Abortion

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Tray Dub, Aug 31, 2008.


  1. Prenatal murder is an opinion, and therefore has no legal relevance (as you know).

    It wasn't trying to enforce morality. It was trying to protect the women's right to personal liberty and privacy from state laws and legislators. And since it is an unknown whether a fetus should have rights (because that would be enforcing morality), they wanted to protect the woman's constitutional rights first and foremost. Which does have constitutional validity, in my opinion/interpretation.

    P.S. I know I already left you rep saying this, but I enjoy debating you more than anybody I've ever come across, with the exception of my dad. So props.
     
  2. I'm pro-choice, despite the fact that I believe it's wrong to have an abortion. Nobody except the mother has the right to make a decision regarding abortion. Government- stay out.
     
  3. I don't necessarily disagree, but how do you propose Kansas enforces this law? It certainly isn't logical to throw women in jail, and I doubt the state would be able to deter all doctors from performing them. At that point, doesn't the lack of enforcement speak volumes towards how private an issue it is, and therefore how little influence government should have? As far as abortion goes, even the state government should stay out of it.
     

  4. Exactly. If these religious states want to enact ludicrous laws banning abortion and gay rights, they will suffer the consequences. More harm will undoubtedly come from their prohibition, and the free-market would eventually correct their beliefs. Instead we allow it to be a national debate, and these religious nuts will never know how spoiled their ideas are.

    Competition between states creates healthy debate and comparison for how issues should be handled. If Kansas has the highest black-market abortion deaths and families start to send their children across state lines for abortions, they will reform their laws, and other states will shy away from copying their mistakes.

    If California were allowed to legalize weed, other states would be able to observe the success of regulation vs criminalization.
     
  5. I agree with everything you posted, though I believe the disinformation involved with marijuana will prevent that from happened - at least for quite some time.

    OT - Decriminalisation is something that should have been achieved in Canada by now, but a conservative PM was elected and he has made it clear that it is of no interest to him. Canada is nowhere near as decentralised as the States are, so the provinces have no role in this. We've got another federal election coming up and it looks like the current PM will win and push decrim. further down his list of priorities. :(
     
  6. I agree, no matter what your personal view is, its not your business what others do.
    I personally don't see the need for anything after the second trimester (or into the third, to be more clear) unless its an emergency, but then again, who am I to make someone do something?
     

Share This Page