Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Late term abortions (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
You're a smart guy and most of the time a pretty good dude but you really do ruin a lot of these threads when you start pulling the lawyer schtick and insisting on the last word in every single conversation. I'm out. Enjoy your slavery and abortion comparisons. Have a good one.
You conveniently leave out birthing the baby which carries a non-zero risk of medical complications including death.
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Sometimes you just have to give a guy credit for knowing that he's talking himself into a corner and bowing out.I asked you a question. By definition, I was giving you at least the next word.
matttyl
Footballguy
So you're on the pregnancy = slavery train, too? I'm also not quite sure where Henry actually stated "short term slavery or indentured servitude". Going back to the last page I still see the first post in that discussion states ""I don't have any interest in slavery, I just want to tell black people what they have to do for me and not pay them" followed by "Being anti-choice is akin to pro--slavery in my opinion". So I'm not sure where he's now bringing up "short term slavery or indentured servitude" from - and I went all the way back to where he brought up the number of snake bites for some reason, which is about where I started in this thread.
So if being anti choice is pro slavery, I guess that means that the Emancipation proclamation is like an abortion.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
He's not in a crazy position. He's not in a corner any more than I am. And I was searching for common ground - the viability part of the discussion.
Now, I happen to be comfortable in my corner, and I've worked on this position from a logical and philosophical position since college, and I don't see much likelihood that I'm being moved off of it, but I'm as entrenched in an unpopular position with his side as he is with my side.
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I think your analogy is off. The Emancipation Proclamation would be like Roe v. Wade in this analogy.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
matttyl
Footballguy
Not really. EP (effectively) ended slavery. Roe v Wade allowed abortions. The abortion itself it what ends the pregnancy. Roe v Wade didn't end all pregnancies.
matttyl
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
matttyl
Footballguy
honestly missed that. I guess I jumped right down to the Confederate part.
For the record, I actually consider myself to be pro-choice. But that choice should (by and large) always be life. I'm against abortions (by and large - again, no absolutes). I'm pro-choice only to the extent that I don't think it should be the gov. forcing anything in a "free society".
For the record, I actually consider myself to be pro-choice. But that choice should (by and large) always be life. I'm against abortions (by and large - again, no absolutes). I'm pro-choice only to the extent that I don't think it should be the gov. forcing anything in a "free society".
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Which makes you not anti-choice. And, again, I apologize for having been loose with language earlier in the thread and ascribing that position to all "pro-lifers." It's a reaction to the "Preaux Life" movement here recently and it was improper.
But that thing that makes you shy away from being anti-choice and saying the government shouldn't force that decision is exactly what I think would be short-term slavery or indentured servitude.
There are many things in this country that we are forced to do against our will. They aren't equivalent to slavery in any way.
You are forced to pay taxes for example. That isn't akin to slavery. That is a law. the same would apply to giving berth.
timschochet
Footballguy
It may be impossible to have a discussion about late term abortion without it ultimately becoming a discussion about all aspects of abortion. That wasn’t my intent, but I can’t blame anybody on any side because feelings are so passionate about this subject.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I know that. And neither would the giving birth by force be entirely true. You can avoid most any law but there will be consequences. that applies to both situations. For the record, I am in no way interested in a semantic discussion with you. The earlier poster was correct. You have to get in this last word. It gets old fast.
timschochet
Footballguy
I really dislike this argument. Whenever I hear it, I see “The Handmaid’s Tale” in my mind. That’s a wonderful tv show, but it’s a dark fantasy and if you believe thats what pro-lifers truly want, you’re kind of being delusional IMO.
All pro-lifers want you to do is think of the fetus in the womb the same way as you would think of a baby outside of the womb. That’s all. If you had a baby and you refused to feed it and it starved to death, you would be guilty of a murder. If you refused to clothe the baby, or clean the baby, you would be guilty of child abuse. Do these laws make you a slave, either to the state or to the baby? That’s an absurd comparison by any measure.
I am very much pro-choice, but this sort of misrepresentation of pro-life people is unfair and harmful, IMO.
NREC34
Footballguy
Right. If I have a child I can’t afford to feed and I rely on the government to feed it they will criticize me for it and ##### about supporting everyone else. That’s all I’m saying.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
You'd be guilty of child neglect. And your child would probably be taken away. Notably, you could avoid this consequence by intentionally giving up your child and refusing to clothe the baby or clean the baby forever. By agreeing to do exactly what you want to do.
But you wouldn't be forced to undergo massive physiological changes, gestate a human being for nine months, and then have an episiotomy.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
If you are forced to stay, in the above scenario, under penalty of prison - is that akin to slavery?
timschochet
Footballguy
Which is one reason I am pro-choice, because I do see a distinction.
But my point is that pro-life people don’t. So this slavery analogy is IMO unfair to them
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Can we stipulate that everything we are forced to do is akin to slavery? Then can we please move on? You really are exhausting.
timschochet
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Anti-choice people will generally not admit this. If they did it would be a much shorter conversation.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
It's integral to the discussion of my position. The one you engaged with is less so.
The position that this is akin to slavery or servitude is based solely on the exercise of rights over another person's body that no one else has a right to. Period. No one has a right to be attached to your circulatory system, to be gestated by your body, to cause massive physiological changes to you. No one. Ever. That is different than your scenario.
dgreen
Footballguy
I'm not suggesting they should admit it. I'm suggesting they should just accept your wording, even if they disagree with it, and move on.
matttyl
Footballguy
Just curious, are you pro choice under just about any circumstance? Not talking legally or morally - you personally. 8.5 months mother changes her mind, no longer wants to be "a slave", and should be able to have an abortion just because? Is there any line in you mind?
shader
Footballguy
No I do not understand it from your perspective. Do you understand racism from the perspective of a racist? Do you understand being a serial killer from the perspective of Ted Bundy?
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Yeah, usually. I don’t agree with it but I understand the reasoning in most circumstances. I just believe it’s usually based on a set of false premises or faulty logic. Ones I can point out and explain how they’re wrong in a number of different ways.
You're welcome to give that a shot if you’d like.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
At 8.5 months a procedure can be instituted that would give a fetus about a 90% chance at life and also end the pregnancy. I think that is the proper vehicle at that point. I have a huge problem with the question of “sure, but if she decides not to do that should we let doctors perform an abortion.” I tend to end on “no, and doctors need to stand up and refuse to do that but offer a c-section instead.”
I’m also on record saying no relationship I’ve ever been in would probably survive if a woman I was with had an abortion after the first trimester for non-medical reasons. Pretty good chance it would destroy any of those relationships even before then. I’m definitely not pro-abortion.
Last edited by a moderator:
unckeyherb
Footballguy
Is there a point in time that you aren't allowed to make that determination Henry? I understand your 'akin to slavery' concept and I suppose it makes sense. But, in the context of THIS thread's original question, the mother has already submitted to potentially 8+ months of indentured servitude and has gestated the baby to a point that it isn't a quick blip and its gone. The baby is viable at this point. Its a person. Its inside another person, but its a person. At what point does the mother NOT get to exercise rights over another person's body?
Henry Ford
Footballguy
1. Read the post right above yours;
2. The prospective mother isn't exercising rights over the fetus's body. The prospective mother is refusing to give rights to her body to the fetus.
That's a very important distinction. And getting to that discussion requires starting with an understanding of where everyone is on who has rights and what they are.
unckeyherb
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
I agree with you. What I wrote is not my scenario but that of pro-lifers, and it’s wrong to deliberately paint them as something they’re not. They don’t see it as slavery.
Similar threads
