Skip to content
BOL Conferences
Learn More - Click Here!

Page 2 of 12 1 2 3 4 11 12
Thread Options
#864524 - 11/30/07 11:57 PM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill TheManofSteel
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
so scotus is therefore illogical?

see, you are playing a game of semantics, tmos. YOU are calling it an unborn child AND a person. scotus doesn't define it as that until it is viable. in other words, it is more 1 person that it is 2 separate ones.

Return to Top
Chat! - BOL Watercooler
#864527 - 12/01/07 12:02 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill Yossarian
Becka Marr Offline
Power Poster
Becka Marr
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,152
Originally Posted By: Yossarian
Quote:
the unborn child, both person and non-person.


No. that's just the political spin that you want to put on it. The Supreme Court has specifically held that a fetus is not and never has been a "person" under the US Constitution. State legislatures are free to pass whatever laws they want within constitutional bounds, though.

Go ahead and rant about this phony "inconsistency" all you want, it's the anti-abortion people that have created it.


Yoss, do you think that having state laws be inconsistent with The Supreme Court is problematic?
_________________________
To avoid criticism do nothing, say nothing, be nothing. ~Elbert Hubbard

Return to Top
#864528 - 12/01/07 12:03 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill Hated By Some
TheManofSteel Offline
10K Club
TheManofSteel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,068
Fortress of Solitude
Originally Posted By: Ron Mexico
so scotus is therefore illogical?

see, you are playing a game of semantics, tmos. YOU are calling it an unborn child AND a person. scotus doesn't define it as that until it is viable. in other words, it is more 1 person that it is 2 separate ones.


Ron, just because SCOTUS ruled on this in the 1970's does not mean I find it to be logical, nor that I find it to be founded on sound science. We, who hold the unborn child's life to be sacred and worthy of the same protections as any other stage of human development, consider the SCOTUS position flawed and based upon bad science. The unborn child is either a person or is not. The unborn child cannot simultaneously be both a person and not a person anymore than you or me. However, the law sees it as such, as evidenced by the position that abortion is not taking a human being's life, but a third party killing the unborn child is the taking of a human being's life. That is a contradiction, regardless of where you stand on the abortion debate.
_________________________
"Beneath an ever watchful eye...the angels of the temple fly"

Return to Top
#864530 - 12/01/07 12:05 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill Yossarian
rainman Offline
Power Poster
rainman
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,237
Originally Posted By: Yossarian
Quote:
the unborn child, both person and non-person.


No. that's just the political spin that you want to put on it. The Supreme Court has specifically held that a fetus is not and never has been a "person" under the US Constitution. State legislatures are free to pass whatever laws they want within constitutional bounds, though.

Go ahead and rant about this phony "inconsistency" all you want, it's the anti-abortion people that have created it.


Yoss, you're talking about legal terminology and theory. The inconsistency that TMOS is referring to is one of biology/ethics/morality/philosophy. To paraphrase something that someone (I think you) noted in the other thread, if the legislature (or the Supreme Court) determined as a legal matter that there is no such thing as "men" and "women", only "humans", we'd all have to recognize that as a legal matter. But it wouldn't stop any of us from calling men "men" and women "women" in our daily lives.

The same thing holds true here. While the Supreme Court has held that a fetus is not a "person" for constitutional purposes, people on this side of the debate do see a fetus as a "person" or a "human life" that has a different status than a lump of tissue or a tumor.

So the inconsistency is real. If you don't think a fetus has any special status, then of course you don't see an inconsistency. But it's not something that's just "made up" for debating purposes - it gets to the heart of the issue, which is and always has been - what's growing in there?

(And by the way, I do not by any means believe that calling the fetus a person automatically resolves all of the questions about abortion.)
_________________________
Nobody's perfect, not even a perfect stranger.

Return to Top
#864534 - 12/01/07 12:08 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill rainman
TheManofSteel Offline
10K Club
TheManofSteel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,068
Fortress of Solitude
Quote:
[/quote]Yoss, you're talking about legal terminology and theory. The inconsistency that TMOS is referring to is one of biology/ethics/morality/philosophy.[quote]


Finally, someone explains it in the most poignant of terms!!!!
_________________________
"Beneath an ever watchful eye...the angels of the temple fly"

Return to Top
#864535 - 12/01/07 12:11 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill °X°
Becka Marr Offline
Power Poster
Becka Marr
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,152
Originally Posted By: _X_
it was not murder, just an act of abortion as if it was performed by one of your abortion doctors?


Is miscarriage the same as abortion?
_________________________
To avoid criticism do nothing, say nothing, be nothing. ~Elbert Hubbard

Return to Top
#864539 - 12/01/07 12:38 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill °X°
Yossarian Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,436
Quote:
OK, so how can this guy be charged with attempted first-degree intentional homicide? How can he be charged with any major crime? What do you see as his crime, if any?


How can he be charged? Because the legislature defined what he did as a crime. This isn't complicated. They defined an act as a crime and he committed it. Period.

Return to Top
#864540 - 12/01/07 12:40 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill TheManofSteel
Yossarian Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,436
Quote:
since only a human being can be murdered


however "human being" is defined by the legislature of the particular jurisdiction.

Return to Top
#864542 - 12/01/07 12:47 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill Becka Marr
Yossarian Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,436
Quote:
Yoss, do you think that having state laws be inconsistent with The Supreme Court is problematic?


Well, the state is defining "human being" rather than "person" and is doing so for a different purpose, so it isn't really inconsistent. The states have differing definitions of "human being" and many other terms too.

Return to Top
#864543 - 12/01/07 01:00 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill TheManofSteel
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Quote:
nor that I find it to be founded on sound science

oh, so then viability exists at conception? what is your source for this sound science?

Quote:
The unborn child is either a person or is not.

it is not until it is viable.

the "contradiction" that you are claiming to see is that a woman has autonomy over her body until the point that the fetus is capable of having the ability to survive and become capable of being protected by society on its own: viability.

Return to Top
#864544 - 12/01/07 01:00 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill rainman
Yossarian Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,436
Quote:
Yoss, you're talking about legal terminology and theory. The inconsistency that TMOS is referring to is one of biology/ethics/morality/philosophy.


Yes, exactly, except for the reference to "biology". And this discussion is about the law, not about ethics, morality or philosophy. I'm not trying to tell anyone what to believe. As far as biology is concerned, no one would question whether this is a human fetus. It is genetically human. The question is, when does it become a human being? A fertilized chicken egg is genetically a chicken, too, but you wouldn't consider the egg to be a chicken, would you?

Quote:
people on this side of the debate do see a fetus as a "person" or a "human life" that has a different status than a lump of tissue or a tumor.

So the inconsistency is real.


It's "real" just because they believe it?

Quote:
But it's not something that's just "made up" for debating purposes - it gets to the heart of the issue, which is and always has been - what's growing in there?


I disagree. As far as I know there was no state that made causing a miscarriage to be murder until this became a political football. If this has always been about that, why was it never murder in the past? Because the anti-aborion people in the legislatures wanted to create this debate.

Return to Top
#864545 - 12/01/07 01:02 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill rainman
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Quote:
I do not by any means believe that calling the fetus a person automatically resolves all of the questions about abortion

tmos does.

Return to Top
#864546 - 12/01/07 01:04 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill Yossarian
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Originally Posted By: Yossarian
Quote:
OK, so how can this guy be charged with attempted first-degree intentional homicide? How can he be charged with any major crime? What do you see as his crime, if any?


How can he be charged? Because the legislature defined what he did as a crime. This isn't complicated. They defined an act as a crime and he committed it. Period.

and for clarity: they are not allowed to call a woman doing it before viability a crime.

Return to Top
#864547 - 12/01/07 01:15 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill Yossarian
rainman Offline
Power Poster
rainman
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
It's "real" just because they believe it?


Is it not real just because others don't believe it?

Was the earth not round a thousand years ago just because most people thought it was flat? (That's not meant to be an insulting example - it's just the first one that rolled out of my head - I know it's more complicated than that.)
_________________________
Nobody's perfect, not even a perfect stranger.

Return to Top
#864548 - 12/01/07 01:17 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill rainman
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
he was refering to the semantics of it, rainier. he clarified in his post that nobody is denying human genetic material or that it is a human fetus.

Return to Top
#864550 - 12/01/07 01:22 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill Yossarian
TheManofSteel Offline
10K Club
TheManofSteel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,068
Fortress of Solitude
Originally Posted By: Yossarian
Quote:
since only a human being can be murdered


however "human being" is defined by the legislature of the particular jurisdiction.


Funny, considering no philosopher in all of history has been able to fully define "being". They define things as are most politically expedient. In the 1800's, Native Americans were not defined as human beings either. But there was no contradiction there, because some legislature stated it as such. Neither were slaves.
_________________________
"Beneath an ever watchful eye...the angels of the temple fly"

Return to Top
#864552 - 12/01/07 01:23 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill Hated By Some
TheManofSteel Offline
10K Club
TheManofSteel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,068
Fortress of Solitude
Originally Posted By: Ron Mexico
Quote:
nor that I find it to be founded on sound science

oh, so then viability exists at conception? what is your source for this sound science?

Quote:
The unborn child is either a person or is not.

it is not until it is viable.

the "contradiction" that you are claiming to see is that a woman has autonomy over her body until the point that the fetus is capable of having the ability to survive and become capable of being protected by society on its own: viability.


Ron, a newborn baby cannot survive on his/her own either, yet you call them viable. Get real. It was defined as such due to willfull blindness.
_________________________
"Beneath an ever watchful eye...the angels of the temple fly"

Return to Top
#864553 - 12/01/07 01:24 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill Hated By Some
rainman Offline
Power Poster
rainman
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
he was refering to the semantics of it, rainier. he clarified in his post that nobody is denying human genetic material or that it is a human fetus.


I don't think so; it appears to me that he was reaffirming the position that the inconsistency is not real, and people believing that it's real doesn't make it real.
Last edited by rainman; 12/01/07 01:28 AM.
_________________________
Nobody's perfect, not even a perfect stranger.

Return to Top
#864554 - 12/01/07 01:28 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill TheManofSteel
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Quote:
no philosopher in all of history has been able to fully define "being".

isn't that the point of philosophy though? at any rate, it doesn't take a philosopher to define what something is. check out the banking regs. i bet you can find a "definition" section in every one.

Return to Top
#864555 - 12/01/07 01:30 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill Hated By Some
TheManofSteel Offline
10K Club
TheManofSteel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,068
Fortress of Solitude
Originally Posted By: Ron Mexico
Quote:
no philosopher in all of history has been able to fully define "being".

isn't that the point of philosophy though? at any rate, it doesn't take a philosopher to define what something is. check out the banking regs. i bet you can find a "definition" section in every one.


The point here, is that "being" is a transcendental term. It can never be fully defined by anyone. Experiencing it is enough. Philosophy is meant to communicate science. Since science cannot define a transcendental term like "being", nether can philosophy fully.
Last edited by The Man of Steel; 12/01/07 01:31 AM.
_________________________
"Beneath an ever watchful eye...the angels of the temple fly"

Return to Top
#864556 - 12/01/07 01:32 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill TheManofSteel
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Quote:
a newborn baby cannot survive on his/her own either

i'm pretty sure that they can. sure, they need fed, etc like you and i do, but they can live without being part of another organism. heck, some babies can be very tiny and hooked up to tons of machines, but they are not part of another organism (this illustrates that, as technology gets better, viability get closer and closer to conception)

Return to Top
#864557 - 12/01/07 01:35 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill TheManofSteel
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Quote:
It can never be fully defined by anyone. Experiencing it is enough

ok...

anyway, can a fetus experience life without dependence on another organism until viability?

Return to Top
#864558 - 12/01/07 01:41 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill Hated By Some
TheManofSteel Offline
10K Club
TheManofSteel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,068
Fortress of Solitude
Originally Posted By: Ron Mexico
Quote:
a newborn baby cannot survive on his/her own either

i'm pretty sure that they can. sure, they need fed, etc like you and i do, but they can live without being part of another organism. heck, some babies can be very tiny and hooked up to tons of machines, but they are not part of another organism (this illustrates that, as technology gets better, viability get closer and closer to conception)


And now I'll give you food for thought. Unborn Baby is simply part of the mother's body , right? So if the baby's heart is removed, does mom experience the removal of her heart? Does her heart cease functioning? If unborn baby's limb is removed, does mother's nervous system register the removal of her own limb?

I can go on and on, but in the interest of not becoming graphic, the point here is that the utterly obvious is ignored by the pro-abortion movement. It is a form of willfull blindness, as they see this clearly, but refuse to recognize it.
_________________________
"Beneath an ever watchful eye...the angels of the temple fly"

Return to Top
#864559 - 12/01/07 01:43 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill Hated By Some
TheManofSteel Offline
10K Club
TheManofSteel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,068
Fortress of Solitude
Originally Posted By: Ron Mexico
Quote:
It can never be fully defined by anyone. Experiencing it is enough

ok...

anyway, can a fetus experience life without dependence on another organism until viability?


Actually, fetuses have been removed from mother's wombs, and found to be expert swimmers. They cannot provide for themsleves, ingest by themselves etc, but neither does newborn baby w/o aid from someone else.
_________________________
"Beneath an ever watchful eye...the angels of the temple fly"

Return to Top
#864565 - 12/01/07 02:03 AM Re: Man Accused Of Slipping Woman Abortion Pill rainman
Yossarian Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,436
Originally Posted By: rainman
Quote:
he was refering to the semantics of it, rainier. he clarified in his post that nobody is denying human genetic material or that it is a human fetus.


I don't think so; it appears to me that he was reaffirming the position that the inconsistency is not real, and people believing that it's real doesn't make it real.


Wait a minute! YOU made the statement that said "people on this side of the debate do see a fetus as a "person" or a "human life" and then said "So the inconsistency is real." I don't believe that there is an inconsistency, but I'm certainly not the one claiming that my belief is objective reality.

Return to Top
Page 2 of 12 1 2 3 4 11 12