Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 6141516
Results 151 to 159 of 159

Thread: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

  1. #151
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by EgoffTib View Post
    SCotUS tends play a pretty big role in deciding what is lawful or not.
    And then we see the President and Congress pass legislation that overrules the Court's determination of what is lawful or not (see Ledbetter).

    This notion that the SCOTUS is the final determination of constitutional meaning or expositor of constitutionality is dangerous.

    In fact, it's what led the SCOTUS, in the first place, to usurp the political processes in this country by ripping out abortion policy from public policy debate.

  2. #152
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    By the way, for those posters earlier in this thread that claimed that the embryonic stem cell lines that Bush restricted federal funding for were not viable or essentially worthless...please take care to note that this week's announcement of the first clinical trials derived from ESCR used stem cells from those lines.

    So much for that argument...

  3. #153
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,081

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Felicity View Post
    I present Exhibit "A" --EXACTLY the same sort of reasoning used to enslave Americans is used to justify killing another segment of human beings. Dred Scott anyone?
    What? Dred Scott wasn't about claiming that because a black man wasn't a person they could be enslaved. It was whether or not a black man who set foot in the North as a slave was free. But here. I'll school you a little :

    Dred Scott - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The case raised the issue of a black slave who lived in a free state. Congress had not asserted whether slaves were free once they set foot on Northern soil. The ruling arguably violated the Missouri Compromise because, based on the court's logic, a white slave owner could purchase slaves in a slave state and then bring his slaves to a state where slavery was illegal without losing rights to the slaves. This factor upset the Northern Republicans and further split Northern and Southern relations.

    Scott traveled with his master Dr. John Emerson, who was in the army and often transferred. Scott's extended stay with his master in Illinois, a free state, gave him the legal standing to make a claim for freedom, as did his extended stay at Fort Snelling in the Wisconsin Territory, where slavery was also prohibited. But Scott never made the claim while living in the free lands—perhaps because he was unaware of his rights at the time, or fearful of possible repercussions.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  4. #154
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-06-09 @ 03:03 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,946

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    What? Dred Scott wasn't about claiming that because a black man wasn't a person they could be enslaved. It was whether or not a black man who set foot in the North as a slave was free. But here. I'll school you a little :

    Dred Scott - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    same wiki article
    In effect, the Court ruled that slaves had no claim to freedom; they were property and not citizens; they could not bring suit in federal court; and because slaves were private property,

    ...and from the ruling...
    We proceed to examine the case as presented by the pleadings.

    The words 'people of the United States' and 'citizens' are synonymous terms, and mean the same thing. They both describe the political body who, according to our republican institutions, form the sovereignty, and who hold the power and conduct the Government through their representatives. They are what we familiarly call the 'sovereign people,' and every citizen is one of this people, and a constituent member of this sovereignty. The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word 'citizens' in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them. Dred Scott v. Sandford
    school's out.



    Shame I have to school you of all people.
    Last edited by Felicity; 01-30-09 at 08:06 PM.

  5. #155
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Felicity View Post
    same wiki article



    ...and from the ruling...


    school's out.



    Shame I have to school you of all people.
    You are definitely right but your overarching argument isn't anymore persuasive than PETA members claiming animals should be classified as "people" too.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  6. #156
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-06-09 @ 03:03 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,946

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    You are definitely right but your overarching argument isn't anymore persuasive than PETA members claiming animals should be classified as "people" too.
    Except...we're talking about human beings--and not sea kittens.

  7. #157
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Felicity View Post
    Except...we're talking about human beings--and not sea kittens.
    And PETA is talking about living, breathing, feeling beings that have emotions and thoughts just like you and me.

    (Your dog wants steak)
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  8. #158
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,762

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by OKgrannie View Post
    In different areas of the country the majority holds different beliefs. The same beliefs are common all across the country, into every nook and cranny, the only difference is the majority. Minorities should be able to adhere to their own beliefs wherever they reside so long as their actions do not cause chaos in society. The entire Bill of Rights is essentially for the purpose of protecting minority's rights, as the majority needs no such protection. IOW, a majority that supports legalizing abortion should not be able to force women to have abortions.
    OK, the jig is up. This is worded WAY too well. So come clean. Which founding father are you?
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  9. #159
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: Obama To Alter Abortion Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    Can you not answer a question directly?
    The answer is I don't know. The reason why is because I have not thought through every possible circumstance, if such is even posible given our finite lives.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    No, they are not obvious reasons and you simply cannot fairly dismiss any and all ethical and moral concerns because you think that ethical and moral arguments can only rely on religion.
    Then please present me with an argument that doesn't.

    I've done this many times and when you break the argument down its either a non sequitur or a religious conviction or plausible. I've yet to see an objectively true position. Try if you must.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    I would agree wholeheartedly with #2 and #3. I'm not sure that enlightens the discussion, though.
    It does because I still only have a vague idea on why you argue what you do.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    My issue, as I am not "they" is that ESCR that relies on harvesting embryoes simply to conduct research is morally repugnant given that alternatives to harvesting such embryoes exist that avoid those ethical and moral problems.
    Why is it morally repugnant? I see you discuss this below... finally.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    A human embryo is human life.
    So what? A brain dead human is human life too. A skin cell is technically human life.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    A human embryo is not just a collection of cells scraped off the inside of a nose. As a matter of basic biological fact human embryos are actual human beings in the earliest stages of their natural development.
    Yea? and So is a sperm and an egg. And so is the molecules and proteins that will make sperm and eggs and so and so forth to an infinite regression. SO are the brain dead. So are the brain damaged. The list goes on...

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    Human embryos (or fetuses, or infants) do not differ in kind from mature human beings (as carrots or alligators differ from humans);
    YES, they do differ, significantly. Fetuses are incapable of thought. Fetuses are incapable of independent life. Fetuses lack many if not all cognitive abilities. They are no different mentslly than a cricket, if not less for much of their development.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    rather the difference between human embryos (fetuses, infants) and adults is a difference merely in stage or degree of development of precisely the same kind of being.
    Exactly! Beings that possess self-awareness are what matter. That is, beings developed to the point of self awareness have rights imparted upon them due to their capability to comprehend and reciprocate.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    But, again, I am not talking about banning ESCR altogether, but rather discussing my support for restricting federal government funding of ESCR. And that argument does not rest solely on a ethical/moral argument, but other factors.
    Such as? EG, your belief it could be done by other means? Moral objections aside, why limit experts in the field from making this decision?

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    As well, I am not an advocate of banning abortion altogether, either. I just want Roe overtunred so that the issue will be returned to the proper political forum.
    I haven't studied the case enough but from what I have I tend to agree.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 6141516

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •