Please address this Hector_St_Clare
Just what in the fuck makes you think your morality supersedes everyone else’s?
No, you’ve refocused the question.
Deaths due to car accidents are common, in a sense – but how common is it that you, personally, talked to someone who went on to die that day in a car accident?
Because Jesus?
That’s an excellent question.
I’d say that since we don’t agree on a system of morality, we should be bound by the law. You don’t agree with me; I don’t agree with you. We have a framework that allows us to promulgate law that binds both of us.
For my part, I didn’t say I wanted to ban this form of protest. And I do not. I just consider it to have multiple negative outcomes and no real positive ones, aside, presumably, from making those who protest feel like they’ve accomplished something.
A trait that tends to apply with a lot of protests, really.
No, you’re refocusing, horribly. A better question would be how many corpses from car accidents has a mortician seen today. We aren’t talking about how often I, personally, engage with raped women who wants an abortion. We’re talking about how often abortion protestors at abortion clinics engage with raped women who want abortions.
Why would we need to prevent neo-Nazi groups from standing in front of synagogues and yelling anti-Semitic taunts at anyone entering or leaving?
I don’t claim to have a clear-cut answer to that. I do claim that basic precepts of civilized society call for intervention when such harassment becomes sufficiently egregious that the basic rights of law-abiding citizens are clearly being violated.
That’s good to know. What you need to know is that the law is more important than your opinion.
Let’s take that bizarre concept of jurisprudence and run with it. Maybe abortion clinic protestors should have to pass through a minimum of three police lines before they’re allowed near the clinic, at least one of which involves a complete strip search. And then they should be yelled at. Hey, we can’t stop free speech, but that doesn’t mean it should be easy! :rolleyes:
If some mothers end up not having abortions, that’s a positive outcome.
How do you convince people what the law should be?
Shouldn’t women have complete domain over their own bodies like men do?
I think of a woman’s ovaries as a sovereign country. Make whatever laws you want to after that baby is born. But until then, that unborn baby is NOT a citizen of the United States. It belongs to the sovereign domain of the mother and is outside of the reach of any United States law.
This also makes that whole argument of “When does life begin?” irrelevant.
Not if more don’t. Are you now, by the way, claiming that you think clinic protests are effective? Or is this a hypothetical?
This doesn’t strike me as a particularly good argument, given that there are no circumstances under which a man would have a being the qualities of which that pro-lifers tend to value inside them.
And I’d tend to suspect that, if somehow men could get pregnant, Bricker’s views would be entirely the same as they were for women. I’ve seen no reason to think that his views differ on men and women because they are men and women and not because of an indirect specific.
Will the SCOTUS now remove the buffer zone from around their own building?
So you agree that it’s wrong to harass women for trying to enter certain buildings, and it’s a good and positive thing to do to provide support for women to enter certain buildings if someone is trying to harass/verbally obstruct them?
LOL. if men could get pregnant, do you really think the subject of abortion would even be a debate?
I met the guy who wrote that song. He’s pro-choice.
How many women (including rape victims and other women who do not want elective abortions) are you comfortable with having been harassed in order to convince one woman to not have an abortion?
Would you harass a hundred women, ten of whom were rape victims, and 50 of whom were not in for abortions at all, in order to convince one to not have an abortion?
Personally, I doubt it very much, at least to the same extent.
No, I don’t agree that should be the law.
Why are anti-trespassing laws not good enough to keep unwanted people off of the property of these clinics?