The Chronicles of Narcissist

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dannyalcatraz said:
While I am pro life, I can't agree with this particular rhetoric. Even in standard homicide, we distinguish between whether the killing was accidental or intentional; whether there was a purpose other than homicide (self defense, reckless in attention, etc.). Murder is a specific kind of homicide, requiring specific kinds of intent- every other kind of homicide is defined as "not murder."

IOW, circumstances DO matter, always.
Click to expand...

Indeed they do. Moreover, I just can't see any positive morality to the idea of requiring a rape victim, of any age, to carry a rape-caused pregnancy to term. That's just compounding the crime, forcing her to serve a 40 week sentence because of something someone else did to her. If she chooses to bring the baby to term, she's welcome to do so. But deny her an abortion? Unconscionable.

Ultimately, I support abortion rights because I think circumstances matter well beyond whether or not a crime was committed when the woman was impregnated. And the only person sufficiently qualified to judge any set of particular circumstances is the pregnant woman herself - not some politician, not some pope or priest, not even some voters promoting their own conscience.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



JRRNeiklot said:
Yes, there is a difference between homicide and murder, but unless the mother's life is in danger, the abortion is murder (assuming you agree the fetus is a human being). Abortion is not self defense, nor is it accidental. Therefore, the circumstances do not matter. Either abortion is murder or it isn't a homicide.
Click to expand...

As you say, "unless the mother's life is in danger": that IS a circumstance, a form of self-defense. In fact, that was my Mom's circumstance.
 




Homicidal_Squirrel said:
Why Not? What's the difference between the state executing a person and a woman having an abortion?
Click to expand...

Well, first of all the state has the perceived authority to execute criminals. If you don't believe the state has any authority over people - and thus no right to exist - then you might have a point. Second, are you seriously comparing an innocent child to a murderer?
 
Last edited:

JRRNeiklot said:
Well, first of all the state has the perceived authority to execute criminals. If you don't believe the state has any authority over people - and thus no right to exist - then you might have a point.
Click to expand...
Okay, so the state has a perceived authority to execute criminals. The State lends that authority to those that perform the actual execution, right? The guy that pulls the lever for the electric chair, or hits the buttons for the lethal injection; that guy was given the authority to do so by the state, correct?

Second, are you seriously comparing an innocent child to a murderer?
Click to expand...
Of course not. I'm comparing aborting a fetus to executing a person.
 

goldomark said:
On the contrary. Marco Rubio knows that humans can't become cats or donkeys. Very smart. http://gawker.com/marco-rubio-explains-science-a-human-cannot-become-a-c-1723225182
Click to expand...
[emoji1]
80dd2cf1ab5758d869a3b2a8996dc258.jpg
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top