RE: The reason religion is so powerful
June 18, 2021 at 8:43 pm
(This post was last modified: June 18, 2021 at 10:06 pm by brewer.)
(June 18, 2021 at 5:51 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:(June 15, 2021 at 10:42 pm)brewer Wrote: I'm not an extremist, just a realist. I've never encountered a soul in nature. I've not stated that life is cheap or inconvenient. Reproduction attempts have successes and failures, some of the failures (and successes) even threatening the mother or other conceptions. Those are just the facts.
I don't believe I've taken a pro or con position on abortion in this thread. My position is against all unborn have humans rights from conception and gave biologic/medical reasons and examples in support of that position.
But just to be clear, I'm pro choice. However that debate is for another time/thread. The water in this thread has been to muddied. The last sentence of your first paragraph is a perfect example.
Supporters of partial birth abortion are extremists. The first people to muddy the waters were those using the phrase forced birth. I am willing to allow that an embryo has developmentally appropriate rights in the same sense that children have fewer rights than adults.
You're allowed consider them extremists but I think, for you, it extends beyond partial birth abortion.
Do you know that the actual medical procedure is called dilation[D] and extraction[X] (not to be confused with evacuation[E]), that "partial birth abortions" on living a fetus have been banned and that providers do their utmost to insure that the fetus is deceased before a D&X is performed? So not that many or any actual partial birth abortions are performed and if performed it's thru necessity. I can't imagine that a physician going to knowingly going put themself in legal jeopardy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intact_dil...extraction
https://www.npr.org/2006/02/21/5168163/p...-from-spin
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-...story.html
Continuing, let me ask you, isn't "forced birth" a valid way to reference the legal ramifications women faced prior to Roe v Wade? Prior, a woman would have to break the law or cause a miscarriage. Estimates of illegal abortions prior to R v W run as high as 25%.
The waters were muddied when you used all unborn have humans rights from conception, and I challenged. I/we have addressed the problems with both unborn and human rights.
I don't have an anger problem, I have an idiot problem.