POLITICS President Trump: 100+ Mornings After (Term 1 Complete)

Choice has nothing to do with whether it is murder, or not. If it's murder it's murder. Whether someone should be allowed to murder or not is choice. But choice doesn't determine whether it is, or isn't.

 

I dont think it's as cut and dry. Just as murdering in self defense isn't the same as premeditated murder, and choice comes into play in each situation. Woman chooses to be promiscuous or doesn't. Woman who is raped has no choice and shouldn't have to carry a child as a victim of rape.
I'm pretty sure most here would want their daughters to have a child if impregnated by boyfriend or husband, and suspect you wouldn't really like the idea of being a grandaddy to the offspring of a gangbang rape.

 

Killing in self defense is not murder.

Your logic doesn't work. If you think terminating a pregnancy because you just don't want the baby is murder, then you are acknowledging the the baby/fetus inside the woman is a human. And if that baby/fetus inside the woman is a human, then killing it is murder, regardless of how it got there.

The baby never has control over how/whether it ends up in the womb. Either the baby/fetus is a human and has a right to life, or it isn't and doesn't.

 

I'm perfectly fine with your difference of opinion. I just find a massive logic hole in the its murder defense. Just say you want the child to suffer from the irresponsible decisions of their parents; don't fake a high ground pretending you care about killing it. I disagree with that stance, but it at least doesn't collapse on itself.

 

look how hopeful and innocent I was earlier

 

we can all have different views on this, but logically you can't kill a person because they are the product of rape or incest. The Paul Finebaum phone banks will not fill themselves. There is uncertainty about personhood and body autonomy, not murder itself. if abortion is murder at a point in time, the previous crimes of the father or mother wouldn't absolve a new one. that's just logic.

 

I dont concern myself with "your logic doesn't work" when people disagree. My logic is fine and always has been.

 

"Want the child to suffer from irresponsible decisions"? Where the [uck fay] you get that from.
I'm fine with you having a different opinion. I just find a massive logic hole when someone comes up with bullshit like that and suggests another is taking a fake high ground.

 

He's stating that the child is the one who suffers when you force a woman to birth a child she doesn't want.

I'd argue that suffering but alive is better than dead 9/10 times.

 

Your logic is not fine.

1. Scenario 1:
   • Woman bangs a man by choice and intentionally avoids using protection.
   • Woman becomes pregnant
   • Woman terminates pregnancy at 6 month mark
2. Scenario 2:
   • Woman is raped by man
   • Woman becomes pregnant
   • Woman terminates pregnancy at 6 month mark

If terminating pregnancy at the 6 month mark is murder in one scenario, then it is murder in every scenario. You cannot use the sins of the father to justify the killing of the child. The child didn't rape the mother. If the child has a right to life in one scenario, then it has to have that right in any scenario. Otherwise, it's not a right.

 

I could respond with a "my logic is fine" bullshit but I'll actually take the time to explain my reasoning.

The overwhelming majority of the time when you force someone to have a child they don't want, the life for the unwanted child sucks. One reason for this is the second they are born the people who cared so much about making sure they're carried to term, stop giving a shit about them. Most of those kid's fate in life is set in stone the moment they're born because society doesn't care to help. They're stuck in the system, live shit lives, and largely fall through the cracks. They're the inconvenient underbelly of society that we demand exist while doing are best to actively ignore.

So all because we wanted to do the right thing we force people to have a baby they don't want and mostly likely never intended to conceive, we put those kids in a hopeless environment because the second they pop out into the world we're off to make sure the next unwanted child is birthed not giving a damn about reaching a hand down to help someone up. That's how people are ok with making the child suffer for the sins of their parents, because those people sure as hell aren't helping.

 

I don't think I'm such a small person that I'd blame the child for the actions of their sperm donor. There are more than a few children who were the result of a rape, that live on this planet, and are loved, because someone chose to carry them to term and love them despite their coming into existence. I'm not going to tell someone that they have to make that choice, or any other choice. It is not my place, regardless of thoughts on the matter, because I am not the one who must do the carrying.

There is no murder in self defense. Just as manslaughter isn't murder, murder is a purely semantics legal definition, defined mostly by being, as you state, premeditated. But an ambush in war is premeditated, and we don't call that murder, generally speaking, as a society. Which means that it isn't enough to just kill. It isn't enough to kill with premeditation. It's semantics. But it rests, solely, in the semantic legal set of ideas of: illegal premeditated killing. Abortion is not illegal. Therefore it is not murder.

 

And you not thinking many women have considered abortion but turn out to be great mothers shows how short sighted you are on the subject overall.

 

I never have said I supported abortion at 6 months. Go make up another false claim and argue about it with someone else.

 

Lumber, there are millions of kids in hopeless environments and their parents never considered abortion, so are you saying they should have been aborted and skipped the "hopeless life" they are living? Seems like a pretty aggressive stance on abortion

 

I thought I was clear. Forcing a parent to have a kid they don't want is prerty shitty. If a parent wants to have a kid them there's no hypothetical abortion to discuss.

 

Also there's a big difference in being wanted and loved and cared for, vs being unwanted and forced on someone.

 

People should probably consider pregnancy risk before having sex if abortion is their solution to the repercussion of their own actions and choices, imo.
There are also many parents out there who can't have children and would adopt and give kids a great life, so assuming a child born to a mom , who at 1 month doesn't want the baby, will have a hopeless and meaningless life is a wrong assumption.
Actually if the real concern is a kid having a bad parent and hopeless situation, there are millions of them to concern yourself with.

 

That demand for adopting young kids simply isn't there. If there was we wouldn't have all those young kids in the foster system. Imagine millions of more babies being added to that already overloaded and crowded system every year.

But since we already have an issue with poor parenting and a broken societal system I guess we should double down, exacerbate the situation, and make things worse by forcing more unwanted kids. Then we can pat ourselves on the back for being prolife, and dip out like a deadbeat dad telling those new borns and parents they're on their own.

I agree that I don't want abortion to be used as a regular form of birth control. I think birth control via repeated medical procedure is dumb, but until it becomes viable it should be up to the mother.

 

.