Sounds like it since there is no such thing as bornism…


    HEY , ya got any threads where ya prove fetuses have rights?

    No, I didn't think so :) :)
     
  19. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I personally have no issue with dueling. My only restrictions would be that such events would have to be registered or some other regulation to ensure that participants actually agreed to duel, and some murderer don't just claim their victim lost a duel.

    As to logical consistency, a lot would depend upon their basis. For me since the basis is bodily autonomy, dueling isn't equivalent because neither duelist is using the bodily resources of the other against their will. Furthermore, both duelist are already born, so they do not compare to a ZEF, which is an unborn. It has been shown multiple times, across many threads, that the law favors the born over the unborn.
     
  20. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That would include all the food animals that we regularly consume.
     
  21. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,633
    Likes Received:
    11,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Innocent human life. That should have gone without saying.
     
  22. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

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

    HEY , ya got any threads where ya prove fetuses have rights?

    No, I didn't think so :) :)
     
  23. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,633
    Likes Received:
    11,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Typically in the old days they'd have a crowd of spectators watching. At a minimum, there would be at least two or three witnesses, usually close friends, and they would often get a neutral third party to dispense the dueling weapons and conduct/arbitrate the rules.
    So there were almost always witnesses. The intended point of duels was most often not specifically to kill, but that was certainly a frequent outcome.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2020
  24. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Tradition is not legal requirement. If the law requires a certain number of witnesses, or a licenses official to oversee the duel (say the equivalent of a Notary Public), that still fulfills the limits I have. Like I said, just because it's traditional to have a duel in front of witnesses, doesn't mean tradition will always be followed.
     
  25. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,633
    Likes Received:
    11,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Can we have the same type of regulations making sure abortion was done for a valid reason?

    Or is abortion somehow special, and these regulations should only apply to dueling for some reason?
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2020

Share This Page