>
Patriots Planet - New England Patriots Forums and Message Boards

Home Members List Top Posters Arcade Casino Toolbar
Go Back   Patriots Planet - New England Patriots Forums and Message Boards > The Razor > Politics and Religion Forum
Mark Forums Read rel="nofollow">Mark Forums Read
Register All Albums FAQDonate Calendar

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-19-2018, 08:12 AM   #16
Oswlek
Registered User
 
Oswlek's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In southcarolina's closet
Posts: 16,989
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $308620


Oswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museum
Oswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museum
Quote:
Originally Posted by O_P_T View Post
If yes, then that would mean that 30 seconds before the baby is born, the woman could tell the doctor to giver her an abortion.

Is that what you're advocating?
It would be helpful to read what is actually written, OPT. You do realize there is a big difference between "primary" and "sole", right?

Rather than put words into my mouth, it would be more helpful to provide examples you have now twice avoided giving. Can you offer a situation where someone is legally obligated to donate blood or tissue to another person?
__________________
"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." - Carl Sagan
  Oswlek is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2018, 11:49 AM   #17
deec77
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,861
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $811615


deec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond repute
deec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oswlek View Post
It would be helpful to read what is actually written, OPT. You do realize there is a big difference between "primary" and "sole", right?

Rather than put words into my mouth, it would be more helpful to provide examples you have now twice avoided giving. Can you offer a situation where someone is legally obligated to donate blood or tissue to another person?
Conjoined twins.

Instead of personhood how about viability outside the womb?

Oswlek can you explain what you mean by ďprimaryĒ bodily autonomy? I know how I view it, but, Iím confused/ unsure as to how your using it and I donít want to put words in your mouth.

Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004, federal law. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb. Most states have homicide laws pertaining to an unborn ďchild in uterioĒ on viability some go as far as giving an embryo or fetus personhood status in regards to violence against the unborn. So there is legal language (I wonít to go as far as precedent) when a violent act ie a crime is involved regarding viability as well as personhood, charges can be filed on behalf of the unborn.

IMHO it is about the oppressed and the oppressor you just have a different view of who is who.

~Dee~
  deec77 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2018, 01:05 PM   #18
Oswlek
Registered User
 
Oswlek's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In southcarolina's closet
Posts: 16,989
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $308620


Oswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museum
Oswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museum
I never used the phrase “'primary' bodily autonomy", Dee, I said it is a primary factor.

Quote:
IMHO it is about the oppressed and the oppressor you just have a different view of who is who.
Yes, one could view it that way. And one could say the exact same thing about the opposing viewpoint as well (with the fetus being the oppressed). The reason OPT's description is a poor fit here isn't that it can't apply, it's because it applies to all equally, making it functionally useless.

Last edited by Oswlek; 10-19-2018 at 01:09 PM..
__________________
"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." - Carl Sagan
  Oswlek is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2018, 01:18 PM   #19
deec77
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,861
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $811615


deec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond repute
deec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oswlek View Post
I never used the phrase “'primary' bodily autonomy", Dee, I said it is a primary factor.



Yes, one could view it that way. And one could say the exact same thing about the opposing viewpoint as well (with the fetus being the oppressed). The reason OPT's description is a poor fit here isn't that it can't apply, it's because it applies to all equally, making it functionally useless.
Ok then what do you mean by-


Quote:
As far as I can tell, bodily autonomy is the primary factor regardless of when a fetus becomes a person.”

~Dee~

Last edited by deec77; 10-19-2018 at 01:24 PM..
  deec77 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2018, 01:41 PM   #20
Oswlek
Registered User
 
Oswlek's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In southcarolina's closet
Posts: 16,989
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $308620


Oswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museum
Oswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museum
Quote:
Originally Posted by deec77 View Post
Ok then what do you mean by-





~Dee~
Exactly what it says. I honestly don't know how to word it more succinctly or clearly.
__________________
"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." - Carl Sagan
  Oswlek is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2018, 02:50 PM   #21
deec77
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,861
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $811615


deec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond repute
deec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oswlek View Post
Exactly what it says. I honestly don't know how to word it more succinctly or clearly.
Ok but I then I guess I donít understand how you could respond with this

Quote:
It would be helpful to read what is actually written, OPT. You do realize there is a big difference between "primary" and "sole", right?
To this

Quote:
As far as I can tell, bodily autonomy is the primary factor regardless of when a fetus becomes a person.

So let me get this straight.

You seem to be saying that once a developing fetus becomes a "person", but has not yet been born, it still has no rights and the mother can abort at any time?

Is that correct?


If yes, then that would mean that 30 seconds before the baby is born, the woman could tell the doctor to giver her an abortion.

Is that what you're advocating?
Having bodily autonomy your primary factor regardless of personhood, would mean just that. If itís my body my choice then itís my choice, bodily Autonomy, then itís still my choice regardless of the fetusís gestation, if unborn, and in my body would it not?

And just an FYI Iím fine with first trimester abortion, and a late term if the mother or unborn child are in danger. I just find this argument disingenuous at best.

Now I find the bodily autonomy a definite oppressed oppressor argument in this case. Now arguing that at some point the unborn becomes viable and that is not the same as an oppressed oppressor argument.

~Dee~
  deec77 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2018, 02:55 PM   #22
Baron Samedi
Russian Bot 762X54R
 
Baron Samedi's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Framingham
Posts: 25,905
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $411925
My Mood


Baron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on money
Baron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on money
A person gets into a motorcycle accident near a small town, and it brought to the local private hospital and put on life support.

That hospital then gets another patient requiring life support, a patient that for whatever reason is prioritized.

Does the owner of the sole life support machine have the right to pull the plug on patient one, in favor of patient two?

Does the owner of the sole life support machine have the right to pull the plug just for the Hell of it....to reduce the electricity bill?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaric View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by benhamean View Post
Who is this self-important instigating douche-bag, anyway?
Dude, Baron has been a valued member of this forum for quite some time.
Peace, Prosperity, Liberty, Human Rights, Natural Rights, Civil Rights, Property Rights, Sound Money, Free Markets, Sovereignty, the Constitution, the Republic.

Shameless plug for my blog; https://puntyventures.com/
  Baron Samedi is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2018, 03:03 PM   #23
Oswlek
Registered User
 
Oswlek's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In southcarolina's closet
Posts: 16,989
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $308620


Oswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museum
Oswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museum
Quote:
Having bodily autonomy your primary factor regardless of personhood, would mean just that.
You are making the same error OPT did, in confusing "primary" for "sole".

It's also amusing that neither of you seem to realize that your position is equally reducible. If perspnhood takes precedence over bodily autonomy then anyone who can make a necessary tissue donation would be obligated to do so.

Are you in favor of obligatory tissue donation? Or is my summary reductive?
__________________
"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." - Carl Sagan
  Oswlek is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2018, 04:21 PM   #24
deec77
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,861
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $811615


deec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond repute
deec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oswlek View Post
You are making the same error OPT did, in confusing "primary" for "sole".

It's also amusing that neither of you seem to realize that your position is equally reducible. If perspnhood takes precedence over bodily autonomy then anyone who can make a necessary tissue donation would be obligated to do so.

Are you in favor of obligatory tissue donation? Or is my summary reductive?
Well thatís not true as in the case of conjoined twins you canít force them to consent to separation either. So both the persons are sharing a body one person doesnít have more say then the other. Your argument wants me to conflate a womens right to bodily autonomy and remove, resulting in death of the fetus ( and Iíve made it clear Iím talking about a viable infant) an unborn fetus based on the fact that they donít want the unwanted fetus using/sharing their body anymore? Is that really the route you want to take. I prefer honesty just say I really am not ready to young etc, its up to me and my doctor.

So no I understood where you were going with youíre argument I just think itís a disingenuous one as I said. Youíre argument about giving tissue to some stranger has zero to do with aborting a fetus your potential offspring. On the flip side my body my choice then I can drink, smoke, heck do drugs, sky dive, and any dangerous thing I choose. The state canít take my baby or force me into treatment right? My body my choice.

So once more explain your position I asked you to clarify twice because if boldily autonomy is primary factor what is secondary.


~Dee~
  deec77 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2018, 03:04 AM   #25
Oswlek
Registered User
 
Oswlek's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In southcarolina's closet
Posts: 16,989
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $308620


Oswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museum
Oswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museumOswlek should have their sex organs bronzed for posterity and put in a museum
I don't know why this is so hard. If personhood supposedly began at conception I would disagree with that as an end date for an abortion and if personhood supposedly began at birth I would disagree with that as well.

Someone could say this is largely semantics because where I draw the line is probably very similar to where OPT feels a fetus becomes a person. Regardless, the fact remains that personhood is not a primary factor... and recognizing this neither leads logically to or obliges me to accept the naive generalizations that have been presented.

FWIW, the conjoined twins example is an interesting one, but it's inapt because there is no clear distinction between the entities; the tissues are shared, not donated. The entities in a pregnancy are more distinct, making them more akin to a traditional donation, so that is the framework that your argument should build around.
__________________
"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." - Carl Sagan
  Oswlek is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2018, 07:04 AM   #26
Baron Samedi
Russian Bot 762X54R
 
Baron Samedi's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Framingham
Posts: 25,905
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $411925
My Mood


Baron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on money
Baron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on money
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oswlek View Post
Yes, but I still disagree. Can you think of another case where a person is required to contribute the use of their organs, blood or tissue for the benefit of another? Even if we know the other is a "person", that their life depends on it and the donor was responsible for bring the person into existence?

As far as I can tell, bodily autonomy is the primary factor regardless of when a fetus becomes a person.
Not sure if this qualifies, but the police can take blood, or DNA, or whatever from a person in custody without their consent.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaric View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by benhamean View Post
Who is this self-important instigating douche-bag, anyway?
Dude, Baron has been a valued member of this forum for quite some time.
Peace, Prosperity, Liberty, Human Rights, Natural Rights, Civil Rights, Property Rights, Sound Money, Free Markets, Sovereignty, the Constitution, the Republic.

Shameless plug for my blog; https://puntyventures.com/
  Baron Samedi is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2018, 08:18 AM   #27
IU_Knightmare
Registered User
 
IU_Knightmare's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: God's Country
Posts: 423
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $104500
My Mood


IU_Knightmare is classy.IU_Knightmare is classy.IU_Knightmare is classy.IU_Knightmare is classy.IU_Knightmare is classy.IU_Knightmare is classy.IU_Knightmare is classy.IU_Knightmare is classy.IU_Knightmare is classy.IU_Knightmare is classy.IU_Knightmare is classy.IU_Knightmare is classy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron Samedi View Post
Not sure if this qualifies, but the police can take blood, or DNA, or whatever from a person in custody without their consent.
On a different note but along the lines of the conversation, I think one could argue that as a parent, we are legally obligated to provide of our everything to the now born child's everything. Our entire being, identity, emotional, physical, psychological self is now required legally to provide for the welfare of the child. We must provide of ourselves for it's every basic need until it reaches adulthood...or we can relinquish our parental rights to the involvement in the child's life, but we are still required to find a person or entity to pass that obligation to.
__________________
A good friend will come and bail you out of jail, but a true friend would be sitting in the cell with you saying "THAT WAS F'ING AWESOME!"

  IU_Knightmare is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2018, 11:33 AM   #28
Baron Samedi
Russian Bot 762X54R
 
Baron Samedi's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Framingham
Posts: 25,905
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $411925
My Mood


Baron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on money
Baron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on moneyBaron Samedi should have their picture on money
From an Austro-Libertarian perspective, the fundamental question is who has property rights over the unborn at each stage...or even the born, for that matter.

Property rights determine whether it is a crime to kill it. An owner can kill a slave and it is not a crime. However, that same person cannot kill someone that he does not own without it being a crime.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaric View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by benhamean View Post
Who is this self-important instigating douche-bag, anyway?
Dude, Baron has been a valued member of this forum for quite some time.
Peace, Prosperity, Liberty, Human Rights, Natural Rights, Civil Rights, Property Rights, Sound Money, Free Markets, Sovereignty, the Constitution, the Republic.

Shameless plug for my blog; https://puntyventures.com/
  Baron Samedi is offline Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2018, 12:07 PM   #29
deec77
Registered User
 

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,861
Posting Frequency


Casino cash: $811615


deec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond repute
deec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond reputedeec77 has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oswlek View Post
I don't know why this is so hard. If personhood supposedly began at conception I would disagree with that as an end date for an abortion and if personhood supposedly began at birth I would disagree with that as well.

Someone could say this is largely semantics because where I draw the line is probably very similar to where OPT feels a fetus becomes a person. Regardless, the fact remains that personhood is not a primary factor... and recognizing this neither leads logically to or obliges me to accept the naive generalizations that have been presented.

FWIW, the conjoined twins example is an interesting one, but it's inapt because there is no clear distinction between the entities; the tissues are shared, not donated. The entities in a pregnancy are more distinct, making them more akin to a traditional donation, so that is the framework that your argument should build around.

I donít think anyone one said that personhood was the primary factor for everyone just as bodily autonomy isnít the primary factor for everyone either.

The courts decision does take viability into consideration, as far as Roe V Wade went ie viability personhood. Hence the court decided that in the first trimester abortion should be decriminalize because according to the 7 judges in favor believed and wrote in their opinion that the argument that life begins at conception ie personhood, didnít pertain to the first trimester as the fetus wasnít viable. They in essence were saying life doesnít begin at conception, in their view. But they went on to say after the first trimester viability does come onto play, and abortions would only be decriminalize under certain circumstances, the health of the mother and or the fetus after the first trimester.

The courts never ruled in favor of abortion based on bodily autonomy. Now they did use the 14 amendment and due process claiming the right to privacy between mother and DR. But as you can see that the ruling states life/ personhood doesnít begin at conception so personhood is and alway has been the crux of the argument regardless of how naive you think the generalized is.

O_P_T as well as I arenít saying we agree or disagree with either argument, but merely stating the personhood is exactly what the 2 groups are basing their arguments off of. Itís not our arguement itís the arguement in general. Right to lifers believe, whether you agree or not, life begins at conception. Pro choice believe in,as you point out, itís a matter of bodily autonomy. Their body their choice regardless of gestation and viability of the fetus, there is no personhood until birth. Then those in between believe in the courts decision regarding viability your, semantics, which is where I believe the 3 of us fall into.

You actually are arguing a point that neither of us were making which is why I asked over and over again what you meant by the primary factor. Perhaps in hindsight I should of asked what you were referring to as to the primary factor to whom and how. This is why itís so difficult to have a disscussion about abortion rights because assumptions are made and then it becomes a circular argument. In your view itís a primary factor as opposed to the opposite side of the arguement which it isnít, personhood is.

Now onto your donation argument, your basing it on the view of bodily autonomy is absolute, which is what hard core pro choice are arguing, in their view bodily autonomy grants them absolute control even minutes before a fetus is born it can be aborted, whether you agree or not, there is no personhood until birth. Again according to the 14 amendment no one can force you to donate any tissue, etc. the bases for the bodily autonomy arguement.

Iím confused with the whole donation part of your arguement. The way you worded it. Are you implying a woman is donating tissue to the fetus or that the fetus is part the womanís tissue ie womb, and not a separate entity, being, life, person with its own organs, tissue, and dna? Or are you arguing conjoined twins arenít separate entities relying on each otherís tissue solely. Or are you comparing the unborn fetus via abortion and an organ, tissue, blood donation as the same thing? Iím thinking the later. Or am I totally misunderstanding your arguement. Or are you framing your arguement based on something else altogether?

My arguement. A fetus like conjoined twins both are separate beings even if they share a body tissue, organs, etc . At some point they can choose to be separate entities no longer sharing one body or they can remain as one . According to the US courts they both must agree as they are regardless of what one may be donating to the other including life, have a say, bodily autonomy. As with conjoined twins one may survive, both may not survive, or both may survive the separation surgery. Obviously unlike a separation of conjoined twins the fetus has very little chance to survive the abortion procedure. Some do. Now depending on the viability of an unborn fetus it could survive other procedures to remove it as in separating it, like separating conjoined twins, but that would mean they too have bodily autonomy.

So if I m understanding your argument correctly youíre basing it on the right to refuse to donate blood, tissue, organs etc. to another person even if it means death, so therefore I have the right not to donate to the unborn fetus regardless of viability? If so I think the courts may disagree with you on bodily autonomy arguement once the unborn fetus is viable and sharing a body. Which is why I question the donation arguement based on the courts ruling regarding restriction when a legal abortion can and may be preformed.


So I simply disagree with your agrguement that bodily autonomy primary factor regardless of personhood, statement. Itís okay to have a different opinion and thatís why itís important to understand both sides of any argument. Taking segments out of context makes for a very difficult arguement either way.

My argument and I wonít speak for O_P_T is and was that the concept of personhood is the bases of both arguments. Itís primary in the right to lifeís view, and it secondary to the pro choice crowd. It all boils down to when you feel at what point they both have rights, at conception, at birth, or somewhere in between, no more no less.

~Dee~
  deec77 is offline Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Template-Modifications by TMS
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Patriots Planet is not affiliated with the NFL or with the New England Patriots. The views and opinions on this forum do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the owners and/or operators of this forum and website.