Another Texas GOP lawmaker is attempting to make abortion punishable by the death penalty

No need to. My LORD and Savior Jesus Christ will one day call me to his wedding feast (Jesus marrying The Church) and him and The Church will return to Earth to begin the Millennium Kingdom Age.

 

There is no "the dictionary". There are MANY dictionaries.

Dictionaries do not define words (people do). A dictionary is not an authoritative source for any word definition. Dictionaries are merely a collection of words (and common meanings) meant to standardize spelling and pronunciation.

While a particular killing event may or may not LEGALLY be murder, it might still MORALLY be murder. Legality does not escape morality.

No, it is not.

Legality is not morality.

Yes, it can be, and it IS murder. It is the killing of a living human who has committed no crime nor expressed any desire to die. It is morally abhorrent.

 

Why do you think you have any right to impose your morals on others....a god complex?

 

True. Which dictionary would you prefer I use?

Why would you choose to define words outside of thier dictionary meaning? How can an intelligent discussion be had when one or more person(s) uses words that can mean whatever they want? No offense but that sounds absurd.

You probably should have clarified at the start that your designation of murder was based on your own morals and feelings and not the law.

Yes. It is

You have not heard of roe v wade? You should check it out.

Agreed.

Your own personal feelings are it is morally abhorrent. Yep. Got it.

 

Any form of society is going to impose morals upon others; it is unavoidable.

 

I'd prefer that you think for yourself.

There is no "the dictionary meaning". There are MANY dictionaries with MANY different word meanings. Word meanings inside of dictionaries are not auto generated by that dictionary. People put them in there.

See, I make use of Philosophy. I can think for myself, and if I can come up with something better than is in a dictionary, then I am going to do so. For instance, 'religion' is best defined as "an initial circular argument with other arguments stemming from it". You will not find that definition inside of any dictionary. What you will likely find is some definition that would be better suited for the word 'theism' than for the word 'religion'. I don't appeal to any dictionary definition in that case because my definition is better and much more accurate than any dictionary definition. My philosophy is better than the philosophy of whoever all came up with the most commonly used definitions for the word 'religion'.

That IS absurd, which is why Liberal (a language which closely resembles English in structure) is an absurd language.

If you wish for clarification on the definition of a word that I am making use of, just ask me and I will define it and further explain it for you.

Well, now you know. And to get at my point, there was a time when slavery was legal here in the USA. Does the legality of slavery somehow change what slavery is (morally speaking) and the wrongness of it? Same with murder. The legality of some murder (and the illegality of other murder) does not change what murder is (morally speaking) and the wrongness of it.

This is also why it is completely and utterly impossible for one to avoid "legislating their own morality upon others". This line that so many people parrot, as if they are "a good little boy/girl" for saying that, is so damn stupid in every way imaginable. That's why the 10th Amendment of the federal constitution made it clear that such legislative matters were reserved to the States and to the people thereof.

A court case is not the Constitution. SCOTUS ruled unconstitutionally in that case (see above about the 10th Amendment).

Yes, I believe that it is morally abhorrent.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Why do you think you have any right to impose your morals on others....a god complex?

your typical "avoid the real question" answer.


Here's the actual question which you may not understand because you think words have all different meanings depending on the weather...or something..


Why do you think you have any right to impose your morals on others....a god complex?

 

An admirable quality for sure...it just doesn't always translate well into online forums.

This seems a moot point since you define words on your own terms.

If I didn't know what religion was and looked it up in the dictionary and it said "an initial circular argument with other arguments stemming from it"; I feel I would still have no idea what religion is.

I have never heard of a liberal language.

As you wish but I feel that is a breach of forum etiquette to expect a person to try to determine if a word you used is not based on a standard accepted meaning. Plus it seems like it would be exhausting on your end.

Bringing up slavery is a tu quoque fallacy. AKA a dodge...unless your definition of the word slavery is terminating a pregnancy in which case I need verification.

The 10th amendment covers those things not mentioned in the constitution. However the supreme court concluded abortion was covered under the constitutional right to privacy based on the 14th amendment. This is further reinforced by the 9th amendment that was championed by James Madison to appease the anti federalists. Madison and others were concerned if people like you were in power you might restrict rights not specifically mentioned. Don't take my word for it; here is what Madison himself had to say on the topic.

"It has been objected also against a bill of rights, that, by enumerating particular exceptions to the grant of power, it would disparage those rights which were not placed in that enumeration; and it might follow by implication, that those rights which were not singled out, were intended to be assigned into the hands of the General Government, and were consequently insecure. This is one of the most plausible arguments I have ever heard against the admission of a bill of rights into this system; but, I conceive, that it may be guarded against. I have attempted it, as gentlemen may see by turning to the last clause of the fourth resolution."

And thus the 9th amendment was born.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjABegQIARAF&usg=AOvVaw169JL1uRD0URxCWKdBERpI

Yes. A court case can and does determine constitutional rights. Abortion is not the only right granted by the 9th amendment and subsequent SCOTUS decisions. Which of the following unenumerated rights would you be willing to give up?

• right to choose and follow a profession[iii];
• right to attend and report on criminal trials[iv];
• right to receive equal protection not only from the states but also from the federal government[v];
• right to a presumption of innocence and to demand proof beyond a reasonable doubt before being convicted of a crime[vi];
• right to associate with others[vii];
• right to privacy[viii];

...and several others.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/system.uslegal.com/u-s-constitution/the-ninth-amendment/?amp

I certainly would not tell you how to feel.

 

It's ironic that those who say a woman has a right to take away life do not believe that government has a right to take away that woman's life.

 

Almost like we value the life of a woman vs that of a fetus.

Do you think a 14 year old should be executed because she induces a miscarriage after her father has raped her? Yes or no?

 

It's horrible to think the people of Texas DO...but that's Texas....

 

I already answered your question... It was a stupid question from the start because it is something that is unavoidable.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Why do you think you have any right to impose your morals on others....a god complex?


your typical "avoid the real question" answer.


Here's the actual question which you may not understand because you think words have all different meanings depending on the weather...or something..


Why do you think you have any right to impose your morals on others....a god complex?

No, you never answered why YOU think YOUR morals should be imposed on others...

You answered once with : ""Any form of society is going to impose morals upon others; it is unavoidable."""


But NOT
why YOU think YOUR morals should be imposed on others...

 

How about the right and obligation of a society to help others who are weak and vulnerable, and protect their rights?

What you're asking here kind of seems like "Why should I care about women getting raped, I'm not a woman, what right do you have to interfere?"

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
why YOU think YOUR morals should be imposed on others...

That's nothing to do with :
FoxHastings said: ↑
why YOU think YOUR morals should be imposed on others...

NO, what I am asking is :


"""why YOU think YOUR morals should be imposed on others...""


So you are wrong as usual, your crystal ball still isn't working but your ability to deliberately misinterpret posts is doing just fine

 

Yes it does. You just don't seem to be capable of comprehending.


If you're trying to play a semantics game with this, I'm not going to be personally imposing my morals on anyone.

Maybe the question you meant to ask was "Why do you feel your morals are so much better than mine?"

 

No, it doesn't ...seems you appear to not comprehend as been shown by your non-answer.

LOL, here ya go again...when you know you're losing you start with the 'Semantics! , Squawck, Semantics !!"...

No, they are common words and clearly understandable for anyone who wants to understand and not twist them to suit themselves...

Wrong as usual. The question I asked was :"why YOU think YOUR morals should be imposed on others..."


Just because you can't answer the question doesn't mean you can change it to suit yourself …..just admit you can't answer it (like so many other questions you've been asked)

 

I have a question. Why do you think the reason why my morals should be imposed on others would be different from the reason I gave why the government should impose its morals on others?

Can you help my understand that? Because right now, I'm not seeing why my previous answer was not good enough for you.

 

I explained that IN ENGLISH...





Answer my question first...


FoxHastings said: ↑
The question I asked was :"why YOU think YOUR morals should be imposed on others..."






Just because you can't answer the question doesn't mean you can change it to suit yourself …..just admit you can't answer it (like so many other questions you've been asked)

 

I think I just told you I did. What part of that didn't you get?

 

The part I didn't get was your "answer " to "":"why YOU think YOUR morals should be imposed on others..."...you NEVER answered that question, you just pretended I posted something else...



Just because you can't answer the question doesn't mean you can change it to suit yourself …..just admit you can't answer it (like so many other questions you've been asked)

 

That's a Straw Man. Who says a woman has a right to take away life? Not the orthodox pro-choice! They say that the fetus isn't a life.

 

Pro-Choicers do not say a fetus isn't "life", it is very much alive...but it is not "A" life as in legal person with rights.

And women have the right to end that "life".

 

Getting rid of living tissue is not ending a life. You can call it "ending life" if you like, but then you have to call bleeding or scraping living skin off "ending life". Neither pro-life nor pro-choice people object to "ending life" in that sense.

 

The government — typically / should — be used for harm reduction. The argument is which harm is greater? Termination of a unaware developing fetus or forcing a woman to act as an incubator with all the inherent risks that exist with that.

Also, you must have missed the question I asked you, “Do you think a 14 year old should be executed because she induces a miscarriage after her father has raped her? Yes or no?”