How Abortion is a Right (argument from analogy)

So why have women been given equal status and the same liberties as men under law?

 

No I don't. If you cant see how allowing morality to be enforced by mob rule is dangerous from that example, nothing else I can say is going to convince you. You'll just have to wait until something you dont think is wrong is defined as wrong by a majority and made illegal for you.

 

morality dictates law. we as a society chose what we deem to be morally wrong and we create laws to enforce those morals. When the supreme court makes a ruling, it is a statement towards morality of society based on current values and beliefs. Which is why Roe vs Wade is being re looked at. We were ignorant towards our understanding of pregnancy and what was happening inside the womb at it's earliest stages. We now have a greater understanding and the morality of the act of abortion is now being reconsidered. With that understanding we weigh it against the constitution and then the court makes a decision.

That's the entire gd point. Sorry.

 

Most actions have potential consequences. No one actually thinks a person consents to a potential consequence. That's absurd. If I eat a peanut and an allergic reaction occurs, am I consenting to the allergy? Consent does not refer to the occurence of a consequence. It refers to the action itself. I consented to eating a peanut.

 

There is only ONE ACT that can create another human being. That's the act you chose to partake in and the outcome could have consequences of which murder should not be an "out" to get things back to a normal.

If you eat something new for the first time, you are ABSOLUTELY accepting the responsibility that you might have a negative reaction to that thing. It is exactly why there is a list of possible side effects for every prescription you take. You assume the consequences and risks of those side effects for the reward of the benefits of the drug.

 

This is wrong. Murder is an unlawful killing. By your standard Kyle Rittenhouse is a murderer. He knew that going to that place at that time may provoke an attack on him. Nevertheless he was aquitted. Do you know why?

 

The woman is now in self defense against the person she willfully created? What?

 

The person she created? Call it what it is. In any case, the ZEF is actively feeding off of and damaging the woman's body. Your saying she has no right to stop the damage by ending the source of the damage by whatever means is necessary.

 

Oh ok so now it's a zef. The zef is actually a person. As unlike anything else you want to try and compare it to, will grow if nourished into a full grown human adult. So ya. It was placed inside the woman to use as nourishment through the actions the woman partook in knowing this was a possible result.

Ya. She put it in there. She now has a responsibility to it at least until birth. And if she wants out of that responsibility she needs a better excuse then "its inconvenient"

 

As did the parent in the organ donation scenario. So is my child entitled to my organ donation because I "made" that child?

 

As I've said, your obligation to the individual you've created ends once it leaves the womb. At that point you can release yourself from obligation by placing it up for adoption. However much you want to be a part of that individual's life is up to you.

But while it's in the womb, it's dependant solely on it's mother who willfully put it in there. Hence why there is a great responsibility to pregnancy

 

No, the SC does not make moral judgements. Isn't supposed to anyway. Its supposed to interpret the constitution. Can you cite a single instance where the court cited morality as a basis for a ruling?

 

Well you are correct. It is suppose to remain impartial and just interpret the constitution. But it can and has made key decisions like Roe vs Wade in how it interprets the constitution. And later on, due to more information, might overturn Roe vs Wade. Hence the cause for this thread's hysteria.

 

I'm only seeing the elephant sized flaw in the 'room', but hopefully that will suffice.

Unless she is raped, the 'pregnant lady' HAS given consent. Since most grown women know how babies are made, any argument on that front is only going to embarrass you, and insult women.

 

Post of the week.

 

That right is exercised at the point of conception, in this unique case.

 

They're not who are starving.

 

Are you proposing that rape shouldn't be illegal?

Because other than that, there is no 'Govt regulation' of women's bodies involved at the point of conception (IOW the point at which the woman makes a choice).

 

Only if you have no comprehension of cause and effect, and a six year old can grasp it.

Ignoring the medical anomally suggested by your peanut allergy example, and working with prosaic events that 99% of human adults are exposed to in ordinary day to day life - we all know that if we don't want to be killed by a fast moving vehicle, we don't play on the freeway. Since it's incredibly easy to avoid that 50/50 proposition, or least to reduce the likelihood to 0.01% by simply NOT playing on the freeway .. that's what we choose.

 

Looks like you never received an answer to this question. I find that interesting to say the very least.

 

ABSOLUTELY NOT....."morals" are as fixed as farts in the wind....laws are NOT based on morals but what prevents chaos in society.

IF "morals" make laws then stop dancing and drinking and gambling because SOMEONE thinks they are immoral...

Abortion does NOT create chaos...

 

.

Nature has nothing to do with laws....but women are different from men, they are strong, intelligent, practical, can multi-task., create and settle entire countries while having periods and babies...

 

OR if we play on the freeway and get pregnant we can just have an abortion


Your dog-tired trite freeway "example" is silly.

 

But we still need men to tell us what to do with our bodies.

 

Consent to one act is not consent to any other act....even driving recklessly is NOT consent to have an accident.

You just seem to want women punished for having LOTSA FUN SEX