Alabama and Abortion - Page 2
Register

Welcome to the Prepper Forum / Survivalist Forum.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Alabama and Abortion

This is a discussion on Alabama and Abortion within the Political News and Topics forums, part of the General Discussion category; Originally Posted by The Tourist Taken as a singular issue, I agree. The problem is that if a European country has strict limits on abortions, ...

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 74
Like Tree147Likes

Thread: Alabama and Abortion

  1. #11
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    10,752
    Quote Originally Posted by The Tourist View Post
    Taken as a singular issue, I agree. The problem is that if a European country has strict limits on abortions, they also disenfranchise their citizens in other manners, like gun control and even traveling "without papers."

    What I'd like to see is to pass legislation that protects babies, but also gets some help for the mother. For example, I remember a story some years ago where a mother drove her car into a lake to drown herself and three kids. (I never found out if she was successful).

    Like all tragedies, I do not believe this happens in a vacuum. Clearly among the people who know such an individual there have been clear warning signs for years.
    A couple incidents like that. Susan Smith in 1994 and Amber Turley in 2010.

    https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...r16-story.html
    The Tourist likes this.

  2. #12
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    The Lone Star State
    Posts
    7,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Camel923 View Post
    https://www.al.com/news/2019/05/alab...pe-incest.html

    I believe in life at conception so to me hats off to the State of Alabama for this legislation. I am not so sure about exceptions as the remedy for punishing some one who violated a woman is to kill another person that did nothing to you.
    The article I read on the topic included mention of only one exception, and that was if the life of the mother was at risk.
    No other exceptions were made in the law, not for rape, not for incest, not even for age of the mother. The life of unborn child can only be legally extinguished if the life of the mother is threatened.

    I'm proud of Alabama. They will be ridiculed into oblivion, but they could very well be the ripple that triggers the tidal wave, eventually leading to a SCOTUS decision to final bring this barbaric practice to an end.

    The lens of history always gives us a unique perspective. We look back 1000 years and can't imagine how people justified what we now consider to be grotesque and unsavory activity.
    Imagine humans in 3030 looking back on us. They will have gone one of two ways. Either nihilistic, where life is meaningless and not worth effort to save or protect, or a society where life is understood to be precious and worthy of being sustained wherever possible. If the second is true, looking back at this period in their history will just as shocking to them as the thoughts of bloodletting and slavery are to us. How could any society claim to be "civilized" when they are willingly killing their offspring for non-threatening reasons.

    I hope the wave continues, and washes away this horrendous stain from our world.
    Last edited by Kauboy; 05-16-2019 at 11:43 AM.
    Denton, Slippy, Inor and 2 others like this.
    "Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H. L. Mencken

  3. #13
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    3,753
    Quote Originally Posted by RedLion View Post
    A couple incidents like that. Susan Smith in 1994 and Amber Turley in 2010.
    Thank you for the update. I remembered the incident, but not the names or the details.
    ...No matter where you are it's enemy territory...

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PrepperForums.net
    Advertisements
     

  5. #14
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    SE Wisconsin
    Posts
    17,503
    If a puppy has a heart beat it is a dog, if a child has a heartbeat it is a person. To end the child life is murder.
    Slippy, Inor, Camel923 and 1 others like this.
    New life as a house husband, major shift in duties.

    Karl Marx said, "Destroy their culture, rewrite their history. Ruin their art and literature, and defame their heroes, by offering fabrications to scandalize that which they considered good.
    After reading this Obama said I am on it.

  6. #15
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    home
    Posts
    2,134
    I have reservations about the AL law not allowing exceptions for incest and rape. I think it probably should be allowed in those cases where the prospective mother did not willingly engage in the activity that led to her pregnancy. This will lessen the chances of the law being upheld.
    "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."- The wise words of Benjamin Franklin.

  7. #16
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    The Lone Star State
    Posts
    7,613
    Quote Originally Posted by jimb1972 View Post
    I have reservations about the AL law not allowing exceptions for incest and rape. I think it probably should be allowed in those cases where the prospective mother did not willingly engage in the activity that led to her pregnancy. This will lessen the chances of the law being upheld.
    Your belief about the law being upheld due to lack of exceptions is likely true. This is more of an emotional point of view, but often the thing that decides laws that stem from a moral position.
    However, your reasoning for the exceptions is something I'd like to discuss.

    This bill takes what many refer to as "a principled stance". That is, a basic principle is established and codified, and the rest of the bill stands to support this principle.
    Namely, an innocent human life is worthy of protection regardless of status or stature.
    From this point of view(the bill's perspective), what scenario can ever be given where the principle should be violated? Does rape in any way alter the principle? Does incest in any way alter the principle? Does economic hardship? Does burden of care? Does anything?

    In the past, bills similar to this have made such exceptions. However, such exceptions undermine the basic principle. If rape is sufficient to decide that a human life is not worth protecting, then you can extend that logic beyond such horrible things into more mundane things. You remove the sanctity of human life when you make exceptions for its unjustified destruction. Then it just becomes a matter of adjusting the scales of society to accept less and less egregious things as sufficient reason for destruction of human life. That's exactly how we've arrived at the present, where "the economic impact of raising a child is too much to bear" is used as sufficient justification to kill a baby.

    Is rape horrible? Yes.
    Is incest horrible? Yes.
    Are both instances difficult for the mother to deal with when carrying a child? Absolutely.
    Is any of that the fault of the child? No.
    (I heard Ben Shapiro attribute the bearing of such a burden to true heroism. He's right. That child will NEVER meet a hero more worthy of the title in their life. God bless such a woman.)

    If anyone can name a single other situation where crimes, acts of violence, or even simple mistakes involving two people lead to the legal execution of a third individual who had no say in the matter, I'll begin to concede the point.

    It comes down to two basic questions.
    Is that baby/fetus/embryo a human life? Everything in the scientific world says yes. I also say yes.
    Is innocent human life worth protecting whenever possible? On this, I say yes too.
    "Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H. L. Mencken

  8. #17
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    159
    How do you support individual freedom but want to ban abortions? If you don't like them don't get one.

    Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

  9. #18
    Super Moderator


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Hiding in plain sight
    Posts
    8,072
    Quote Originally Posted by OakOwl View Post
    How do you support individual freedom but want to ban abortions? If you don't like them don't get one.

    Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
    Hows is killing a defenseless child supporting its individual freedom? Once a woman gets pregnant she ceases to be an individual.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    Slippy, Camel923 and stevekozak like this.
    First you have to give up. First you have to know, not fear, know that someday you're going to die.

  10. #19
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    The Lone Star State
    Posts
    7,613
    Quote Originally Posted by OakOwl View Post
    How do you support individual freedom but want to ban abortions? If you don't like them don't get one.
    How do you support individual freedom, but willfully ignore the freedom of the child in question?

    You've heard that line, "your rights extend as far as my nose", right?
    If the owner of said nose is unable to do anything to defend themselves from violence or death, it is the burden of society or government to step in and protect them. Yes, even from their own mother.
    The child in the womb deserves that protection.
    Slippy, Camel923 and stevekozak like this.
    "Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H. L. Mencken

  11. #20
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    home
    Posts
    2,134
    Quote Originally Posted by Kauboy View Post
    Your belief about the law being upheld due to lack of exceptions is likely true. This is more of an emotional point of view, but often the thing that decides laws that stem from a moral position.
    However, your reasoning for the exceptions is something I'd like to discuss.

    This bill takes what many refer to as "a principled stance". That is, a basic principle is established and codified, and the rest of the bill stands to support this principle.
    Namely, an innocent human life is worthy of protection regardless of status or stature.
    From this point of view(the bill's perspective), what scenario can ever be given where the principle should be violated? Does rape in any way alter the principle? Does incest in any way alter the principle? Does economic hardship? Does burden of care? Does anything?

    In the past, bills similar to this have made such exceptions. However, such exceptions undermine the basic principle. If rape is sufficient to decide that a human life is not worth protecting, then you can extend that logic beyond such horrible things into more mundane things. You remove the sanctity of human life when you make exceptions for its unjustified destruction. Then it just becomes a matter of adjusting the scales of society to accept less and less egregious things as sufficient reason for destruction of human life. That's exactly how we've arrived at the present, where "the economic impact of raising a child is too much to bear" is used as sufficient justification to kill a baby.

    Is rape horrible? Yes.
    Is incest horrible? Yes.
    Are both instances difficult for the mother to deal with when carrying a child? Absolutely.
    Is any of that the fault of the child? No.
    (I heard Ben Shapiro attribute the bearing of such a burden to true heroism. He's right. That child will NEVER meet a hero more worthy of the title in their life. God bless such a woman.)

    If anyone can name a single other situation where crimes, acts of violence, or even simple mistakes involving two people lead to the legal execution of a third individual who had no say in the matter, I'll begin to concede the point.

    It comes down to two basic questions.
    Is that baby/fetus/embryo a human life? Everything in the scientific world says yes. I also say yes.
    Is innocent human life worth protecting whenever possible? On this, I say yes too.
    Do you believe slavery and indentured servitude are acceptable? Because while it is for a limited time that is what is being forced on an unwilling and innocent woman. Now I would not wish it to be allowed past the first trimester for any reason, but in the case of rape or incest especially at a young age, I believe it should be allowed. I see those who disallow it under any circumstance to be as unreasonable as those who want it allowed at any time for any reason. Should we punish crime victims?
    "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."- The wise words of Benjamin Franklin.

 

 
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

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

Similar Threads

  1. California drought blamed on abortion.
    By slewfoot in forum General Talk
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-13-2015, 11:01 PM
  2. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-13-2014, 05:53 PM
Back to Top