Nevada GOP drops Pro-Life Platform

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

 

[Origanalist]

Many people confuse non-autonomy with dependence. A child is biologically autonomous yet still dependent. A fetus is neither.

I fail to see the relevance of this point.

 

[The Rebel Poet]

Many people confuse non-autonomy with dependence. A child is biologically autonomous yet still dependent. A fetus is neither.

What does "biologically autonomous" mean?

 

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

 

[The Rebel Poet]

women who have a legitimate miscarriage and try to abide by the law will end up having their uterus' investigated by authorities.

Where are the authorities going to get an warrant for that?

 

[The Rebel Poet]

But you can shut off the water and lock up the frig and pantry and stop feeding them.
And I'll say it again, you can shut off the water and lock up the frig and pantry and stop feeding them.
And if they hook an umbilical into your blood supply then your completely with your rights to sever it, because an invitation to your house doesn't imply any privileges beyond that.

Now you're just being facetiosly pedantic. When you put a fetus into your body, it is normal for it it attach an umbilical cord. So an invitation being forced into your uterus does mean something beyond that.

So, let's say you drag a person into your house, without their consent, and attach them to your body, without their consent, in a way that means they will die if you detach them; do you really think killing them under the guise of "trespassing" is OK?

 

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

 

[56ktarget]

More like they dropped the anti-liberty platform.

 

[Jingles]

The Pro-life position doesn't address that women own their bodies. The "pro-choice" position doesn't address the life of the child. It is okay to evict, but not to kill someone who didn't even choose to be their in the first place. So you can remove the child so long as they live. Technology is getting to this point where this is possible to do earlier and earlier. Also as we advance in technology abortion will be less of an issue.

It would be like you wake up one day and suddenly there is some guy handcuffed to your porch. You ask him, "What happened". "I don't know, man. I just woke up and found myself here. I didn't even choose to do this or even mean to violate your property rights". So you help the guy. You don't shoot him in the face.

I really like Walter Block's "Evictionism". It is the only abortion position that ever made absolute sense to me.

 

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

 

[Origanalist]

Are you proposing an exception in the case of rape then?
If so then this whole issue is not a matter of the life of the "innocent" fetus.
If not then your whole discussion is rather moot - for consent doesn't enter into your equation.
I don't see other options - but perhaps there's something I missed.


But you can shut off the water and lock up the frig and pantry and stop feeding them.
And I'll say it again, you can shut off the water and lock up the frig and pantry and stop feeding them.
And if they hook an umbilical into your blood supply then your completely with your rights to sever it, because an invitation to your house doesn't imply any privileges beyond that.

I would be embarrassed if I posted that. Your argument has devolved into the realm of moronic trying to justify your position.

 

[Ecolibertarian]

Some of us don't like the idea of the state investigating a woman's uterus, as in, it may be wrong or it may be ok to abort a fetus, but either way it is a private matter for the mother that doesn't concern the state.

Agreed.

 

[Antischism]

Good.

 

[puppetmaster]

Remind me, when is the last time you heard a fetus/baby demand anything? They are quite passive.



Unless she was raped, the pregnant woman made her choice to transform her body when she had sex. She put that baby in her body; it wasn't the baby's choice. You can't drag someone into your house and then shoot them for trespassing. I'm going to say that again: You can't drag someone into your house and then shoot them for trespassing. Regretting ones past choices or fretting physical pain doesn't somehow make murdering an innocent bystander OK.

I am not even an overly religious person and I see the wrong in killing an innocent human child .

 

[The Rebel Poet]

It wasn't my analogy, it was yours. When I bring someone into my house I'm entirely within my rights to stop providing them with food and water ... just as I am with a fetus.

If it wasn't your analogy, then why did you feel the need to change it? You could have addressed my analogy, or you could have explained why you think it is apples to oranges, but instead, you addressed a slightly modified analogy as if it were mine. Where I come from, that's a straw man.

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

It wasn't my analogy, it was yours. When I bring someone into my house I'm entirely within my rights to stop providing them with food and water ... just as I am with a fetus.

Wow I really hope you are NOT a parent.

 

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

 

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Bad analogy again. I didn't drag them into the womb. I didn't attach them.

I think you're posting on the wrong forums. Here you go http://www.straightdope.com/

 

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx