abortion, rape, and guns.

Pretty sure that applies to you also. Familiarize yourself with the topic at hand.

 

It wasn’t an assumption on my part. I was mocking you for even asking the question about age.

 

As we do not live in ancient times and you and I do not know what ancient people actually thought, I must live in and accept modern concepts and language. And these terms are accepted my most not some...You sir are amongst the minority "Some" who pick their terminology to support positions. "Most" people pick a position and then use accepted societal terminology to express their support.

 

My point is laid out in your post. "Accepted societal terminology" cannot be agreed upon. Therefore, go back to the terminologies original intent. Ancient languages have been studied in depth. What ancient people thought is evident in the original meanings of the word. I am not picking this terminology.
Since I wasn't sure that a fetus is a human being, I looked up the etymology of the words. Was that bad? Should I just accept what some people say without thinking it through for myself?

 

I recommend you research "Dictionary" and "Encyclopedia" as both might help your understanding of accepted terminology. Conversation may be beneficial as well.

Did you go to grade school?

 

Ad hominem attack? That is usually par for the course for someone who can't argue the points of a debate.
The online etymology dictionary is the internet's go-to source for quick and reliable accounts of the origin and history of English words, phrases, and idioms. It is professional enough to satisfy academic standards, but accessible enough to be used by anyone. The site has become a favorite resource of teachers of reading, spelling, and English as a second language.
https://www.etymonline.com/

Haven't you ever seen a dictionary with the roots of the word listed? "Modern" dictionaries have deleted these roots and just give the meaning that some big shot gave to it. Some of the roots are very telling.
Why would I go to an encyclopedia to find word meanings? I used encyclopedias in "grade school" when I was doing a report on something, not to look up word meanings.
To answer your question, I have a college degree in medical science. What did you go to school for--sociology?

 

Have A Nice Day

 

That is true- but the effect is not insignificant on the mother; many times it winds up doing great damage to her life and the possibilities for the child. Nature aborts pregnancies of all species, and viability and or practicality is usually the trigger.

There are times for example where the presence of a child can result in what might be called a life-failure for both mother and child, while at the same time if that person gets their life together and then has a child, both could do well. Unexpected pregnancies for people totally unprepared to deal with them are often disastrous. If one tells me that it is a life and considers nothing else, I have to ask if they just care about the existence of one with no regard to the quality of it?

While I highly respect the value of life- I also abhor the misery of hopelessness that many people exist in, where their life is a kind of living hell. I can't decide for another person- I don't think that my beliefs, regardless of intentions, can be imposed on another person when the consequences are so far removed from me- and fully born by that person.

There is no good choice in such circumstances. However the worst choice is for us to tell others that they must do what we think is right, because we think we are righteous.

Many years ago, I knew a woman who was a card-carrying, bumper sticker pro-life advocate. She had been trying to leave a wealthy but domineering and abusive husband for many years, and finally got away- she was in hiding while an attorney took over. However, he found her, beat her up and raped her- resulting in pregnancy. She already had 4 children, and was a good mother. She was in distress over this unwanted pregnancy, and found herself having to consider the future for both her and that child. Eventually came to the decision to abort. She told me that she knew she could not be a loving mother to the child, that very likely she would see it as she saw him- and come to hate him. She feared she could only destroy that life rather than nourish it. This woman was strongly pro-life, and a life-long catholic. However, she was now in the position of those she had always felt the right to dictate to. She asked if I would drive her to a clinic in a neighboring state for the procedure. Seems it is easy to make a decision for someone else, but when it's about your life and the consequences- things are different.

I'm an advocate of life- of good life, and I refuse to make the choice for others. That makes me pro-choice. Only the people involved have the right to to that, and either way they choose- because the consequences of the decision, either way, will fall on them.

 

You talk like it's a problem with only absolutes as solutions, you already have placed arbitrary limits on the value of life, as you have said you already allow murder when its;

1. The result of rape
2. The result of incest
3. To stop a rape.

As you said you're a pragmatist so you understand there are times when the right to life must be overridden, but when it comes to the right to bear arms this seems more important to you than the right to life as you are willing accept limits on one but not the other.

Why can't you apply the same pragmatism, is not 'As a pragmatist the right to bear arms should be limited' just as valid an argument for gun control

 

I don’t see allowing everyone to own and carry firearms would be an effective way to prevent sexual assault and rape. Most perpetrators know their attackers and most sexual offences don’t occur as the simple immediate conflict where firearms might be relevant. You also have the issue that if everyone can carry firearms, so can the prospective rapists, largely neutralising any benefit.

I’m certainly not completely anti-gun but I don’t see firearms as any kind of magical solution to anything. As it happens, I’m not completely pro-choice either, for much the same reason.

 

I’m quite familiar. It’s why I pointed out the legal reality of why abortion is legal.

 

sigh... another one who thinks that might makes right.

Arguing that because X is legal, then X is moral is not a winner. You WILL lose that argument, my friend.

 

So you are unfamiliar with constitutional law and case precedent?

Morality is entirely subjective.

 

killing is not murder when done in self-defense. now that we’ve discharged that fallacy, what pragmatic solution do you have for me, a 125 lb. woman, to stop a 250 lb. sex offender from trying to force his penis inside of me?

 

what solution do you have for me then, a 125 lb woman, to stop a 250 lb. sex maniac from trying to force his penis inside of me? and if he is willing to overlook the law that says forcing penis into someone is illegal, there is a very good chance he would overlook any gun laws you might impose on the public. i guess i should just sit back and enjoy it then?

 

Find a 260 pound husband who is armed to the teeth.

 

but i have already stated i approve of an exception for rape, incest, life of the mother.

 

funny, i already have one of those. he’s a very healthy 220, built like a tank, and knows this thing called marine corps martial arts. he can handle just about any weapon you put in his hand. we are together a fair bit, but not joined at the hip. i carry a compact 9mm on my person, and usually a .357 in my purse. and we always have full frame pistols in our vehicles.

the same people who scream about alabama not making an exception for rape in its new abortion laws apparently don’t mind at all if i am myself raped as i’m sure many of them would take my guns if they could.

 

appeal to authority fallacy.

 

you obviously don’t live in boston.

 

well then what the hell are you flapping about
???

 

I support the right of WOMEN to arm themselves, but not men. I realize that is blatantly discriminatory but I believe a common sense exception should be made here.

Women are generally smaller and less strong than MOST (definitely not all) men. Women can also be easily killed in a rape;
men can too but it is much more difficult and less likely (though it does happen. ) Finally men are less mentally stable than women, so safer around firearms. (Consult . The Natural Superiority of Women by Ashley Montagu)

That applies in "good guy with a gun" scenarios especially, Women are naturally cool under fire; much less likely to start shooting all and sundry rather than the actual culprits

I would deal with trans and non-binaries on a case-by-case basis but generally respect your right to say what you are. If you're willing to wear a dress to carry a gun I'm gonna let you.

 

What does that matter? The original issue was you incorrectly claiming that MA doesn't allow people to carry.

To which I explained that I live in MA and have a LTC

Then you incorrectly stated...

To which I explained the town I live in ONLY gives out LTCs

So, are you now saying Boston doesn't issue LTCs to its residents at all?

 

actually you said you have no problem with me owning a gun. you did not say carrying, even after i asked you for clarification.

 

So you are unfamiliar with constitutional law, case precedent, and apparently logic. Got it.