Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Alabama Abortion Ban:

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    I answered you sparko - already. Go search for "Everest". Read that post again. I'm not going to repeat myself just so you can claim I'm ignoring you again. If you have any questions or believe my answer is in error, please reply to that post.

    Jim
    Your Everest analogy was horrible and did not in any real way reflect the situation of being raped and getting pregnant.
    That's what
    - She

    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
    - Stephen R. Donaldson

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      That is a terrible analogy.

      We are talking about suicidal women, not mountain climbers.
      Could you engage your brain for 10 seconds please? Read again. The analogy shows the change in responsibility that occurs if one is forced to do something vs if one chooses to do it.

      Consensual sex: personal choice. Rape: violently forced.

      The analogy is not the argument. This is the argument:

      Originally posted by oxmixmudd
      Therefore, allowing rape as an exception clause for a ban on abortions does not in any way apply the reasons that exception clause might exist to any manner of consensual sex that produces a pregnancy. The raped women is victim and is not responsible to accept the consequences of the rapists actions. The women that had consensual sex is not a victim and through her own choice is pregnant and thus must accept the consequences of her own actions.
      In this I answer you as to why the exception clause for rape can not be extended in general as an exception to women in similar circumstances but not due to rape. And that is the point. IOW, the justification for the exception is the fact the pregnancy is forced by the rape combined with the resulting circumstance, not the specific circumstances alone.


      In both cases you have a woman who is threatening to kill herself if she can't have an abortion. In both cases if she does, both her and the baby die.
      No - in that post I never even mention a specific case where a women having consensual sex threatens suicide and a women raped and pregnant is driven by the trauma to suicidal ideation.

      First, they are fundamentally different situations. But more importantly, what I am talking about is the change in responsibility for an act and its consequences when the act is chosen vs when it is forced.

      Consensual sex is a choice and all participants bear responsibility for the consequences. Rape is forced on the women. The consequences are the responsibility of the rapist, not the victim.


      Yet in the case of consensual sex, you are willing to let her commit suicide rather than let her have an abortion, but in the case of rape, you are willing to let her have the abortion instead of killing herself and the baby.
      IF you didn't know the circumstances of the pregnancy you would not know which woman was which. So it isn't about the woman threatening suicide or the risk that both could die. It is all about HOW she got pregnant.

      Where's YOUR empathy?
      I did not present that scenario at all. I was discussing the reason the rape exception should be allowed, that the consequences of the action are on the rapist. And I am not willing to let her commit suicide either.

      In the case of rape, forcing the women to carry the baby to term puts responsibility for the consequences of the rapists action on the women who is the victim.

      That reason for an exception (rape) can't be extended to become an exception associated with consensual sex because if a similar circumstance, because circumstance is not the primary reason for the exception.

      However, the existing exception based on a threat to the life of the mother could conceivably be invoked if the woman is truly suicidal. But that would be a very hard thing to adjudicate.


      Jim
      My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

      If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

      This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

      Comment


      • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post


        No - in that post I never even mention a specific case where a women having consensual sex threatens suicide and a women raped and pregnant is driven by the trauma to suicidal ideation.
        No, that was MY example that you said your "everest" analogy answered. It didn't.


        First, they are fundamentally different situations.
        No they are not. Without knowing how they became pregnant you would consider them exactly the same.

        But more importantly, what I am talking about is the change in responsibility for an act and its consequences when the act is chosen vs when it is forced.
        Which is why I said you were only concerned with HOW they got pregnant and not with the actual hardship they were going through. Both claim they will kill themselves if they can't get an abortion. Both feel trapped. Both don't want the baby. Both would rather die than have the baby. But you don't give a crap about the one who had consensual sex. So you actually have no empathy here. This entire emotional argument is moot because you only care about HOW they got pregnant.



        Consensual sex is a choice and all participants bear responsibility for the consequences. Rape is forced on the women. The consequences are the responsibility of the rapist, not the victim.
        And yet both women are suffering the same consequences and hardships. Yet what would your solution be for the one who threatens suicide who was pregnant because of consensual sex? Would you let her kill herself? Would you force treatment upon her to keep her from killing herself? Or would you allow her to have an abortion? Please answer this.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          It had the opposite effect for the women I quoted above. Rape is an extremely traumatic experience. And finding out one is pregnant is an extremely traumatic experience. That force state of being pregnant is going to upend this persons life forever, whether she adopts or keeps the baby. So it is not a given that stopping the pregnancy is the worst possible option - which is how you are treating it. Sometimes it is not. It's all bad. But what is the best option for a given person is NOT something you or I can decide.

          Again, this is not about abortion on demand. This is a special case where the women is in a very fragile and difficult place and the state (Alabama) wants to force a specific outcome when it is demonstrably false that outcome is always the best outcome. Further, there - again - is the very real possibility that the Trauma of the rape and discovering one is pregnant will threaten the life of the mother. In that case, abortion is justified just as it is in ANY case where the life of the mother is threatened. Removing the exception for Rape denies the very real possibility the rape and the pregnancy can represent a threat to the life of the mother outside the purely physical effect. And that diminishes and denies empathy for the women that finds herself in that state of being after the rape.

          Jim
          Get back to me when you've managed to process what I said, Jim. You're not responding here - you're attempting to justify your position.
          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
          sigpic
          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            Ummmm.... lemme check. I'll get back to you on that.
            Hey, you guys got a movie out of the deal!
            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
            Than a fool in the eyes of God


            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
              Hey, you guys got a movie out of the deal!
              That's TRUE!

              And I just remembered --- we also got accused of dishonesty because we had a third party purchase the property for us. The folks representing Planned Parenthood said they never would have sold it to us if they had known who was behind it?
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                No, that was MY example that you said your "everest" analogy answered. It didn't.
                No - I said the "Everest" analogy answered why you can't say a justifiable cause for abortion related to a women that was raped is also a justifiable cause for a women that has engaged in consensual sex. You keep trying to say that they should be able to be shifted across that divide, and I keep telling you I already told you why you can't. And you keep moving the conversations around to try to get out of being wrong.


                No they are not. Without knowing how they became pregnant you would consider them exactly the same.
                That is just stupid. The rape exception is a RAPE exception. If you weren't raped, it doesn't apply.


                Which is why I said you were only concerned with HOW they got pregnant and not with the actual hardship they were going through. Both claim they will kill themselves if they can't get an abortion. Both feel trapped. Both don't want the baby. Both would rather die than have the baby. But you don't give a crap about the one who had consensual sex. So you actually have no empathy here. This entire emotional argument is moot because you only care about HOW they got pregnant.
                It's not either or, its both. The reason for the rape exception is that it changes the character of the hardship. As I said in my example, if I willingly take an action and it has consequences, I am responsible. If I am forced to take an action and it has consequences, then the party that forced me is responsible. That translates into the rape exception. She did not chose to do that which would make her pregnant, she was forced to do that which made her pregnant. And because of that, she has a right NOT to have to endure the same hardships a person that CHOSE to do that which produced a pregnancy.


                And yet both women are suffering the same consequences and hardships. Yet what would your solution be for the one who threatens suicide who was pregnant because of consensual sex? Would you let her kill herself? Would you force treatment upon her to keep her from killing herself? Or would you allow her to have an abortion? Please answer this.
                No I wouldn't let her kill herself.

                The problem here is that you've picked an example that is covered under two different exceptions clauses. For a person that is suicidal, they could theoretically fall under the 'threat to the life of the mother' exception.

                But lets change it up just a bit. Suppose the issue is just the simple fact that her entire life is now put on hold for a year at least and that she has to go through the pregnancy and the financial hardship and the medical issues and the impact on any family or significant other and schooling and so on.

                Consensual sex: No - sorry that was your choice.

                Rape: OK, you do NOT have to accept that burden. You did not chose this.



                Jim
                Last edited by oxmixmudd; 05-17-2019, 04:28 PM.
                My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                Comment


                • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                  Suppose the issue is just the simple fact that her entire life is now put on hold for a year at least and that she has to go through the pregnancy and the financial hardship and the medical issues and the impact on any family or significant other and schooling and so on.
                  Maternity leave is only about six weeks. Gestation isn't even a whole year. Where are you getting "a year at least" from? And I and others have already said, the rapist should be the one to pay her medical bills. He should also pay everything else that results from the pregnancy, including whatever percentage of her salary her employer doesn't pay whilst she's on maternity leave. That plus child support should be a pretty good deterrent to other would-be rapists.
                  Curiosity never hurt anyone. It was stupidity that killed the cat.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                    No - it's a 100% appeal to compassion for a victim of a violent crime. It's an appeal to mercy for the victim of a violent crime - to not demand she sacrifice her entire life at the feet of this rapist.

                    Jim
                    How is carrying a baby to term "sacrificing her life at the feet of this rapist"?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by QuantaFille View Post
                      Maternity leave is only about six weeks.
                      FMLA allows up to 12 weeks [minus time from pregnancy complications, if necessary]. An employer is not obligated to pay the 12 weeks taken through FMLA, but FMLA guarantees 12 weeks leave if a mother asks for it. Individual employers can allow more leave if they wish (many biglaw firms give 20-24 weeks paid maternity leave).

                      "Fire is catching. If we burn, you burn with us!"
                      "I'm not going anywhere. I'm going to stay here and cause all kinds of trouble."
                      Katniss Everdeen


                      Christ our Passover has been sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                        (I know you don't accept this, but it is what it is) the OT law - in the original text - apparently makes the distinction between the unformed child and the formed child when determining the punishment for a man who through his actions kills the unborn.
                        Hey Jim, I posted a lengthy post on this subject some time ago here and here. The actual Jewish view is far more complex than we may sometimes think. Some Jews maintained that an unformed child and a formed child were indistinguishable (even in the face of rape), some actually distinguished between the two, but look at our own language on this subject. You call both formed and unformed "children". That is significant I think. As much as I agree with you on so many other topics, especially your views on Trump, this is an area that I agree with the other Christians on this forum.

                        I SO empathize with your point of view in this thread. Rape destroys so many lives, and it continues to destroy lives well beyond the initial physical act. I know it's only anecdotal, but in my own life I've been close to a number of women who have been raped, and/also have aborted their children. My own mother had an abortion because the cult I was raised in sanctioned abortion regardless of the cause. These women felt like they had nowhere else to go, and/or were disgusted with their condition, and/or felt they had no other choice without destroying their lives. My mother who was raped while under the influence, and aborted her child, coming to a fuller knowledge of God's will, has ministered to women in the same circumstances for decades. I grew up in a household where my parents took in so many poor women who felt they had no other choice, who felt that suicide was the only option, who ministered into their lives, and showered them with the love of Christ. Once they knew that the child within them wasn't part of the evil they endured, it changed them. I saw so many lives changed. They saw their children as a curse turned into a blessing. That's for real. That's not some hypothetical, I saw it with my own eyes. Again, I totally empathize with those who've been through that sort of trauma, but abortion isn't the answer. The Christians on this form are correct in pointing out that all it does is lead to more grief.

                        I love your heart man. I really do, but I think in this particular case it's misplaced.
                        Last edited by Adrift; 05-17-2019, 09:54 PM.

                        Comment


                        • I do question the wisdom of lacking a rape exception. Earlier conservatives were, as far as I can tell, scoring legitimate points in public perception by pointing out the absurdities of the abortion laws in states like New York, but now they've granted ammunition to the liberals. And for what, exactly?

                          "It could save more lives" you might say, but let's be real here. This law is not going to go into effect anytime soon. It'll be challenged instantly and put on hold by a judge because it's a flagrant violation of precedent (that precedent may or may not be wrong, but it's currently binding). The only way this law is going to go into effect is if it somehow manages to make its way to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court finds it constitutional. That requires a whole lot of things to line up perfectly, would take a long time even if it did happen, and if it did, the state could just decide "okay, now that it's in effect, let's amend it to take out that rape exception."

                          It may seem a minor thing, but it feels like it's a loss in PR without actually gaining anything from it.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
                            I do question the wisdom of lacking a rape exception. Earlier conservatives were, as far as I can tell, scoring legitimate points in public perception by pointing out the absurdities of the abortion laws in states like New York, but now they've granted ammunition to the liberals. And for what, exactly?

                            ...It may seem a minor thing, but it feels like it's a loss in PR without actually gaining anything from it.
                            But you gain a consistent argument, if that unborn really is a human life it is deserving of Constitutional protections, no matter how that life came into being.
                            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by seer View Post
                              But you gain a consistent argument, if that unborn really is a human life it is deserving of Constitutional protections, no matter how that life came into being.
                              Except it's not being consistent. As I understand it, the law prescribes punishment (possibly very harsh punishment) for the doctor or whoever performed the abortion. But the woman herself faces no prosecution whatsoever, which also means that a woman can legally self-abort. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that is my understanding. And if true, that means the law is therefore taking the bizarre (and hardly consistent) stance that it's legal to kill or hire someone else to kill for you, but it's illegal to be hired to kill.

                              Comment


                              • Would the woman not qualify as "whoever performed the abortion" in those circumstances?
                                1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                                .
                                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                                Scripture before Tradition:
                                but that won't prevent others from
                                taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                                of the right to call yourself Christian.

                                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                231 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                291 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X