Mike Pence has signed the abortion bill

[17 squirrel]

You all know my stance on abortion. I'm not going to get into the subject of abortion itself. (We have plenty of other threads where that's been hashed out, ad infinitum.)

My problem with this bill is that it is unenforceable:



98% of abortions are purely elective. The mother does not have to provide a reason for murdering her unborn child. So, I don't see any way that the State will ever be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a specific mother had an abortion specifically and only for the prohibited reasons enumerated in the bill. So, in my opinion, it is pointless legislation.

You have entered the fray about abortion as soon as you call it murder..
It's a legal medical procedure.. It's legal,, its not murder...

 

[17 squirrel]

You have entered the fray about abortion as soon as you call it murder..
It's a legal medical procedure.. It's legal,, its not murder...

You anti's just can't stand to have a civil conversation about it.. All you are doing is enflaming folks.. Some things you should just keep to yourself..


This is one of the stupidest topics to have on a gun forum..

 

[17 squirrel]

How many murderers get the death penalty now? But I'd say both would be guilty, same as if someone hires a hit man. What's the difference?

One is a legal medical procedure, the other is not..

 

[Kutnupe14]

How many murderers get the death penalty now? But I'd say both would be guilty, same as if someone hires a hit man. What's the difference?

At least you're honest in your assessment. If abortion is murder, then it only philosophically consistent to treat all those who participate in the act as murderers are currently viewed. I personally think you are in minority, as there would be a severe backlash against anyone who tried to punish abortive mothers and doctors.

 

[chipbennett]

You have entered the fray about abortion as soon as you call it murder..
It's a legal medical procedure.. It's legal,, its not murder...

One is a legal medical procedure, the other is not..

The Nazis gassing Jews was a legal procedure. Slave owners raping and killing their slaves (chattel) were legal procedures. Stalin and Pol Pot and every other tyrant acted under the auspices of the law.

You anti's just can't stand to have a civil conversation about it.. All you are doing is enflaming folks.. Some things you should just keep to yourself..

This is one of the stupidest topics to have on a gun forum..

Nobody forced you to join the thread. Also, nobody started calling anyone names until you joined the thread. Physician, heal thyself.

 

[chipbennett]

At least you're honest in your assessment. If abortion is murder, then it only philosophically consistent to treat all those who participate in the act as murderers are currently viewed. I personally think you are in minority, as there would be a severe backlash against anyone who tried to punish abortive mothers and doctors.

The mothers deserve compassion, IMHO.

Any doctor who performs an abortion is a butcher, and if abortion were properly illegal, any such doctors should face murder charges.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

 

[17 squirrel]

The Nazis gassing Jews was a legal procedure. Slave owners raping and killing their slaves (chattel) were legal procedures. Stalin and Pol Pot and every other tyrant acted under the auspices of the law..

Who here did I call names ??????

It used to be illegal here, but then Roe v Wade corrected a huge wrong..
It's not murder, its legal... Don't like it, don't have one.. How easy is that....
Again it's not a topic that can be kept on a even keel..

I believe I'm allowed to enter and post my opinion just like any other member here..

 

[chipbennett]

Who here did I call names ??????

It used to be illegal here, but then Roe v Wade corrected a huge wrong..
It's not murder, its legal... Don't like it, don't have one.. How easy is that....

You are employing the argumentum ad dictionarim logical fallacy: appeal to the dictionary. Murder is the unjustified taking of a human life.

Just because it's authorized by statute doesn't mean that killing an innocent human being isn't murder. Did the Nazis murder Jews? Did slave owners murder their slaves? Did Stalin murder his own people? Did the legalization of their killing cause their killing not to constitute murder?

Again it's not a topic that can be kept on a even keel..

We've been doing just fine, until you jumped in and tried to inflame.

I believe I'm allowed to enter and post my opinion just like any other member here..

Indeed you are. But if you truly believe that a topic is "stupid" for a gun forum, and can't be discussed civilly: why would you choose to join in discussion of that topic?

 

[PaulF]

You are employing the argumentum ad dictionarim logical fallacy: appeal to the dictionary. Murder is the unjustified taking of a human life.

Just because it's authorized by statute doesn't mean that killing an innocent human being isn't murder. Did the Nazis murder Jews? Did slave owners murder their slaves? Did Stalin murder his own people? Did the legalization of their killing cause their killing not to constitute murder?

Chip, is an acorn an oak tree? Reductio ad absurdum much?

Here on INGO we are in almost universal agreement that we have the right to expel an intruder from our home...by force if necessary.

We decide to whom an invitation is extended, and we have the right to revoke that invitation.

Is the same not true for my own body?

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. Consent to pregnancy today is not consent to pregnancy tomorrow. Pregnancy is a risky, life-changing event...one that can end in death, and should not be taken lightly. A woman has the right to reassess her risks and change her mind. She has no obligation to be a slave to another person, even a foetus.

 

[17 squirrel]

You are employing the argumentum ad dictionarim logical fallacy: appeal to the dictionary. Murder is the unjustified taking of a human life.

Abortion is a legal medical procedure.. It's not murder..

Just because it's authorized by statute doesn't mean that killing an innocent human being isn't murder. Did the Nazis murder Jews? Did slave owners murder their slaves? Did Stalin murder his own people? Did the legalization of their killing cause their killing not to constitute murder?

That's just your opinion.. My opinion differs greatly..



We've been doing just fine, until you jumped in and tried to inflame.

Inflame you say,... I'm not the one calling females and doctors murderers and butchers. Thats high up on the list of inflaming folks that live within the law.



Indeed you are. But if you truly believe that a topic is "stupid" for a gun forum, and can't be discussed civilly: why would you choose to join in discussion of that topic?

Because I'm intitled to post my opinion also, it is a stupid topic to even try to discuss, murderers and butchers... Unbelievable....

 

[churchmouse]

As always this topic brings out the emotions in most everyone.
Every time I see one of these threads I know it will get a bit heated.

I would ask that everyone take a deep breath and consider what they are about to post.
People are starting to watch.

2nd time I have said this.

It will be the last time.

 

[oldpink]

You are employing the argumentum ad dictionarim logical fallacy: appeal to the dictionary. Murder is the unjustified taking of a human life.

Just because it's authorized by statute doesn't mean that killing an innocent human being isn't murder. Did the Nazis murder Jews? Did slave owners murder their slaves? Did Stalin murder his own people? Did the legalization of their killing cause their killing not to constitute murder?

We've been doing just fine, until you jumped in and tried to inflame.

Indeed you are. But if you truly believe that a topic is "stupid" for a gun forum, and can't be discussed civilly: why would you choose to join in discussion of that topic?

Often, the motivation to inflame is a deliberate effort to get threads locked that discuss controversial issues that make said "inflamers" uncomfortable.

 

[OkieGirl]

Often, the motivation to inflame is a deliberate effort to get threads locked that discuss controversial issues that make said "inflamers" uncomfortable.

QFT

 

[MontereyC6]

As always this topic brings out the emotions in most everyone.
Every time I see one of these threads I know it will get a bit heated.

I would ask that everyone take a deep breath and consider what they are about to post.
People are starting to watch.

2nd time I have said this.

It will be the last time.

+1

 

[chipbennett]

Because I'm intitled to post my opinion also, it is a stupid topic to even try to discuss, murderers and butchers... Unbelievable....

Your opinion, in which you disagree that the Holocaust constituted murder, is immoral and depraved.

 

[chipbennett]

Chip, is an acorn an oak tree? Reductio ad absurdum much?

Here on INGO we are in almost universal agreement that we have the right to expel an intruder from our home...by force if necessary.

We decide to whom an invitation is extended, and we have the right to revoke that invitation.

Is the same not true for my own body?

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. Consent to pregnancy today is not consent to pregnancy tomorrow. Pregnancy is a risky, life-changing event...one that can end in death, and should not be taken lightly. A woman has the right to reassess her risks and change her mind. She has no obligation to be a slave to another person, even a foetus.

Paul, my friend, you and I have gone around and around on this topic. I don't think either of us will change the other's mind.

 

[MisterChester]

As always this topic brings out the emotions in most everyone.
Every time I see one of these threads I know it will get a bit heated.

I would ask that everyone take a deep breath and consider what they are about to post.
People are starting to watch.

2nd time I have said this.

It will be the last time.

I was truly hoping for a civil discussion on the merits of the bill, but it's devolved into the abortion debate once again.

 

[chipbennett]

I was truly hoping for a civil discussion on the merits of the bill, but it's devolved into the abortion debate once again.

Ironically, both sides are likely more in agreement about this bill than about any other aspect of the underlying issue.

 

[MisterChester]

Ironically, both sides are likely more in agreement about this bill than about any other aspect of the underlying issue.

Ironically yes. I know better than to try to convince someone to change their opinion on abortion. However there is certainly enough to discuss about this bill and its implications and consequences. I really wanted to hear some opinions on it from here, considering the situation.