Moral people can now protect life

See where I was commenting on the substance and you made it a personal attack? Can you even tell the difference?

But sure. Explain to me how all the women who support and are celebrating the overturning of Roe and Casey are misogynistic. Are they oppressing themselves? See? Even your personal attacks are nonsense. And redneck is just a complete non sequitur. Chalk that one up to floundering for insults. Or maybe you're laboring under the erroneous presumption that everyone who lives in a red state is a redneck. If so, you should really think about getting out more. Otherwise, I invite you to break that news to all the black residents of red states...personally.

But yeah, I guess reducing the risk of premature death in women (aside from the half of all babies aborted) is somehow a very bad thing:

Each Abortion Increases Woman’s Risk of Premature Death by 50%, New Study Reports
...Within the first 180 days, the risk of death from any cause is over twice as high following abortion compared to that following delivery. The risk of early death remains elevated for at least ten years (Figure 1).

Both abortion and miscarriage are linked to elevated mortality rates, but the effect is more strongly associated with induced abortions.

The largest portion of premature deaths following pregnancy loss are due to suicides, accidents, homicides, and some natural causes, such as circulatory disease, which are known to be associated with stress.

The reviewers concluded that these findings are best explained by the psychological effects of pregnancy loss, which contribute to elevated levels of stress, substance abuse, risk taking, and self-destructive behaviors.
Graph of proportional risk of premature deaths relative to the number of abortions to which a woman is exposed.

The studies reviewed also reveal a dose effect, with each exposure to abortion adding approximately a 50 percent increased risk of premature death compared to women who have never had abortions (Figure 2).

In contrast, delivering two or more pregnancies improves longevity. Delivery is also linked with a reduction in mortality risks associated with abortion or miscarriage alone.
- https://afterabortion.org/each-abortion-...y-reports/

(Jun 25, 2022 10:27 AM)Syne Wrote: See where I was commenting on the substance and you made it a personal attack? Can you even tell the difference?

But sure. Explain to me how all the women who support and are celebrating the overturning of Roe and Casey are misogynistic. Are they oppressing themselves? See? Even your personal attacks are nonsense. And redneck is just a complete non sequitur. Chalk that one up to floundering for insults. Or maybe you're laboring under the erroneous presumption that everyone who lives in a red state is a redneck. If so, you should really think about getting out more. Otherwise, I invite you to break that news to all the black residents of red states...personally.

But yeah, I guess reducing the risk of premature death in women (aside from the half of all babies aborted) is somehow a very bad thing:...

No fool - you initiated with personal insult. Nothing objective, no reasoned argument in your put-down. And now you run-off on various tangents that entirely miss the intent of my last response. Enough!

It's not a matter if you are moral or not. I personally don't like abortion, and if I were a woman in that situation I wouldn't do it. But I'm not and have no right to dictate that decision for women who are pregnant. My morality does not override the morality of others, and I'm certainly not for mandating birth by law. How would you go about enforcing something like that? It can't be done, and a law that is unenforcable is a bad law. Women have the inherent right to make that decision for themselves.

(Jun 25, 2022 04:16 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: Doesn't effect my state of Oregon at all. They're actually expanding their abortion services to accomodate all the women traveling from other states. And many corporations are offering to pay all traveling expenses for them:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/24/tech/comp...index.html

Since there are waves of local DAs asserting that they won't prosecute abortion providers, such is unofficially transferring the issue to roughly a (backyard) county level rather than the pervasive state level. Accordingly, if there's a sub-region not too far away in _X_ state with lax magistrates, then abortion seekers may not have to travel great distances. 

That is, until taking into account that abortion clinics were sparse and stifled in some states before this came along. In 2019, for instance, there were six states with only one abortion clinic left, and Missouri's was effectively rendered useless. Many girls/women were journeying even before this decision reversal.

So a defiant prosecutor employed in what was already a wide "abortion services desert" wouldn't actually be counteracting much -- that area was deficient and hog-tied without the "assistance" of SCOTUS nullification.

(Jun 25, 2022 11:01 AM)Kornee Wrote:

(Jun 25, 2022 10:27 AM)Syne Wrote: See where I was commenting on the substance and you made it a personal attack? Can you even tell the difference?

But sure. Explain to me how all the women who support and are celebrating the overturning of Roe and Casey are misogynistic. Are they oppressing themselves? See? Even your personal attacks are nonsense. And redneck is just a complete non sequitur. Chalk that one up to floundering for insults. Or maybe you're laboring under the erroneous presumption that everyone who lives in a red state is a redneck. If so, you should really think about getting out more. Otherwise, I invite you to break that news to all the black residents of red states...personally.

But yeah, I guess reducing the risk of premature death in women (aside from the half of all babies aborted) is somehow a very bad thing:...

No fool - you initiated with personal insult. Nothing objective, no reasoned argument in your put-down. And now you run-off on various tangents that entirely miss the intent of my last response. Enough!

So you obviously can't tell the difference. Got it.
Whining about it not being "objective" or a "reasoned argument" has nothing to do with whether it was a comment about the substance. It was obviously opinion, but it was indeed about the content of the post...being objectively conspiratorial and subjectively nonsense.

This is in stark contrast to literally attacking the person, with zero comment on substance or content of the post whatsoever. Just because you're triggered by an opinion about the content of a post doesn't make it equivalent to a direct insult.

But I'm sure your feelings won't allow you to make that very simple distinction. Explains a lot.

---

(Jun 25, 2022 09:08 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: It's not a matter if you are moral or not. I personally don't like abortion, and if I were a woman in that situation I wouldn't do it. But I'm not and have no right to dictate that decision for women who are pregnant. My morality does not override the morality of others, and I'm certainly not for mandating birth by law. How would you go about enforcing something like that? It can't be done, and a law that is unenforcable is a bad law. Women have the inherent right to make that decision for themselves.

You don't have any moral opinion over whether one human kills another?
I wouldn't admit to that if I were you.

Quote:You don't have any moral opinion over whether one human kills another?

A fetus isn't a human being. Just like an acorn isn't an oak tree.

(Jun 25, 2022 10:41 PM)Magical Realist Wrote:

Quote:You don't have any moral opinion over whether one human kills another?

A fetus isn't a human being. Just like an acorn isn't an oak tree.

A fetus is, scientifically and biologically, a human life. Scientifically, an acorn is analogous to a sperm, hence why one contains and one is referred to as "seed."

Using hedge words like "human being" to obfuscate some vague notion of personhood is self-deception.
But granting that premise, when does the human life of a fetus magically become a being?

The fetus becomes a "being" when it becomes a fetus. It is just a temporary phase of development, not the end result. Like how the oak tree is the end result of the development of the acorn. The human being is the end result of the development of the fetus and occurs at birth.

(Jun 25, 2022 10:56 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: The fetus becomes a "being" when it becomes a fetus. It is just a temporary phase of development, not the end result. Like how the oak tree is the end result of the development of the acorn. The human being is the end result of the development of the fetus and occurs at birth.

So what's the difference between a premature birth and a baby brought to term?
Does the birth canal magically imbue it with "beingness?" Or in the case of C-section, is "beingness" just inhaled with the first breath of air? Is "beingness" in the air?

(Jun 25, 2022 11:41 PM)Syne Wrote:

(Jun 25, 2022 10:56 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: The fetus becomes a "being" when it becomes a fetus. It is just a temporary phase of development, not the end result. Like how the oak tree is the end result of the development of the acorn. The human being is the end result of the development of the fetus and occurs at birth.

So what's the difference between a premature birth and a baby brought to term?
Does the birth canal magically imbue it with "beingness?" Or in the case of C-section, is "beingness" just inhaled with the first breath of air? Is "beingness" in the air?

I have no idea what you are talking about. Define "beingness".