Humans as a species commit morally reprehensible acts EVERY SINGLE DAY! We fight wars, killing indiscriminately in the process, we exploit the poor and weak to the advantage of the wealthy as a matter of course, we despoil the planet we are supposed to cherish, we rape, murder, destroy and try to oppress any art, culture or beliefs we as polities find 'offensive'. We try to silence dissenting political or religious opinions and human life be dammed if that is a consequence. In sort we lie, cheat, steal and betray each other both as 'individuals' and as races and nations. Basically? We fail on virtually every moral metric God supposedly sets for us. And yet? Abortion is the hill you are apparently prepared to die on. It's the main 'evil' that you (conveniently as a male BTW) claim is 'morally reprehensible'! Perhaps when you finally express an opinion on at least some of the other issues I've raised above I might start to take your moral judgement on abortion more seriously.
I've always remarked how the abortion issue seems to have the miraculous power to transiently turn progressives into conservative-like Libertarians bringing up Constitutional rights. But now it seems the abortion issue not only does that but can even start making you reason like Christian moralists!
To the extent I've 'reasoned like a christian moralist?' I was simply pointing out that no-one gets to arbitrarily 'cherry pick' particular moral issues as being more 'important' simply because the one they choose is 'easy' i.e. it cost's them little or nothing to object to to on a personal basis. It's only when you are literally peering into the abyss of a life changing moral decision and then make a choice that you get to pontificate on the decisions of others in similar situations.
Just trying to kickstart the thread..... I asked: How is choosing an abortion after a forced pregnancy not a matter of self-determination of a human being over her own body?. And then you quibbled about the definition of bodily autonomy and refused to answer, but now we have your definition, although Ms kazenatsu's is more complete. So, how is choosing an abortion after a forced pregnancy (rape) not a matter of what happens to my body is within my control and mine alone? It also seems to me you are not against abortion, because you are for the right to choose in cases of rape and to save the life of the woman. You are against the reasons for abortion.
So if you think a fetus is a person with rights it can violate the rights of the woman it's in if she doesn't want it there.. NO one loses their right to bodily autonomy by committing a crime.. Nope, that's not bodily autonomy....not even close... No one can force another to use their body to sustain the life of another. One cannot force another, for example, to give them their heart or blood or other body part to sustain their life (even felons, prisoners, cannot be forced to use their body to sustain the life of another.). ...all because we have the right to bodily autonomy
This is an abortion thread actually. Only someone with no argument would bring up all of the other unrelated issues that you have above.
You asked, and I answered, quoting that exact question: Click here to see post: http://politicalforum.com/index.php...s-on-abortion.580016/page-163#post-1074034708 No, I did not in fact refuse to answer, as you can see from my above reply. Do you acknowledge that you were wrong? I will happily answer that, after you tell me why you specify "rape." Well I am against the reasons for abortion in over 99% of cases. Which means that I am against abortion in over 99% of cases.
I don't think you are very honest. I gave you a statement with a definition of bodily autonomy in it (which is essentially the same as yours) and you said I don't think that is bodily autonomy. And then got really vague about its meaning. So you refused to answer. Now you are stalling again. I said (rape) to remind you what we knew a forced pregnancy was. So, how is choosing an abortion after a forced pregnancy (rape) not a matter of what happens to my body is within my control and mine alone? It is good that you are against 99% of abortions. How is the fetus, that is the product of a rape, any less an innocent life form than any other unwanted pregnancy?
Then you missed the bit about the 'hill to die on I guess' as well as the later post where I mentioned 'cherry picking' 'evils'. And for the record I am morally opposed to abortion. It's just that I'm even more morally opposed to the alternative. There being (in my mind at least) an unresolvable moral dilemma I seldom have anything to add in such threads. Except when people start making unequivocal statements about issues that cost them nothing to pontificate on.
Take any moral dilemma, if your not in the shoes of the person facing that dilemma/problem its very easy to pass judgement (also very human BTW). For example a poor person steeling food to eat. Is it wrong? Yes. Is it right that someone who is rich should rush to judgement? Probably not (depending on the individual circumstances of course.) Same with abortion. Each individual incident has to be judged on the basis of what you (if your the one intending to judge) as a person know about that specific case. There might well be individual abortions where the person concerned is very deserving of judgement e.g. perhaps aborting a child solely to punish the father or more commonly simply because it's the 'wrong' gender. And obviously there will be cases (the vast majority I suspect) where the motives are entirely more complex and can't really be judged without knowing the person concerned and their specific circumstances. My point is its very easy for someone to stand there and pass judgement on someone else when the person doing so isn't impacted in the slightest by the decision/action the other person is making/taking and has little to no knowledge of the specific circumstances involved.
Yep, (assuming abortion is even a crime depending on where you live). At law any 'crime' is treated as an individual incident and only facts relevant to that specific incident can be taken into account when deciding guilt or innocence. Same for any mitigating factors.
What happened to condoms? Don't they make them anymore? And IUD's? Can't a woman get one anymore? And, of course, THE PILL... isn't it sold anymore? And diaphragms... what about diaphragms? Oh, for the good old 1960's and 1970's when there was no AIDS and every chick was on the pill!!!
You were the one who asked the question about how I would 'judge' ALL crimes (again assuming abortion is one in the jurisdiction concerned). That's the question I answered. As for your question about 'passing judgement' as I distinctly pointed out in post 4162 what was required before doing so 'and has little to no knowledge of the specific circumstances involved.' I suggest you re-read that post. Because I see no contradiction between that and anything else I have posted since. An individuals choices/decisions should/can only really be 'judged' on the basis of the facts and circumstances pertinent to that persons particular situation
In your scenario, isn't the key that the poor person stole out of necessity? If so, then shouldn't your point be that, not only should rich people probably not pass judgement, but nobody should?
I did use examples specifically relating to abortion but if you insist on using that one OK. It depends on why the poor 'man' is poor. Is he he poor as a result of his own bad decisions and choices or is he poor due to events largely beyond his control? As for rich people passing judgement? Again it depends on what they know about that persons specific circumstances but regardless of that everyone is skating on thin moral ice if or when they start passing judgement on other people having never experienced any of the circumstances that lead someone else to do what they did. Empathy and compassion don't prevent us from passing judgement on another person but they should be present when we do so.
You refused to answer what you agreed with was bodily autonomy. Now maybe you can think of something else to avoid answer my questions.
LOL, are you going to name every crime ever committed? What's your non-existent point? What are you trying to avoid THIS time ?
