What is your thoughts on Abortion?

[Faithofchristian]

It's the woman's body, which means it's her choice.
Anything else would be a gross violation of her rights.

So you believe that a woman has every right to kill, To take a innocent life.

For some Unknown reason people have that a baby's life doesn't mean a thing.
There is no right in killing an innocent life.

That now in NYC babies can be aborted within hours of being born and even after the baby is born.

So as soon as the baby is born, that baby is no longer apart of the woman's body, but on the outside of the woman's body.

So how is it the right of the woman to abort a baby that is no longer inside of her body.
As you say, a woman has the right to do with her body as she wants.

But the baby is longer inside of her body, So how is it her right to kill a baby that is no longer inside of her body.
But on the outside of her body. So how is it her right to kill a baby that is no longer inside of her body
People of to day are no different than those of the stone age.
And people want to say they are civilized, what a joke.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So you believe that a woman has every right to kill, To take a innocent life.

For some Unknown reason people have that a baby's life doesn't mean a thing.
There is no right in killing an innocent life.

That now in NYC babies can be aborted within hours of being born and even after the baby is born.

So as soon as the baby is born, that baby is no longer apart of the woman's body, but on the outside of the woman's body.

So how is it the right of the woman to abort a baby that is no longer inside of her body.
As you say, a woman has the right to do with her body as she wants.

But the baby is longer inside of her body, So how is it her right to kill a baby that is no longer inside of her body.
But on the outside of her body. So how is it her right to kill a baby that is no longer inside of her body
People of to day are no different than those of the stone age.
And people want to say they are civilized, what a joke.

What on Earth are you talking about?

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you believe that a woman has every right to kill, To take a innocent life.

For some Unknown reason people have that a baby's life doesn't mean a thing.
There is no right in killing an innocent life.

That now in NYC babies can be aborted within hours of being born and even after the baby is born.

So as soon as the baby is born, that baby is no longer apart of the woman's body, but on the outside of the woman's body.

So how is it the right of the woman to abort a baby that is no longer inside of her body.
As you say, a woman has the right to do with her body as she wants.

But the baby is longer inside of her body, So how is it her right to kill a baby that is no longer inside of her body.
But on the outside of her body. So how is it her right to kill a baby that is no longer inside of her body
People of to day are no different than those of the stone age.
And people want to say they are civilized, what a joke.

Don't drink the anti-choice Kool-Aid.

 

[Faithofchristian]

What on Earth are you talking about?

What on Earth am I talking about. What I'm talking about is that, in New York City, the democrats just pass a law recently that a baby's life can be taken within hours before the baby is born or just minutes after its born.

that's what I'm talking about. It's these Democrats who are taking things way out of control.to kill a baby just hours before it's born and after it's born.
Democrats are becoming worse than those of the stone age people

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What on Earth am I talking about. What I'm talking about is that, in New York City, the democrats just pass a law recently that a baby's life can be taken within hours before the baby is born or just minutes after its born.

Sounds like you're a bit confused. Which body in New York City do you think did this?

There are only two major legislative bodies in New York City:
- The UN
- New York City Council

What you describe wouldn't be something that either one has the power to do.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What on Earth am I talking about. What I'm talking about is that, in New York City, the democrats just pass a law recently that a baby's life can be taken within hours before the baby is born or just minutes after its born.

that's what I'm talking about. It's these Democrats who are taking things way out of control.to kill a baby just hours before it's born and after it's born.
Democrats are becoming worse than those of the stone age people

Name the law. A valid source please. an antiabortion or proabortion one would not count. See if your original source properly interpreted the law.

 

[Ponder This]

So you're saying that potential is a criterion of moral consideration, that a future possibility must be afforded consideration as if it were a realized fact.

I said that potential should be given moral consideration, not that its moral consideration was the same as a full grown adult.

But that's not the only difference. A foetus lacks self-interest, even self-awareness. It has neither an awareness of nor a stake in the future. It's not even aware of futurity. It doesn't care if it ceases to be.

This seems like a statement that necessitates justification. Certainly the fetus does respond to stimuli while in the womb. No one is going to deliberately torture infants to verify all their reactions, but they do react as we would expect babies to react. Considering that this is the case, you need to justify your statement so that we don't immediately throw it out as invented nonsense.

Foetuses react to sensory stimuli, but it's questionable whether this constitutes self awareness. Even the self awareness of a born infant is debatable.

I see. So when exactly does a person acquire person-hood? Are you saying it's fine to do the Sparta method of killing babies that exhibit 'defects' (or indeed any unwanted characteristic)? After all, babies aren't people?

A larger consideration would be whether there is divine law to begin with, or even a divinity. Cultural thoughts on these questions are all over the board.

Sure, that's a consideration. Do you think it is a necessary one?

The natural rights of the person.
Natural rights is an enlightenment concept from the 1700s. I use it for convenience.

You mean 'life, liberty, and property'? Locke believed that most basic human law of nature was the preservation of mankind. How do reconcile your position on natural rights with abortion?

Good point, but does a potential have rights?

Does it? If so, what rights are being considered? Life? As in human life? As in what Locke said?

 

[Ponder This]

More so, I understand the justifications but that doesn't make it moral.

Killing in a war is immoral because it involves taking lives. I understand the justifications because it saves other people's lives. Two wrongs don't make a right. (Right/wrong-morals)

But sometimes we need to break our morals for the safety of ourselves and others. That's why some people are conflicted with some decisions. They believe X but if they break X then Y would benefit.

Justifications doesnt make it right. I just hope the criteria that we use for just. doesnt go overboard like cruel and unusual punishment.

I get that you are saying two wrongs don't make a right. What I'm asking is: How do we know there was any wrong made to begin with?

 

[Faithofchristian]

Sounds like you're a bit confused. Which body in New York City do you think did this?

There are only two major legislative bodies in New York City:
- The UN
- New York City Council

What you describe wouldn't be something that either one has the power to do.

Didn't you forget someone, that before a bill can become a law the Governor of NY has to sign that bill before it can become a law.
Such as Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

So it takes more than just those two, that you mention of.
As it takes
New York City:
- The UN
- New York City Council
- Governor Andrew Cuomo.

To sign a bill before can become a law.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Didn't you forget someone, that before a bill can become a law the Governor of NY has to sign that bill before it can become a law.
Such as Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

So it takes more than just those two, that you mention of.
As it takes
New York City:
- The UN
- New York City Council
- Governor Andrew Cuomo.

To sign a bill before can become a law.

Ah... you think that New York City is the state capital of New York. That explains the confusion.

(BTW - it's not. The capital of New York is Albany)

So you're talking about a New York state law, or bill, or something like that. What law/bill/whatnot, specifically?

 

[Faithofchristian]

Ah... you think that New York City is the state capital of New York. That explains the confusion.

(BTW - it's not. The capital of New York is Albany)

So you're talking about a New York state law, or bill, or something like that. What law/bill/whatnot, specifically?

New York City,” which is the largest city in the United States. New York City is located inside New York State.

So that means Andrew M. Cuomo. Andrew M. Cuomo, re-elected the 56th Governor of New York State on November 6, 2018, has a lifelong commitment to public service and the proven leadership skills to make government work for the people of the state.
So therefore he's also governor over New York City also.

 

[Subduction Zone]

New York City,” which is the largest city in the United States. New York City is located inside New York State.

So that means Andrew M. Cuomo. Andrew M. Cuomo, re-elected the 56th Governor of New York State on November 6, 2018, has a lifelong commitment to public service and the proven leadership skills to make government work for the people of the state.
So therefore he's also governor over New York City also.

Please, you made an error. Admit it and move on.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

New York City,” which is the largest city in the United States. New York City is located inside New York State.

So that means Andrew M. Cuomo. Andrew M. Cuomo, re-elected the 56th Governor of New York State on November 6, 2018, has a lifelong commitment to public service and the proven leadership skills to make government work for the people of the state.
So therefore he's also governor over New York City also.

The New York State Legislature and the New York Governor's residence are both in Albany.

Feel like answering my question now?

 

[Faithofchristian]

The New York State Legislature and the New York Governor's residence are both in Albany.

Feel like answering my question now?

What does that have to do with the Governor as being the governor over the state of New York and New York City.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Explain your reasoning

Well, I guess it comes down to granting people the right to change their mind. In my view it should be done early though.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Didn't you forget someone, that before a bill can become a law the Governor of NY has to sign that bill before it can become a law.
Such as Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

So it takes more than just those two, that you mention of.
As it takes
New York City:
- The UN
- New York City Council
- Governor Andrew Cuomo.

To sign a bill before can become a law.

Read the above post of yours again. Hopefully you can see your error now.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What does that have to do with the Governor as being the governor over the state of New York and New York City.

I'll take that as a "no."

 

[Faithofchristian]

I'll take that as a "no."

First of all, how do you come by putting words in another mouth, when I didn't say one way or another.

All I said was, Seeing New York City is found within the State of New York,
Then that means, That Governor Andrew Cuomo is Governor over New York City also.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

First of all, how do you come by putting words in another mouth, when I didn't say one way or another.

I asked you a question. You didn't answer it. I'm quite happy to take this as a sign that you aren't going to answer it.

All I said was, Seeing New York City is found within the State of New York,
Then that means, That Governor Andrew Cuomo is Governor over New York City also.

You didn't say that a law was passed that affects New York City; you said that a law was passed in New York City.

In any case, we've resolved that confusion. It took a few posts, but we've established that you're talking about a New York State law. Or bill. Or something that the governor did.

Now... the question of which law/bill/whatever you're talking about hasn't been answered so far. You seem to not want to share that piece of the puzzle.

Understand that I'm trying to be patient with you. I'm making an effort to figure out what you're talking about in the hope - maybe misplaced - that I might learn something or that you have something meaningful to say about it. However, the more you avoid answering me, the more you convince me that my effort is being wasted.

So... for the last time: which law are you talking about?

 

[Faithofchristian]

I asked you a question. You didn't answer it. I'm quite happy to take this as a sign that you aren't going to answer it.


You didn't say that a law was passed that affects New York City; you said that a law was passed in New York City.

In any case, we've resolved that confusion. It took a few posts, but we've established that you're talking about a New York State law. Or bill. Or something that the governor did.

Now... the question of which law/bill/whatever you're talking about hasn't been answered so far. You seem to not want to share that piece of the puzzle.

Understand that I'm trying to be patient with you. I'm making an effort to figure out what you're talking about in the hope - maybe misplaced - that I might learn something or that you have something meaningful to say about it. However, the more you avoid answering me, the more you convince me that my effort is being wasted.

So... for the last time: which law are you talking about?

The law of which the Governor of the State of New York state sign into law.
Was the law which abortions can be done within hours before the baby is born or even within minutes after the babies are born.

Governor Andrew M. Cuomo of the State of New York, today fulfilled his promise to sign into law the Reproductive Health Act, a key component of the 2019 Justice Agenda, within the first 30 days of the new legislative session. The Reproductive Health Act protects women's reproductive rights by ensuring New Yorkers can make personal healthcare decisions and medical professionals can provide crucial services without fear of criminal penalty.

Now the question is,

Who',s to say the woman's health is in Jeopardy.

Who besides professionals makes those determination?

You see there lays the loop hole,

All a women has to say is the baby is jeopardizing her health and the professionals conspire with her. That the baby is jeopardizing her health.

Just to get money off the abortion of the baby.

You really believe that a doctor will pass up the chance to make thousand of dollars off abortions of babies.

If not, then why else are doctor's performing abortions. When doctor's are to preserve life and not take life?

Let's alone for the sake of money