Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 169

Thread: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murder of

  1. #101
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    07-25-11 @ 05:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    464

    Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    As per your standard, nothing is a Natural Person until the law says they're a Legal Person, so as per that standard no, slaves were not.
    That is not at all my standard. I am stating as a positive assertion of rational fact and common sense that a fetus is not a person, and that you cannot offer any argument to the contrary that is not steeped entirely in religious ideology.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    The 'brain activity' argument is irrelevant for 3 reasons:
    1. You will note that the legal definition of "person" contains no reference of brain activity.
    It appears you are the one trying to rationalize an untruth with legal technicalities. If we are arguing law, then the law permits abortion and therefore does not permit force in its prevention. Even if the law did not permit abortion, it does not necessarily follow that a fetus is categorized as a person, that abortion would be categorized as murder, or that force would be authorized to prevent it. If we are arguing morality, then morality permits abortion because it is clearly more of a violation to enslave a woman for months than to allow her control of her own physiology at the expense of a mere potential.

    If we are arguing ethics, then ethics permits abortion because your arguments completely discards the principle of human autonomy at the center of ethical philosophy. If we are arguing science, then the nature of an organism's brain activity is the most fundamental definition of consciousness. You, however, do not seem to want to settle on any of these bases, hopscotching from one to the other as each one in turn fails you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    The reason being that the 'brain activity' argument is a Secular Humanist perversion of "Cogito, ergo sum", is purely theological in nature and therefore has no place in Posative Law.
    It has nothing to do with Cartesian philosophy - this has been the overwhelming and unavoidable conclusion of neurological science for generations. Brain damage or chemical impairment can alter the very foundations of your being, and selective stimulation of known cortices can induce every possible experience ever articulated, including synesthetic experiences that have no distinct verbal translations. Whatever resource you're relying on is very out of touch with science, and primarily concerned with discussions in the humanities.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    2. Main stream Pro-Choice makes no argument that as soon as brain activity is evident in the ZEF, that the ZEF is then a "person" under the law, and therefore Roe-v-Wade Section 9a makes all elective abortion "murder" under the law.
    3. As demonstrated by Obama, it can not only have brain activity, but be born and surviving completely outside-of and detached-from the mother and still not be seen as a "person".
    Therefore, we can conclude that the 'brain activity' argument is disingenuous if not a violation of the 1st amendment. Pro-Choice is assuming the false premise that they would ban abortion were there religious requirement of brain activity present.
    This is complete gibberish, and your sneaking in a link to a deranged anti-Obama rant is the low point of a very low paragraph. First, the mere existence of brain activity is not the definition of being - non-human animals have brain activity, just not to the same complexity or density of operations. As I've said, there are ambiguous grey areas, but abortion does not involve any of them. Fish are more neurologically active than fetuses. Second, I don't know where you're getting a reference to the 1st Amendment, but I can assure you it contains no mention of fetuses being people or abortion being illegal. Are you just throwing out random words or what?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    You are, however, charged with "murder" if you kill the unborn.
    If the mother presses charges - it is an extension of her rights alone.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Well sure but the whole brain activity argument is bunk anyway because "child" is a social construct, not a medical construct.
    A human being is something that exists or doesn't exist in physical fact, not something invented by society. I can't believe how often I have to explain this to people on both the left and right on different issues. Now, once again, I don't deny that there are ambiguous thresholds between humanity and something prior to humanity, but abortion doesn't even come close to those thresholds - a fetus is not conscious, and does not possess even the capacity for consciousness. Its brain is still organizing the basic autonomic structures that regulate simple metabolic and cardiovascular processes. In the earlier stages, it's basically a lobed spinal cord with a thin membrane that will eventually become skin - a fish has greater claim to sentience.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    At least now we have clarity that you don't care what SCOTUS has to say, which pretty much blows any credibility you may have otherwise had right out.
    I'm sorry you disapprove of independent thought and reality not based on authoritarianism. This is not the Austro-Hungarian Empire - a law is not whatever someone in a robe says it is. There is room for expert interpretation, but there are also simple matters of fact and common sense. One of them is that corporations do not have the rights of people, because (a)they are not people, and (b)no law has ever been passed granting them such. The same rationale holds true for abortion: Fetuses are not people, and every law identifying them as such has been struck down as unconstitutional. The validity or invalidity of a court decision rests in itself, not in some authoritarian ideology that holds the source of a decision to be the definition of its legitimacy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    The only people bringing up the killing of abortion doctors are pro-choice. You are the ones acting all paranoid.
    I specifically asked you to affirm that you are not encouraging, endorsing, or rationalizing the killing of abortion doctors because the position you are arguing could be interpreted that way, and you have declined to do so. I have asked that you affirm that this is a matter of intellectual debate, and that you are not trying to incite people to acts of violence against abortion doctors, and you have declined to make that stipulation. That is not paranoia - that is cause for legitimate concern. The rhetoric of the right is often violent, and its actions likewise. I ask you again to affirm the legitimacy of this discussion by stating categorically that you are not encouraging or rationalizing the killing of abortion doctors, simply pursuing a legal interpretation of the SD law. That I'm mentioning this is a courtesy to you, so that no one gets an unintended impression of what you are arguing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Someone els's child, or hell even pet or car, doesn't have to be my personal property for me to protect it.
    Someone else's child is a person, and therefore acting in their defense is both legally and morally equivalent to acting in your own. But someone else's property does not afford you that right - to the best of my knowledge, it is not legal anywhere in the US to use deadly force purely to protect another person's property. In most of the US it isn't even legal to use deadly force purely to protect your own - you have to have some reasonable sense of danger, not just catch a teenager breaking into your car and shoot them because you feel like it. A woman's body is her property, and a fetus is part of her body.
    Last edited by Troubadour; 02-16-11 at 12:49 PM.

  2. #102
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Oh, so you're talking out your ass and are now back peddling. .

    No Jerry, my comment was in reference to statements such as these:



    Note not "To keep them from aborting my child" but simply to prevent them from performing them in a general sense. Advocating bombing abortion clinics simply to "prevent" abortions in a general sense and acting as if somehow this is significantly different then the justifications people have for terrorist actions.

    By the way, I may be crazy or perhaps "irrational", but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that piece of legislation is longer than 2 sentences long and thus its possible to have issues with it beyond a simple 2 sentence synopsis. Maybe that's all IRRATIONAL of me to believe.
    No that's true, I get what what you're saying now. No I certainly can not condone bombing abortion clinics. Just conduct a raid, and after the criminal investigation is finished with the building either re-sell it or properly demolish the structure by a competent contractor.

    I mean, let's be reasonable, if your neighbor was caught with a meth lab you wouldn't want that house blown up right next to yours. It's reckless and unnecessary. Just bring in the dozer and perform a proper demolition.

  3. #103
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    No that's true, I get what what you're saying now. No I certainly can not condone bombing abortion clinics. Just conduct a raid, and after the criminal investigation is finished with the building either re-sell it or properly demolish the structure by a competent contractor.

    I mean, let's be reasonable, if your neighbor was caught with a meth lab you wouldn't want that house blown up right next to yours. It's reckless and unnecessary. Just bring in the dozer and perform a proper demolition.
    Meth Lab = Illegal.

    Abortion Clinic = Not Illegal.

    Jerry = Continuing to try and push a false dichotomoy as if its a fact to try and dupe people into agreeing with him as if we're all a bunch of idiots that don't see through his transparent attempts.

    Yes, if abortion clinics were made illegal a raid of the premsises if illegal activity would make sense. Demolishing a worth while building would be a bit idiotic. A random citizen bombing it would be as illegal, and foolish, as a random citizen bombing a meth lab. That said, the entire conversation is a bit ridiculous, becasue constitutionally as it stands the type of abortions taking place at the majority of clinics aren't illegal and thus aren't comparable to meth labs, and some state law isn't going to magically change that.

  4. #104
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

    This tells me that you didn't even show the common courtesy of reading my OP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    By the way, I may be crazy or perhaps "irrational", but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that piece of legislation is longer than 2 sentences long and thus its possible to have issues with it beyond a simple 2 sentence synopsis. Maybe that's all IRRATIONAL of me to believe.
    I know, right, I should have put a link to the legislation in the opening post OH WAIT I DID.

    Well it's not like other people gave more links the bill OH WAIT THEY DID.

    Yeah, sorry you just happened to "not see" those links, and of me and others quoting the content of those links.

    Yeah it's actually a couple paragraphs. I've read the whole thing, others have read the whole thing, we talked about it....you didn't. In fact we were having a rather nice exchange last night. Aww just look my cute little posts, being all civil and polite.

    So, anyway, if your interested here are a few of the links which were posted within the first dozen or so posts....

    2011 Session - Bill History
    2011 Session - Bill History
    2011 Session - Bill History
    Last edited by Jerry; 02-16-11 at 01:11 PM.

  5. #105
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

    Quote Originally Posted by Troubadour View Post
    That is not at all my standard. I am stating as a positive assertion of rational fact and common sense that a fetus is not a person, and that you cannot offer any argument to the contrary that is not steeped entirely in religious ideology.
    ...and then I proceeded to give such an argument

    Quote Originally Posted by Troubadour View Post
    If the mother presses charges - it is an extension of her rights alone.
    Citizens don't press criminal charges, the DA does. Citizens press civil charges. The mother does not need to act for the state to act.

    Or are you saying that in any typical murder, the police don't go after anyone until someone steps up and presses charges That's rich!

  6. #106
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    07-25-11 @ 05:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    464

    Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    ...and then I proceeded to give such an argument
    You gave no such thing. What you gave was verbal chicanery that denied the empirical existence of human beings as being merely a "social construct," and then argued that reality should be subordinate to legal technicalities on matters of life and death. Sorry, you don't get to invent or nullify the value of human life by playing with words and legal minutiae - these things are merely tools of expression, not that which gives them meaning.

    Now, this is the third time you've declined an explicit invitation to state that you're not advocating the murder of abortion providers. I am going to continue mentioning it until you make a specific statement on it one way or another. This is not a game. If you sincerely value an unconscious spinal nub over a thinking, feeling human being, and would see the latter killed to "protect" the former, then this conversation has no purpose because you are not receptive to arguments regardless of their merit. Let me be clear, even if you will not - it would be legally and morally acceptable to kill someone in the midst of an attempted homicide of an abortion doctor. That would be justifiable homicide under the laws of every state of the union, even the most backward and inhuman ones.

  7. #107
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

    Let us just make this clear. It is one thing to disagree with a law you feel is unjust, it is another to go around killing people. There are many ways to challenge abortion law in this country, but state sanctioned violence is not an acceptable method. If you can't handle your political grievances without murder, you clearly are in the wrong damn country.

  8. #108
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

    Quote Originally Posted by Troubadour View Post
    You gave no such thing. What you gave was verbal chicanery that denied the empirical existence of human beings as being merely a "social construct," and then argued that reality should be subordinate to legal technicalities on matters of life and death. Sorry, you don't get to invent or nullify the value of human life by playing with words and legal minutiae - these things are merely tools of expression, not that which gives them meaning.

    Now, this is the third time you've declined an explicit invitation to state that you're not advocating the murder of abortion providers. I am going to continue mentioning it until you make a specific statement on it one way or another. This is not a game. If you sincerely value an unconscious spinal nub over a thinking, feeling human being, and would see the latter killed to "protect" the former, then this conversation has no purpose because you are not receptive to arguments regardless of their merit. Let me be clear, even if you will not - it would be legally and morally acceptable to kill someone in the midst of an attempted homicide of an abortion doctor. That would be justifiable homicide under the laws of every state of the union, even the most backward and inhuman ones.
    This may seem random but I do have a point which will become clear shortly.

    Would you mind telling me what you do for a living?

    I'm in the National Guard and residential construction.

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    Let us just make this clear. It is one thing to disagree with a law you feel is unjust, it is another to go around killing people. There are many ways to challenge abortion law in this country, but state sanctioned violence is not an acceptable method. If you can't handle your political grievances without murder, you clearly are in the wrong damn country.
    Let's try that again...

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    Let us just make this clear. It is one thing to disagree with a law you feel is unjust, it is another to go around killing people. There are many ways to challenge slavory law in this country, but state sanctioned violence is not an acceptable method. If you can't handle your political grievances without murder, you clearly are in the wrong damn country.
    Hmm, interesting, and again....

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    Let us just make this clear. It is one thing to disagree with a law you feel is unjust, it is another to go around killing people. There are many ways to keep from getting an unwanted pregnancy in this country, but state sanctioned violence (=abortion) is not an acceptable method. If you can't handle your political grievances without murder, you clearly are in the wrong damn country.

  10. #110
    Guru
    OKgrannie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 04:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,221

    Re: South Dakota Justifiable Homicide Bill Under Fire as Critics Say It Invites Murde

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    While I'm sure the legislation will be further refined, it's worth pointing out that Roe-v-Wade gives states the right to ban 2nd trimester abortion if it chooses.
    Restricting abortion in the 2nd trimester can only be done if the purpose is to protect the health of the pregnant woman. States will have a hard time proving that banning abortion in the 2nd trimester is for the purpose of protecting a woman's health.

    Roe v. Wade - Overview

    State laws limiting such access during the second trimester were upheld only when the restrictions were for the purpose of protecting the health of the pregnant woman.
    "Though no one can go back and make a brand new start, anyone can start from now and make a brand new ending."
    ~Anonymous

Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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