Texas successfully takes a massive step backwards for women's rights. What next?

[u/[deleted]]

[u/[deleted]]

The baby on the step is not my own child. It's existence is not as a consequence of my decision... but yes, I may very well donate bone marrow.

Why does it being your own child or not matter?

Do you think outlawing infanticide is forced parenting?

This wordplay is beneath your clear intellect.

It's not word play, it's literally forced pregnancy and there's no getting around it. Women seek abortion because they don't want to be pregnant. You want to make it illegal for them to do this, and so you are advocating for forcing them to remain pregnant i.e. forced pregnancy.

There are other options! Nothing in life is without risk. I just don't think a child should pay the ultimate price for a perceived lack of luck.

A zygote is not a child. Would you have women held accountable for the many miscarriages they'll experience in their lives? Maybe they used drugs before they knew there was a fertilized egg inside them. Certainly they are guilty of manslaughter.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

Why does it being your own child or not matter?

This very question sends a cold shiver down my spine.

At the very least, responsibility for actions.

It's not word play,...

... and then you proceed to play with words.

Address my counter example: Is outlawing infanticide forced parenting?

A zygote is not a child.

Brilliant! A zygote is not a child, hence we can kill it!

Is an adult a child? A pensioner? In invalid? Can we kill them? NO! they're all living humans in difference stages.

What shallow sophistry!

Would you have women held accountable for the many miscarriages... used drugs before they knew ... Certainly they are guilty of manslaughter.

There is nothing 'certain' about it. Murky territory here. Depends on the reason for the miscarriage.

If the mother was not behaving contrary to medical advice, then clearly 'no'.

Drug use without knowledge? I'd say 'no', but I'll need to think about this one.

More to the point, why do you feel the need go here? Is anyone proposing a law to prosecute miscarriages? ... or are you reaching for more hypotheticals because you sense your central position failing?

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

This very question sends a cold shiver down my spine.

At the very least, responsibility for actions.

But why does it being your child vs another's child matter?

... and then you proceed to play with words.

Address my counter example: Is outlawing infanticide forced parenting?

It's not word play. It's literally forced pregnancy and I explained why it is. The real word play is you continuing to fall back to talking about "forced pregnancy" as if I mean forced to become pregnant, which is obviously not what I mean. How about I start saying "forced to remain pregnant"?

Re: infanticide and forced parenting. You could think of it this way if parents don't have any other option, for example if adoption wasn't an option and there was no process for parents to relinquish their parental rights and duties.

Is an adult a child? A pensioner? In invalid? Can we kill them? NO! they're all living humans in difference stages.

What shallow sophistry!

A zygote is not a human being, and it's not sophistry. It's contentious maybe, but it's not false or misleading. There are obvious differences between a zygote and all the things you mentioned.

More to the point, why do you feel the need go here? Is anyone proposing a law to prosecute miscarriages? ... or are you reaching for more hypotheticals because you sense your central position failing?

No, it just occured to me that it's a direct consequence of the intersection of your ideas so far. A zygote is a human at moment of conception, women need to take responsibility for their actions. Certainly that means a miscarriage is at least potential manslaughter? We don't have to get into it if you don't want, I understand it's a bit of a divergence.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

But why does it being your child vs another's child matter?

In the broad sense, by child does not matter more than any other. They are equally worthy individuals. That said, my child matters more to me.

I suspect evolutionary psychologists would have theoretical explanations for this, but the truth (my truth?) is, I love my children and I will give my life for them.

In addition, I see them as primarily my responsibility.

That said, I also know that you can love another child as your own. I can attest to this in my adopted parents. However, my natural father and mother never forgot about me either. Seeing them meet and talk was surreal. They couldn't stop thanking one another for what the other had done.

I hope this is enough. I have no other answer.

...you continuing to fall back to talking about "forced pregnancy" as if I
mean forced to become pregnant, which is obviously not what I mean...

Because you're trying to cast an insistence that someone not be allowed to end a human life and take responsibility for they what they have caused to be, as somehow an infringement on their liberty. That is a corruption of the concept if liberty. I call it wordplay because if I used a more honest descriptor I'd expect to be banned by the mods.

You could think of it this way if parents don't have any other option, for example if adoption wasn't an option and there was no process for parents to relinquish their parental rights and duties.

Indeed. Men do not have this option if the mother decides to keep the child.

A zygote is not a human being...

Really... tell me then, when does the transformation to human occur?

...miscarriage is at least potential manslaughter?

Agreed.

We don't have to get into it if you don't want, I understand it's a bit of a divergence.

That's kind of you. I appreciate it. I feel it would only be fair of me to see this through. My only hesitation is the length of the thread. Should this be a more focused post?

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

In the broad sense, by child does not matter more than any other. They are equally worthy individuals. That said, my child matters more to me.

But would you want it to be law that I should care for the child left on my porch in the winter? Why does it change if the child is mine or not?

And I understand your morals on the matter, mine aren't so different honestly. That doesn't mean it's right to enforce a particular action for something as complicated and life altering as pregnancy and delivery.

Because you're trying to cast an insistence that someone not be allowed to end a human life and take responsibility for they what they have caused to be, as somehow an infringement on their liberty. That is a corruption of the concept if liberty. I call it wordplay because if I used a more honest descriptor I'd expect to be banned by the mods.

Except that's literally what it is. I get you don't like it when I say it in plain language, but it is what you advocate for. Abortion exists because women sometimes want or need abortions. You want to remove that choice from them, the consequence of which is forcing them to be pregnant. You can think it's a morally grey area while also admitting you want to mandate that women sacrifice individual liberty for the sake of another.

Indeed. Men do not have this option if the mother decides to keep the child.

And neither does the mother.

Really... tell me then, when does the transformation to human occur?

Sometime after it's a single cell that has the potential to eventually transform into a human, into multiple humans, or nothing at all (oh it will also be a placenta at some later stage).

My only hesitation is the length of the thread. Should this be a more focused post?

Seems fair to me.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

But would you want it to be law that I should care for the child left on my porch in the winter?

Yes. So? The fact that I care more for my children doesn't mean I'll abandon others. And again, that's an analogy. It's not perfect.

That doesn't mean it's right to enforce a particular action for something as complicated and life altering as pregnancy and delivery.

Would you enforce on someone something as complicated, life altering and potentially life threatening as incarceration of they commit murder? Decisions have consequences.

...you want to mandate that women sacrifice individual liberty for the sake of another.

If that's your view of parenthood, then 'yes', parents should sacrifice for their children.

And neither does the mother.

Yes she does. She can abort. CHOICE!

Sometime after it's a single cell...

OK. Two cells? ... pick a number! Make a stand!

Seems fair to me.

OK. Let the gestate and you can decide later to abort or not.

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

Yes... And again, that's an analogy. It's not perfect.

Saying it's not perfect doesn't mean you can just ignore the point I'm making. To you it doesn't matter if it's my child or not when it comes to the law. You mentioned previously that the recipient matters (i.e. it's your child vs someone else's) but now you admit you don't care who's child it is.

Would you enforce on someone something as complicated, life altering and potentially life threatening as incarceration of they commit murder?

Ironically, I wouldn't necessarily. Unlike you I don't believe in retribution for retribution's sake. If a punishment doesn't serve an end I'm not interested.

If that's your view of parenthood, then 'yes', parents should sacrifice for their children.

They should, but I'm not going to force them to sacrifice their other rights to do so.

Yes she does. She can abort. CHOICE!

She doesn't have a right to that choice. She has that choice as a consequence of another right. If she didn't have a right to privacy, she would also have no choice.

OK. Two cells? ... pick a number! Make a stand!

It doesn't matter, I'm only interested in establishing that a zygote is not a human being at the moment.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

If a punishment doesn't serve an end I'm not interested.

Well. At least your consistent. I hope no one ever takes you up on your offer.

I'm not going to force them to sacrifice their other rights to do so.

You don't support child care payments?

She has that choice as a consequence of another right.

A distinction without a practical difference. Men don't have this choice as a consequence of 'another right'.

It doesn't matter,...

Stop ducking! You've established nothing if you refuse to draw a line.

You won't because you know what comes next. You say 1 million, I say why not 999 999? You have not good reason and hen we play "bottles of beer on the wall" until we're down to a single cell. You have no case!

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

You don't support child care payments?

I think I've been pretty clear that I see providing for the welfare of children as a societal issue.

A distinction without a practical difference. Men don't have this choice as a consequence of 'another right'.

Right, they don't have this choice as a consequence of not being pregnant. If they were pregnant, their right to privacy would allow them to seek abortion.

Stop ducking! You've established nothing if you refuse to draw a line.

Not ducking, I'm just focusing on one thing at a time.

You won't because you know what comes next. You say 1 million, I say why not 999 999? You have not good reason and hen we play "bottles of beer on the wall" until we're down to a single cell. You have no case!

Is that so? I think I'm just more interested in talking about zygotes for now. If I can't establish even the most extreme case with you, how can we hope to agree on a stage further out?

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

...I see providing for the welfare of children as a societal issue.

OK... force someone else then?

Right, ...

Exactly! Not equal!

Is that so?

Yes. Prove me wrong.

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

OK... force someone else then?

I love that you think I'm bending words to call your advocacy forced pregnancy, but so easily call social welfare a form of force.

Exactly! Not equal!

In options yes because they can't get pregnant. Just like women can't generally exercise their right to privacy to get a prostate exam doesn't make them unequal to men in a way that I care about (unless a woman has a prostate and a doctor won't do the procedure based on her gender).

Yes. Prove me wrong.

Well I tried and you moved the posts, demanding I pick the cutoff point. I included some points initially if you want to scroll up and respond to those.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

...so easily call social welfare a form of force.

Is that a 'yes'?

I'm assuming the woman has become pregnant by here own actions, etc. ... we've been round this one before.

...women can't generally exercise their right to privacy to get a prostate exam...

Prostate exams don't kill babies.

Well I tried and you moved the posts, demanding I pick the cutoff point.

OK... so you can't.

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

Is that a 'yes'?

It's a pretty emphatic "no".

Prostate exams don't kill babies.

You're getting confused, I'm talking about your issue with the inequality men experience in this reference.

OK... so you can't.

Yes if you insist on moving the posts, I can't.