No Sign of a Red Wave; Plenty of Signs of a Dobbs Wave

MOST are socioeconomic, and yes those are convenience-based abortions in the same way that trying to abolish poverty by killing all the poor people would be convenience-based killings on a societal level.

You were the one who was outraged for me allegedly mischaracterizing why people have abortions. Don't get mad at me for correcting you.

 

Fixed it for you.

 

Why is this relevant? Since when have we believed that all forms of human life must live all the time without any exceptions?

 

Violation of board rules.

 

Then why are you sad and I’m happy?

 

The butt hurt in this thread is delicious. Like unicorn tears.

 

But the government still picks and chooses which of those cases are legal.

 

Because Republicans didn't perform to their expectations.

Doesn't mean they didn't win the game.

This midterm cycle was the equivalent of Bama playing Eastern Washington (not to pick on Eastern Washington) and winning by three points. Saban's chewing the team out in the locker room, but they still won the game, and Eastern Washington is in no position to talk shit, unless they have the psyche of citygator.

 

Because the default rule is that you generally can't kill people.

Again, you're turning exceptions into the rule. There are EXCEPTIONS where you can kill people, but the rule is you can't kill people.

 

For the record, I've said before that arguments against abortion (particularly in later months) do not have to be based upon religion. There ARE secular arguments. As for murder, I think if every Christian in the world lost their faith tomorrow, very few would conclude that murder is now morally acceptable. The proscription against murder is universally found in nearly every ethical and philosophical school of thought, whether religious or secular. It's not specific to any religion. Humans probably wouldn't have evolved as far as we have unless we collectively had an intuitive understanding that murder should be condemned.

I suppose there are issues of degree here as with anything. Laws against murder are not inherently religious. Mandating that everyone pray to Jesus would no doubt be religious in nature. Not a close call. But what about a law against masturbation or a law requiring women to cover their heads? Would we demand a secular basis for such laws or should it be enough that the majority have a religious objection to those things?

 

Yeah, kind of like how you can have an abortion but not murder an infant

 

So is insulting other posters, that didn't stop you.

 

Until you can't have an abortion because the law changes.

 

I used murder as an example BECAUSE it's not a close call, because there is clear overlap between religious and secular-moral standards.

Abortion is not as clear of a call, but again, I used the murder example to highlight that there is overlap between religious and secular-moral standards in abortion as well. You seem to agree with that point. I was also highlighting that it is a cop-out to claim "theocracy" just because such an overlap exists.

 

Yeah, I was just kinda rambling and thinking out loud. Some examples are more clear than others. For example, many tried to articulate secular arguments against homosexual sex, for example, and those just never seemed credible to me. I felt like they were just fishing for a non religious argument. Abortion is tricker IMO, though I think secular arguments there are much tougher when we're talking about the morning after pill as opposed to a fetus that can arguably feel pain.

 

Of course there are universal laws that most first world countries abide by. They may be a remnant of religion or just common human values. Opposition to “murder” is universal. The definition of murder can vary somewhat.

Asserting that the rights of an early term non thinking, non conscious and non feeling zygote or fetus supersedes a woman’s bodily autonomy doesn’t have to be based upon religion, but for practical purposes for the most part it is. It is not a universally held value, not even close.

 

Pissing contests aside, has the battle been worth it? If republicans were willing to be even little flexible on abortion and not so beholden to the orange man, I suspect they could have easily taken the house and senate as well as the presidency in 2024. Hell if it weren’t for those 2 things I may actually vote Republican.

 

Now that’s gonna leave a mark.

 

Both sides legislate non-universal values all the time. That's where the bulk of political arguments lie.