I've never met someone who has accidentally bought a television..unless they were drunk. Oh wait! A lot of accidental pregnancies happen when drunk too! There's a warranty period for regrettable purchases, just as there should be a warranty period for regrettable sex. /thread
Oh, but I want to see Commodore's argument extend to its' fullest logical conclusion. If his problem is fundamentally with others choosing who gets to live and die, when does it end, and why? The opportunity cost of a birthing can extend quite far.
Obtuse much? The original point was that we have laws protecting stupid property like TVs but we don't have the civility to extend that protection to babies in utero.
Up until recently, scientific research was held back years in the United States because of a slight association with fetuses---and there are numerous laws in provision to protect children. There just don't happen to be any that demand penance from the mother, and criminalize an activity below the age of viability. that would be unconstitutional.
But you crapped out because many forms of contraception (such as IUD) prevent conception... so YOUR logical conclusion JUMPED THE SHARK somewhere in there. Can you show me evidence of any human conception not interrupted by man or nature that resulted in anything but the birth of a human child-- still- or live-born?
You seem like a nice guy. All it really comes down to for me is, I care a lot more about the negative affects that unwanted pregnancies have on parents and society as a whole more than I care about the rights of a fetus. Different strokes for different folks. I don't see either of us changing our minds.
Can you show me examples of Starbucks coffee not made by Starbucks? Conceptions interrupted by mysterious forces (otherwise known as SCIENCE). somebody is choosing who gets to live or die. Can we criminalize GOD?
I understand. I'm likewise concerned but what has been the result of Roe v Wade? 56,000,000 American abortions.
56,000,000 unwanted children is an awful lot. If abortion had been illegal and all these kids were given up, we would have 56,000,000 additional kids in orphanages. Tell me...who would pay for their care? Don't tell me they would be adopted, because we have many kids that we can't adopt out as it is. I am not saying that economics makes the decision, but you can't be blind to it either.
I suspect it'll be the same thing as with the bankers. Rule of law doesn't apply to tax havens---or heavens.
this. /thread History will not look back kindly on the abortion era. With continued advancement in science, the unborn will be viable at earlier and earlier dates in gestation...
Without Roe v Wade, I don't think we would have had those 56 Million conceptions... with an easy out. We have made it easy for people to be irresponsible. No one knows how hard the decision to abort might be until they are ready to cross that bridge. Even so the studies show that many, many women have numerous abortions... because they can.
this ignores the face that abortions happened before Roe v Wade---sometimes in very unsafe conditions. it ignores maternal death rates throughout the unsafe procedure. it ignores the potential lives criminalizing abortion would have continued to shatter---not only in the sense of broken homes but in the sense of jail time. In fact, the abortion ratio has been decreasing markedly recently---and is now only a few points higher than it was in 1972. Taking a raw number like that is lazy data analysis, and is only good for pure shock value.
texxx, are you ever going to get off your oil baron seat, and contribute to science? Because, I think I keep on posting this---but viability hasn't budged for a while. Meanwhile, sequencing genomes, and delicious data frameworks have---our ability to sequence genetic code rapidly and process it is increasing on an exponential tier that is very hard to comprehend. The future of science isn't pre-natal extension---it's having the ability to screen babies, rapidly and efficiently. As creepy as that sounds---it is where science is going. I don't really have a bone to pick here, but if you do, better get on that science.
It is what it is: 56 Million. It IS shocking. In addition to better education about sexual matters-- although I did see a Tweet the other day from a young woman who thought she had outsmarted nature by only having sex at night while the sperm were sleeping-- perhaps people are finally just getting disgusted with the procedure when used casually for birth control. I hope so. There's a reason I don't steal cars or rob banks. Consequences.
don't you people go to hell or something if you do wrong things. Specific consequences in proportion to harm. Seeing as you haven't defined the former at all, I'd be rather curious what your take on the consequences should be. Also, whether you have a woman that would agree with you on said consequences. Just one. It can be the "my black friend" moment.
It has moved significantly in only the past 100 years. How could you possibly disagree with that? Ever been to a NICU? Go check one out. Knowledge. And 100 years is what fraction of humans' history on earth? Answer: a very small percentage.
Why? Your vague stance on values and moral grandstanding trumped by 1) An appeal to actual details, and practicality? 2) An appeal to have somebody who represents the group most affected by your decision-making? Law-makers TEND to take the two details above in consideration. Maybe you should too.
