Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The abortion issue: pro-choice vs. anti-abortion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (109)	10/15/2008 1:02:32 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 286

<Do you think that if you where a woman you would have a right to determine the issue for other women?> No, "right to chose" assumes each woman choses. <If your answer is no, then you confirm my point that the whole point about being a man is at least irrelevant, and arguably ridiculous.> Well, my main point is across... you understand the viewpoint that each individual woman is really the best qualified to decide these things. So NEW TOPIC: SOOOOOOOOO.... now were on the tangential topic of who gets to vote on the issue of taking away that womans right to chose... It seems there are many possible reasons for this... I'll just fire off what comes into my head. * Society has decided that reproduction is to be controlled by and for the greatest good to the community AS A WHOLE? * Society has decided to grant certain legal status and rights to unborn offspring at a certain stage (s) of developement. * The many possible variation on the above that make society decide to intervene in the developemental process at a certain stage to protect unborn babies from possible harm from the mothers including developing penalties for various acts deemed harmful to unborn babies. <The status of the fetus is a general political, moral, philosophical, and legal issue about which men legitimately have as much to say as women. They are not, and should not be preemptively excluded from the debate on any level.> No, because once you have decided on the above... then any laws, penalties, timing, etc. need context just like all laws. Woman (and specifically those who have had certain experiences...but certainly all men would be excluded) are the only ones who have the emotional and experiential ability to know of the context involved for various crimes. There is no way a male can possibly know about the emotional hormonal mood swing and attachment or DIS-attachment the occurs in the mind of a mother who for instance has been raped or for some other reason is getting signals of danger or disaster about the future pertaining to her baby. <Then your back to the whole "I don't have a say because I'm a man" theme as being entirely irrelevant.> I'm only claiming it's relevant given today's context that a decision needs to be made (I don't think it does) that is essentially deciding when the unborn is separate from the mother and needs protection from the mother. Why? Because when deciding these issues only women know the context as to why and when it would be decided that the child is separate from them. All laws always depend on CONTEXT... Men have no way of experiencing these things and certainly shouldn't be consulted when deciding on a sentance for a woman aborting her child at certain times during developement for example... other than to 'help' formulate based on interviews or such with females. This wouldn't included the hypothetical cases where society has decided offspring issues to be of such importance deemed worth of specifically defining a womans roll in relation to the greater good... but that doesn't seem to be the case today with this issue. DAK

To: TimF who wrote (109)	10/15/2008 1:34:33 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 286

<The debate, for just about everyone who has a very developed opinion **, comes down to the status of the fetus, whether it is considered a human with human rights or not. Women generally, or the mother specifically don't have any special status in determining that issue.> This is pretty much the cruxt of the issue. Of course the POINT of "womans right to chose" is exactly that the mother DOES and in fact is THE ONLY ONE that has "special" status in determining the issue. Obviously on assumes that husband, friends, family, doctor would be involved as pertains to the womans relationship with each. <<If you assume (as you apparently do) that the fetus doesn't have, and properly shouldn't be considered to have human rights, than the decision would be properly up to the pregnant woman, not because she has some special status in the larger debate, but because, at least in your mind, the issue is fully decided and there is no other human with anywhere near the level of direct involvement in the situation that she does.>> You've contradicted yourself here... the last sentance gives her special status yes. And OF COURSE she has special status, I think what you're getting at is the level of that status and what it means to the issue at hand. <In your opinion it just about her, that she is the only human directly effected by the procedure.> No, I didn't say that...please refer back to the original post if you want to discuss seriously. My whole point is that they aren't separate, what effects the woman also the baby, the baby also the woman. That's the whole point. <If on the other hand you see another human involved, namely the fetus, then their are two people directly effected, both of their rights need to be considered and respected> Yes, of course. <and right to live is more important than the right not to be pregnant (at least when the pregnancy isn't very likely to kill the woman, so that two people have right to life considerations).> I agree with this but this is where the rubber meets the road. But much more than "kill the mother".. Issues like rape, health of the mother, AND psychological issues.... DAK