Let's amend the Constitution to ban abortion opponents!

[Mozart1220]

@John_Mace

@Mozart1220

You are spinning around and muddying the waters and missing the entire point, which is that if abortion (deliberate killing of a human being) is murder, then misscarriage (the accidental killing of a human being) MUST be AT LEAST “INVOULANTARY manslaughter”.

Now dance some more while avoiding the inevitable logic I have repeatedly provided.

Killing implies some sort of act, accidental or deliberate. A miscarriage is neither.

When a child dies of swine flu, we don’t investigate the killing. There is no “killing”. The police aren’t required to investigate to see if the parents deliberately infected the child with the flu viurs.

How do we know what the child dired of? Oh yeah… an autopsy, or in other words, an INVESTIGATION.

[Mozart1220]

@villa

@Bricker

Better than you do. I have no problem using the same standard we use for born persons: the police investigate if there is any reason to suspect foul play.

You would have the reader believe that storm troopers would pound on the door of every woman who suffers a miscarriage. Or, you say, if they didn’t that proves the position of pro-lifers is inconsistent.

But I’m telling you that the position is perfectly consistent: all deaths, born or unborn, should be investigated when there is reason to suspect foul play. If there is no reason, there is no investigation.

I don’t believe if abortion were criminalized all miscarriages would be subject to investigation. However, I don’t think the comparison with other deaths is necessarily valid. An 80 year old lying in bed dies, with no signs of foul play, then there will be no investigation - I think we all agree there.
***There would still be an autopsy, which is in fact, an INVESTIGATION. ***

But the situation with a fetus is fundamentally different. It is using a human being as a life support system - that in and of itself makes a greater likelihood of suspicion. Similarly, if the 80 year old were hooked up to someone as a human dialysis machine, and then died, I think the police would be more likely to look at that person suspiciously. Does it guarantee and investigation? No - but the dependent relationship of the fetus on the mother does create a different situation that impacts whether there is suspicion.

If abortion were to be classified as murder, an investigation would be required in all misscarriages to make sure it was not deliberate. If not, there would be a double standard

[villa]

@Mozart1220

If abortion were to be classified as murder, an investigation would be required in all misscarriages to make sure it was not deliberate. If not, there would be a double standard

But we don’t have investigations in all deaths, and there is no double standard there.

[John_Mace]

@Mozart1220

How do we know what the child dired of? Oh yeah… an autopsy, or in other words, an INVESTIGATION.

Please produce a cite that autopsies are required in every death, or at least every death of a child. Stop speculating, and produce some hard, factual evidence.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@Bricker

@Lynn_Bodoni

Most all of the pro-life people and organizations that I know about are for only abstinence-only sex ed, and quite a lot of them are firmly anti-contraceptive as well.

I’d be interested in knowing about some prominent pro-lifers and organizations who are for complete sex ed, and for more widely available birth control, as well.

Of course, you also know me. So undoubtedly you’ll be leavening your thoughts in the future along these lines, knowing as you do that I am pro-life, yet favor comprehensive birth control.

How’sabout:

"All pro-lifers are women-hating scum, whose ugly faces are as dumb as a butt.[sup]*[/sup] "

" [sup]*[/sup] Except Bricker"

[magellan01]

@Lynn_Bodoni

So if you (or pro-life people in general) were really serious about wanting to prevent as many abortions as possible, then you (and pro-life people in general) would be advocating COMPLETE sexual education in schools, as well as greater access to birth control for everyone, including teens under the age of consent, and greater emphasis on higher education goals for girls. All of these things have been proven to PREVENT more teen pregnancies than other methods, and to also prevent unwanted pregnancies in later life. Fewer unwanted pregnancies = fewer abortions. However, where I live, the pro-life people are precisely the ones who want to have abstinence-only sex ed, and who want to restrict or even outlaw just about every birth control method except for natural family planning. My conclusion is that they don’t want women to have sex except for procreation. And any woman or girl who DOES have sex “should have to face the consequences”, as they frequently say.

I’d just offer one caveat. There is an unknown in your assessment. While “COMPLETE sexual education in schools, as well as greater access to birth control for everyone, including teens under the age of consent” will, I think undoubtedly, eliminate some number of abortions, the policy might also increase the incidence of kids having sex, as they might construe it as more acceptable. So, while I am pro-choice and think sex education is of vital importance, I’ve wary of that particular part of your argument. The law of unintended consequences can show itself in very, very undesirable ways.

[Mozart1220]

@magellan01

@Lynn_Bodoni

So if you (or pro-life people in general) were really serious about wanting to prevent as many abortions as possible, then you (and pro-life people in general) would be advocating COMPLETE sexual education in schools, as well as greater access to birth control for everyone, including teens under the age of consent, and greater emphasis on higher education goals for girls. All of these things have been proven to PREVENT more teen pregnancies than other methods, and to also prevent unwanted pregnancies in later life. Fewer unwanted pregnancies = fewer abortions. However, where I live, the pro-life people are precisely the ones who want to have abstinence-only sex ed, and who want to restrict or even outlaw just about every birth control method except for natural family planning. My conclusion is that they don’t want women to have sex except for procreation. And any woman or girl who DOES have sex “should have to face the consequences”, as they frequently say.

I’d just offer one caveat. There is an unknown in your assessment. While “COMPLETE sexual education in schools, as well as greater access to birth control for everyone, including teens under the age of consent” will, I think undoubtedly, eliminate some number of abortions, the policy might also increase the incidence of kids having sex, as they might construe it as more acceptable.

***I don’t think that’s true. But it will definitly increase the the incidence of SAFE sex, which everyone should agree is more acceptable than the status quo. ***

So, while I am pro-choice and think sex education is of vital importance, I’ve wary of that particular part of your argument. The law of unintended consequences can show itself in very, very undesirable ways.

So if we must err, why not err on the side of SAFE sex and kids making an educated choice, as opposed to “just say no” which obviously does’t work any better in this case than it does in drug useage?

Always err on the side of what works I say.

[Mozart1220]

@John_Mace

@Mozart1220

How do we know what the child dired of? Oh yeah… an autopsy, or in other words, an INVESTIGATION.

Please produce a cite that autopsies are required in every death, or at least every death of a child. Stop speculating, and produce some hard, factual evidence.

Unless there is some special religious request, autopsies are the norm in all deaths. My grandmother died at the age of 96, and there was an autopsy, like they didn’t know what the cause was.

I have seen where a guy is shot and the back of his head is GONE, and guess what? An autopsy.

[Bricker]

@Mozart1220

@John_Mace

Please produce a cite that autopsies are required in every death, or at least every death of a child. Stop speculating, and produce some hard, factual evidence.

Unless there is some special religious request, autopsies are the norm in all deaths. My grandmother died at the age of 96, and there was an autopsy, like they didn’t know what the cause was.

I have seen where a guy is shot and the back of his head is GONE, and guess what? An autopsy.

That is not a cite.

[Mozart1220]

@Bricker

@Mozart1220

Unless there is some special religious request, autopsies are the norm in all deaths. My grandmother died at the age of 96, and there was an autopsy, like they didn’t know what the cause was.

I have seen where a guy is shot and the back of his head is GONE, and guess what? An autopsy.

That is not a cite.

But it was a nice deflection on your part. Maybe you haven’t heard of the JFK assasination. And that’s not even the one I knew of personally.

[Richard_Parker]

@Mozart1220

Maybe you haven’t heard of the JFK assasination.

If you’re coming up with examples of uncontroversial deaths, you could probably do better than JFK.

[Mozart1220]

@Richard_Parker

@Mozart1220

Maybe you haven’t heard of the JFK assasination.

If you’re coming up with examples of uncontroversial deaths, you could probably do better than JFK.

I was just saying, that it was pretty obvious WHAT the cause of death was (not WHO) and yet there was still an autopsy, flawed and obviously faked though it was.

Bricker is just trying to have it both ways.

[John_Mace]

This whole thing about autopsies is off-topic anyway. Autopsies are performed on dead bodies. The woman having a miscarriage is not a dead body.

The fact is, I would expect almost all women today to have their miscarriage “investigated”, as they probably want to know what went wrong and how the miscarriage affects their ability to get pregnant in the future.

I suppose there might be some law, if abortion were illegal, that would parallel what we have now when children are examined by a doctor. If the doctor finds evidence of parental abuse, are they required to report that to Child Protective Services or something like that? So, perhaps (and I emphasize perhaps) we might have doctors report “suspicious” miscarriages to some authority.

But this is all highly speculative, especially since most anti-abortion laws being proposed these days are not aimed at the woman getting an abortion, but at the abortion provider.

Mozart: Please tell us you’re not a JFK truther.

[Bricker]

@Mozart1220

Bricker is just trying to have it both ways.

:rolleyes:

Claim: Autopsies are required in every death

Not a cite: My grandmother died at the age of 96, and there was an autopsy, and also I have seen where a guy is shot and the back of his head is GONE, and he had an autopsy.

Dio you really not understand what a cite to support a claim is?

[Richard_Parker]

Fortunately, since medical examiners are apparently part of the Grand Conspiracy, the powers who choose to keep abortion legal now will just fake the autopsies after the pro-life revolution (which the Grand Conspiracy let happen for tax purposes, I guess).

@Bricker

Dio you really not understand what a cite to support a claim is?

Freudian slip?

[John_Mace]

@Richard_Parker

@Bricker

Dio you really not understand what a cite to support a claim is?

Freudian slip?

I noticed that, too.

[Bricker]

@John_Mace

@Richard_Parker

Freudian slip?

I noticed that, too.

I next to O on keyboard.

Freudian typo.

[Mozart1220]

@Bricker

@Mozart1220

Bricker is just trying to have it both ways.

:rolleyes:

Claim: Autopsies are required in every death

Not a cite: My grandmother died at the age of 96, and there was an autopsy, and also I have seen where a guy is shot and the back of his head is GONE, and he had an autopsy.

Dio you really not understand what a cite to support a claim is?

I do, but I don’t care.

I also understand that you are trying to have it both ways, and it just doesn’t work like that. In Utah, where they DO believe abortion of any kind is murder, they are already investigating misscarriages, and you can look that truth up for yourself.

I explained my logic, it is simple, sound, and I’m through trying to explain it to someone who just goes in circles trying to get his way.

[Boyo_Jim]

Whether you logic is sound or not, your facts are wrong. Autopsies are not required or performed on most deaths, aside from any religious issues.

Cite:

Whether or not people are autopsied depends on the circumstances surrounding their deaths, where they die, their next of kin, and, in some cases, their advance directives or insurance policies. For many reasons, pathologists in the United States now autopsy fewer than 12 percent of nonmedicolegal deaths. Less than 1 percent of those who die in nursing homes, for example, are autopsied.

[ElvisL1ves]

@John_Mace

This whole thing about autopsies is off-topic anyway. Autopsies are performed on dead bodies. The woman having a miscarriage is not a dead body.

Um, John? The dead body is the “unborn child”. The woman is both the suspected crime scene and the suspect, and therefore part of the investigation. Clear now?

The fact is, I would expect almost all women today to have their miscarriage “investigated”, as they probably want to know what went wrong and how the miscarriage affects their ability to get pregnant in the future.

Or, if necessary, to prove that it wasn’t actually an abortion.