Can we compromise on abortion?

[Sargonski]

No, I have been making the secular argument.

You mean you have been Trying to make a secular argument .. and failing -- we are talking legitimate justification for law here.. Which means you have to achieve a bar higher than just making an argument.

What is your legitimate justification for law banning abortion from conception onward ? You have yet to state what a Person is .. never mind clime the hill Friend.

 

[Sargonski]

I agree. Apparently @Clizby Wampuscat does not.

We are working on that ...

 

[crossfire]

No, you did not answer the question. You answered a different question. If I am wrong please show me where you answered the questions "Do you think abortion up to birth should be legal? When would you restrict abortion?

This was your response.

Why make laws for problems that do not exist? By week 22 over 99% of the abortions that occur during a pregnancy have already happened. The remaining 1% are almost all tragedies in that they are medically necessary abortions. You appear to have a rather low opinion of women. In a matter as serious as this they do not tend to be any more whimsical than men, and in fact probably less so. And the very very very few women that would opt for such a procedure are all but guaranteed to be horrible mothers.

Why not just limit insurance coverage after 22 weeks? Only cover medically necessary abortions.

Is it 22 weeks then? or never? I am asking a clarifying question. Seems like you want no restrictions on abortions.

This would be evidence that humans naturally place limits on abortions without the need for legislation. This not not mean there are no restrictions on abortion, it means that these restrictions are self-imposed rather than imposed by law. This leaves room for life-threatening emergency exceptions without the delay of governmental red tape. More lives would be saved in such emergencies without the delay of imposed red-tape.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No I don't but that is an epistemological debate.

Human life has worth because people give it worth just like everything else we value. Do you not think the people you love have value?

Correct, but that is a case for both off us, that it is only true because it is true for us even with variation as individuals.
Your rule is that your rule for worth is true for all humans. It is not and neither is mine.

 

[SomeRandom]

This would be evidence that humans naturally place limits on abortions without the need for legislation. This not not mean there are no restrictions on abortion, it means that these restrictions are self-imposed rather than imposed by law. This leaves room for life-threatening emergency exceptions without the delay of governmental red tape. More lives would be saved in such emergencies without the delay of imposed red-tape.

I swear I just saw a news report from the US
(I’ll try my best to find it to link it) where a woman was denied a late term abortion even though all the doctors involved recommended it for her health and deemed it medically necessary. I think it cost her the baby since it was no longer viable
From the report Biden apparently said that the doctors went against federal law by denying her said abortion (I’m not American so I can’t comment one way or the other on that.)
Apparently the doctors were afraid of possible lawsuits?

Geez and you Yanks complain about how involved my government supposedly is with my healthcare. This still wouldn’t likely happen here without a massive scandal.

 

[Koldo]

Those are not accidents. Those are informed decisions that are made knowing the potential consequences and if they are not well informed that is on them as well. If you are driving 90 mph in a 70 mph zone and you don't realize it, you are still responsible for going 90 mph.

Being responsible for something does not necessarily entail that it wasn't an accident.

But more importantly, what you are suggesting is unrealistic. It is impossible to know for sure if any contraceptive method is always going to work. You are in essence saying abstinence is the only way to behave morally, to most people.

 

[SomeRandom]

@crossfire I think this might be the story, but honestly I don’t know
There’s admittedly a few in circulation at the present

Texas woman denied an abortion tells senators she ‘nearly died on their watch’ | CNN

A woman who is suing the state of Texas after being denied an abortion told lawmakers Wednesday that not receiving abortion care harmed her mental health and might prevent her from having children in the future.

amp.cnn.com

I also found this one from last year, which was hard to read

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/22/health/ohio-abortion-patient-doctor/index.html

Either way. Doctors should be assessing this not the law. I thought Americans valued freedom

 

[metis]

That was not what you said but this is a different issue as to how to pay for these programs you want.

I don't put money ahead of people, and since we pay for so many other programs, I do know we can also pay for universal healthcare if we truly care for others. Matter of fact, Medicare is much more efficient than private insurance.

 

[metis]

How does a woman get pregnant accidentally?

Busted condom; getting carried away emotionally; other birth control fails; etc.

 

[SkepticThinker]

No. I have already explained this twice now. If you disagree then so be it.

And I countered your explanation and explained how they actually are accidents, by providing the definition of the word and pointing out how the examples actually are accidents. Your response appears to be that you disagree, with not much else.

Clearly accidents can and do happen when it comes to pregnancy. As with most other things in life.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It does not become moral all of a sudden. The problem is destroying the life is an immoral act as well. The moral action once you create the life is to make sure the life is taken care of.

So it's immoral to have a child you can't support, but not if you become accidentally pregnant, then you must have the baby, even if you can't support it, which is immoral unless you find yourself accidentally pregnant and then the moral thing to do is to have a baby you can't support.

Umm okay.

 

[Alien826]

Exactly, you have provided beforehand for an eventuality you know could happen but don't expect to happen.

I'm now a little puzzled.

The driving analogy states that every possible precaution has been taken to avoid an accident. [That would be contraception}. Due to the nature of driving, an accident can still happen, and in this case it does. [Some failure of contraception.] The driver is not responsible for the accident in any way othere than by driving at all. [Same for pregnancy, other than by having sex at all]. Nevertheless, some damage has been done and this is is allowed to be fixed. That's what insurance is for. [Insurance = abortion, but in this part of the analogy you don't want the damage to be fixed.]

If you agree with the analogy (you said "exactly") then you agree with all the abortion related parts of what I wrote, but I suspect you don't.

Let's see how the driving analogy might not totally fit.

How to avoid the accident entirely: Don't drive at all. [Abstinence]. In our society it is not reasonable to ask people to avoid driving totally. That might be OK for those living in New York City, but generally not. I suggest that the same applies to sex. I think you will disagree here.

Insurance = Abortion. The objective of insurance is to put the insured person back in the same situation as she was before the accident. [The car is now working perfectly. The woman is no longer pregnant]. You will say the two cases are different in this respect. Fair enough, but if you accept that the driver/woman is not responsible for the accident/pregnancy (by following my logic) then you have to establish why the "insurance" is allowed in one case and not the other.

To save us getting off track, this is about responsibility for an "accident" where the person involved made every effort to prevent it, not other aspects of the discussion.

 

[Alien826]

I thought Americans valued freedom

I have lived in the USA for 33 years now. I can attest that all the blah about freedom comes down to something very simple. They want the freedom to do what they want and also the freedom to deny that right to others. That's not a specific criticism (other than maybe hypocrisy), it applies to pretty much everyone everywhere, I fear.

 

[Alien826]

Human life has worth because people give it worth just like everything else we value.

This is the nub of it imo.

I would say that when we are talking about pregnancy what people value (when they do) is the process of pregnancy, which is how we mammals produce more of us. I'm sure that if a woman that wanted a baby was offered a deal where she had a (live) fetus inside her forever she would not assign any value to it.

Here's another thought. If a woman that desperately wants a child has a miscarriage, she is very unhappy. If she then goes on to get pregnant again all her hopes are renewed and she then values the new fetus very highly and the dead fetus is, if not of zero value, then very little. So, are fetuses fungible? (Ladies, I know it's more complicated than that, it's just a thought).

Anyway, that was a slight diversion. If it all comes down to subjective value (and I believe it does) then the whole thing gets a lot more complicated than simple logic. And don't forget that there are many other people that have value, most obviously the woman involved.

 

[fantome profane]

How to avoid the accident entirely: Don't drive at all. [Abstinence]. In our society it is not reasonable to ask people to avoid driving totally.

Also with this analogy you might decide not to drive, but sometimes the car would come to you and force you inside and force you to drive against your will [rape].

 

[Heyo]

Also with this analogy you might decide not to drive, but sometimes the car would come to you and force you inside and force you to drive against your will [rape].

@Clizby Wampuscat already compromised on that. Rape is for him an exception to a total ban of abortions.

 

[Alien826]

Also with this analogy you might decide not to drive, but sometimes the car would come to you and force you inside and force you to drive against your will [rape].

That's probably one of those self driving cars ... next years model!

 

[fantome profane]

That's probably one of those self driving cars ... next years model!

I sincerely hope the new self driving cars require consent.

 

[crossfire]

@crossfire I think this might be the story, but honestly I don’t know
There’s admittedly a few in circulation at the present

Texas woman denied an abortion tells senators she ‘nearly died on their watch’ | CNN

A woman who is suing the state of Texas after being denied an abortion told lawmakers Wednesday that not receiving abortion care harmed her mental health and might prevent her from having children in the future.

amp.cnn.com

I also found this one from last year, which was hard to read

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/22/health/ohio-abortion-patient-doctor/index.html

Either way. Doctors should be assessing this not the law. I thought Americans valued freedom

I've read several stories like these already. The first woman, who wants to have children is having difficulty getting pregnant again, due to a lack of care. Doctors are not lawyers, and legislators are not doctors.

 

[crossfire]

I've read several stories like these already. The first woman, who wants to have children is having difficulty getting pregnant again, due to a lack of care. Doctors are not lawyers, and legislators are not doctors.

Also with this analogy you might decide not to drive, but sometimes the car would come to you and force you inside and force you to drive against your will [rape].

A crashed car also often has a difficult time driving again, and is often unsafe for passengers. Especially if repairs are denied.