mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Dec 19, 2014 14:43:40 GMT -5
Let's get back to the topic at hand as outlined in the OP, please. We've wandered off into the hinterlands and beyond, there be dragons! mmhmm, Administrator who quotes old maps
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 14:03:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2014 14:57:53 GMT -5
Let's get back to the topic at hand as outlined in the OP, please. We've wandered off into the hinterlands and beyond, there be dragons! mmhmm, Administrator who quotes old maps Glad I don't have to wear your shoes when the abortion issue rears it's ugly/hot head.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Dec 19, 2014 16:07:35 GMT -5
But the discussion was about the legislation, NOT the morality behind it. Virgil made it very clear when he unlocked the thread, yet he continues to post about the morality of it. I'm posting about the benefits of not engaging in extramarital sex. What does that have to do with the morality of abortion? I think the bigger question is why do you think extramarital sex & abortion go hand in hand? There are dozens of reasons a woman might choose to have an abortion that go beyond "I'm not married to the father". I think the fact you think they are so strongly linked shows a misunderstanding of why women often have abortions.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,722
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Dec 19, 2014 17:53:35 GMT -5
I had no idea about my husbands thoughts on abortion ( but this was long ago) but if I had wanted an abortion I would have had an abortion. But then again I am one who knows how to keep my mouth shut and wouldn't be looking for any imput from anyone on the face of the earth - my choice my decision. And if he asks where you were all afternoon, you tell him you went shopping. Sounds like a plan. First apt in the morning during the week. Think about that the next day you head out for the office
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 19, 2014 18:50:56 GMT -5
I'm posting about the benefits of not engaging in extramarital sex. What does that have to do with the morality of abortion? I think the bigger question is why do you think extramarital sex & abortion go hand in hand? There are dozens of reasons a woman might choose to have an abortion that go beyond "I'm not married to the father". I think the fact you think they are so strongly linked shows a misunderstanding of why women often have abortions. I simply pointed out that if a man marries a woman who shares his values and doesn't have sex outside this marital relationship, he doesn't have to deal with any of the issues raised in this thread. No paternity issues or paternity tests, no battles over the fate of his offspring, no worries about potential battles over the fate of his offspring. I wasn't even the first one to suggest the idea. Wisconsin Beth and txsbbtc did. Why are we even discussing the "morality" of abortion? Isn't that off limits? Why is it that it's a MOD who keeps bringing it back to that? We aren't discussing the morality of abortion, steff. As long as people stay away from the "I'm right and you're a murderer!" and "You're wrong and you can't tell me what's moral or immoral!" stances, we're fine. Precisely. Quite the opposite. I'd very much appreciate your assessment of why we can't reasonably divorce the two concepts. Not a word of sarcasm. if you are claiming that extramarital sex is not a moral issue, then let's just say i am baffled by that assertion. Certainly it's a moral issue, but it doesn't pertain to abortion. As I point out above, conforming one's lifestyle to some basic guidelines is the simplest way to avoid moral conflicts over abortion. This thread and everything in it are some other man's problems to deal with.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,144
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 19, 2014 19:24:41 GMT -5
I think the bigger question is why do you think extramarital sex & abortion go hand in hand? There are dozens of reasons a woman might choose to have an abortion that go beyond "I'm not married to the father". I think the fact you think they are so strongly linked shows a misunderstanding of why women often have abortions. I simply pointed out that if a man marries a woman who shares his values and doesn't have sex outside this marital relationship, he doesn't have to deal with any of the issues raised in this thread. No paternity issues or paternity tests, no battles over the fate of his offspring, no worries about potential battles over the fate of his offspring. I wasn't even the first one to suggest the idea. Wisconsin Beth and txsbbtc did. We aren't discussing the morality of abortion, steff. As long as people stay away from the "I'm right and you're a murderer!" and "You're wrong and you can't tell me what's moral or immoral!" stances, we're fine. Precisely. if you are claiming that extramarital sex is not a moral issue, then let's just say i am baffled by that assertion. Certainly it's a moral issue, but it doesn't pertain to abortion. As I point out above, conforming one's lifestyle to some basic guidelines is the simplest way to avoid moral conflicts over abortion. This thread and everything in it are some other man's problems to deal with. then why did you bring it up? you know what, never mind. i don't give a crap. shabbat shalom.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 14:03:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2014 19:46:01 GMT -5
You know what scares me the most about this proposed law?
Courtesy of the recent State Constitutional Amendment that passed in Tennessee (we had a thread about it, backe at election time)... A law of this nature, if passed here, could NOT be overturned on Constitutional grounds. Because there is now ZERO protection against a governmental over-reach when it comes to abortion in Tennessee.
Things like THIS were exactly what I feared... even though I didn't specifically know it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 14:03:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2014 20:12:23 GMT -5
I think the bigger question is why do you think extramarital sex & abortion go hand in hand? There are dozens of reasons a woman might choose to have an abortion that go beyond "I'm not married to the father". I think the fact you think they are so strongly linked shows a misunderstanding of why women often have abortions. I simply pointed out that if a man marries a woman who shares his values and doesn't have sex outside this marital relationship, he doesn't have to deal with any of the issues raised in this thread. No paternity issues or paternity tests, no battles over the fate of his offspring, no worries about potential battles over the fate of his offspring. I wasn't even the first one to suggest the idea. Wisconsin Beth and txsbbtc did. We aren't discussing the morality of abortion, steff. As long as people stay away from the "I'm right and you're a murderer!" and "You're wrong and you can't tell me what's moral or immoral!" stances, we're fine. Precisely. if you are claiming that extramarital sex is not a moral issue, then let's just say i am baffled by that assertion. Certainly it's a moral issue, but it doesn't pertain to abortion. As I point out above, conforming one's lifestyle to some basic guidelines is the simplest way to avoid moral conflicts over abortion. This thread and everything in it are some other man's problems to deal with. Please refrain from misrepresenting my post. I said nothing about extramarital sex or morality.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Dec 19, 2014 21:19:43 GMT -5
I think the bigger question is why do you think extramarital sex & abortion go hand in hand? There are dozens of reasons a woman might choose to have an abortion that go beyond "I'm not married to the father". I think the fact you think they are so strongly linked shows a misunderstanding of why women often have abortions. I simply pointed out that if a man marries a woman who shares his values and doesn't have sex outside this marital relationship, he doesn't have to deal with any of the issues raised in this thread. No paternity issues or paternity tests, no battles over the fate of his offspring, no worries about potential battles over the fate of his offspring. I wasn't even the first one to suggest the idea. Wisconsin Beth and txsbbtc did. We aren't discussing the morality of abortion, steff. As long as people stay away from the "I'm right and you're a murderer!" and "You're wrong and you can't tell me what's moral or immoral!" stances, we're fine. Precisely. if you are claiming that extramarital sex is not a moral issue, then let's just say i am baffled by that assertion. Certainly it's a moral issue, but it doesn't pertain to abortion. As I point out above, conforming one's lifestyle to some basic guidelines is the simplest way to avoid moral conflicts over abortion. This thread and everything in it are some other man's problems to deal with. So really this has zero to do with extramarital sex. Being married doesn't mean you share values and not being married to your partner doesn't mean you don't share values. I would also point out that there is a massive grey area with abortion so there is a good chance you don't 100% agree on every situation that might arise even if you know your partner well. Even among pro-lifers there is a disagreement as to whether the morning after pill or even bc pills are acceptable. And then there are more complex issues like mother's life at stake or baby with health problems. And a baby with problems has different degrees too...downs syndrome, various physical deformities (which also have different degrees), not going to live past 20, not going to live past 2, not likely to live more than a few days if they live to birth. I know plenty of married couples that didn't agree on these issues even they had an otherwise strong marriage. Luckily none I knew had to make these difficult decisions. But even a good marriage doesn't mean you agree on everything when there is so much grey area. You should be advocating knowing your partner, which is not dependent on marriage.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Dec 19, 2014 21:39:12 GMT -5
You know what scares me the most about this proposed law? Courtesy of the recent State Constitutional Amendment that passed in Tennessee (we had a thread about it, backe at election time)... A law of this nature, if passed here, could NOT be overturned on Constitutional grounds. Because there is now ZERO protection against a governmental over-reach when it comes to abortion in Tennessee. Things like THIS were exactly what I feared... even though I didn't specifically know it. It could be on federal grounds, and if they didn't do it a federal court could.
The way I see it there is no legal basis for the law regardless of what a state says- the law might as well require 3 personal references and a credit check.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 14:03:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2014 21:52:50 GMT -5
I doubt if a federal court could overturn this one. I could be wrong... but I doubt it.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Dec 19, 2014 22:47:16 GMT -5
I doubt if a federal court could overturn this one. I could be wrong... but I doubt it. They could easily do it- in fact it is precedent in the SCOTUS they would have to rule it Unconstitutional.
But that's not the point- the point is to gum up the works in the mean time and hope they can get another shot at overturning Roe V. Wade
www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/428/52
4. The spousal consent provision in § 3(3), which does not comport with the standards enunciated in Roe v. Wade, supra, at 164-165, is unconstitutional, since the State cannot "delegate to a spouse a veto power which the state itself is absolutely and totally prohibited from exercising during the first trimester of pregnancy."
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Dec 19, 2014 22:51:35 GMT -5
My bad- I didn't know this had been tried before- but since when does that stop legislators from incurring expenses from taxpayers to defend crap like this.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 14:03:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2014 23:09:12 GMT -5
I doubt if a federal court could overturn this one. I could be wrong... but I doubt it. They could easily do it- in fact it is precedent in the SCOTUS they would have to rule it Unconstitutional.
But that's not the point- the point is to gum up the works in the mean time and hope they can get another shot at overturning Roe V. Wade
www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/428/52
4. The spousal consent provision in § 3(3), which does not comport with the standards enunciated in Roe v. Wade, supra, at 164-165, is unconstitutional, since the State cannot "delegate to a spouse a veto power which the state itself is absolutely and totally prohibited from exercising during the first trimester of pregnancy."
My bad- I didn't know this had been tried before- but since when does that stop legislators from incurring expenses from taxpayers to defend crap like this. This wouldn't necessarily BE "spousal consent" though. It's "consent by the provider of half of the DNA". Different standard... and I could see this one losing a bid to have it called unconstitutional. ETA: not that I am saying I would agree with this one losing that bid... I'm just pointing out that I can see how it could happen
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Dec 19, 2014 23:27:50 GMT -5
I know- it is even less than spousal consent. I was not aware it was tried before- and this case was out of the 70's. I would be a hell of a lot more tempted to give a husband a say so- even though I am not taking the position that he should.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 14:03:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2014 4:58:41 GMT -5
I know- it is even less than spousal consent. I was not aware it was tried before- and this case was out of the 70's. I would be a hell of a lot more tempted to give a husband a say so- even though I am not taking the position that he should. I disagree that it's "less than spousal consent". A spouse (just by virtue of being a spouse) does NOT have a vested interest in the pregnancy itself. A donor of half the DNA however, has a "donor interest" in the pregnancy.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Dec 20, 2014 12:17:41 GMT -5
No kidding. DF and I totally disagree on abortion and even who should pay for it. Other than that, we're pretty much on board with everything else.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Dec 20, 2014 12:19:15 GMT -5
But I'm unlikely to need one at my age.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,144
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 20, 2014 13:33:22 GMT -5
i have never been of the opinion that a man's consent should be REQUIRED. i think it would be good for a woman to INFORM her man of her decision, and give him the opportunity to object- but i think it is her decision to make. she will have to carry the symbiont for 9 months, and she will largely be responsible for it's early care- so she should decide.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,483
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 20, 2014 13:40:18 GMT -5
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on Dec 20, 2014 13:50:56 GMT -5
i have never been of the opinion that a man's consent should be REQUIRED. i think it would be good for a woman to INFORM her man of her decision, and give him the opportunity to object- but i think it is her decision to make. she will have to carry the symbiont for 9 months, and she will largely be responsible for it's early care- so she should decide. Au contraire my friend. I made it very clear to DH that I took care of the "symbiont" for first 9 months, and he got to take primary care of her for the next 19 years. We both considered it a fair trade especially considering my pregnancy.
I'm making light of this, but statements like this really do rub me the wrong way and without intending offense, DJ I really expected a more enlightened view from you.
Either biology defines us or it doesn't. I for one refuse to allow other people to set my role in life based on my gender. Damn good thing DH is on the same page with me.
(Not that he really would have been able to argue with me if he wasn't...)
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,144
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 20, 2014 13:56:46 GMT -5
i have never been of the opinion that a man's consent should be REQUIRED. i think it would be good for a woman to INFORM her man of her decision, and give him the opportunity to object- but i think it is her decision to make. she will have to carry the symbiont for 9 months, and she will largely be responsible for it's early care- so she should decide. Au contraire my friend. I made it very clear to DH that I took care of the "symbiont" for first 9 months, and he got to take primary care of her for the next 19 years. We both considered it a fair trade especially considering my pregnancy.
I'm making light of this, but statements like this really do rub me the wrong way and without intending offense, DJ I really expected a more enlightened view from you.
Either biology defines us or it doesn't. I for one refuse to allow other people to set my role in life based on my gender. Damn good thing DH is on the same page with me.
(Not that he really would have been able to argue with me if he wasn't...)
cap- i am not sure you are aware of this- but i don't have breasts. i really don't know how kids are raised these days, but ours was breast fed. if that makes us a couple of knuckle draggers from your perspective, i can live with that. you can draw your own conclusions, but i don't think you had any reason to get offended. edit: for the record, i did more diaper duty than she did, and about half of the night time walkdown. i am not looking for bonus points here, just putting my comment in proper perspective. our son would NOT bottle feed, even breast pumped milk.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Dec 20, 2014 14:29:37 GMT -5
We're not talking about Biblical standards here, Virgil Showlion. That's been made abundantly clear several times. I really don't want to lock this thread due to the inability of some to make a distinction between the law and morality/Biblical standard, but I will if I must. I'm going to create a thread in Religious Discussion and put b2r's post, any that refer to it, and your last post into it. You may discuss the morality issue there. mmhmm, Administrator
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Dec 20, 2014 14:29:42 GMT -5
i have never been of the opinion that a man's consent should be REQUIRED. i think it would be good for a woman to INFORM her man of her decision, and give him the opportunity to object- but i think it is her decision to make. she will have to carry the symbiont for 9 months, and she will largely be responsible for it's early care- so she should decide. Au contraire my friend. I made it very clear to DH that I took care of the "symbiont" for first 9 months, and he got to take primary care of her for the next 19 years. We both considered it a fair trade especially considering my pregnancy.
I'm making light of this, but statements like this really do rub me the wrong way and without intending offense, DJ I really expected a more enlightened view from you.
Either biology defines us or it doesn't. I for one refuse to allow other people to set my role in life based on my gender. Damn good thing DH is on the same page with me.
(Not that he really would have been able to argue with me if he wasn't...)
But we aren't talking about a specific person or situation. Statistically speaking women are still more likely to be primary caretakers especially early on. And men are far more likely to be the ones to disappear into the night.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,144
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 20, 2014 14:31:24 GMT -5
Au contraire my friend. I made it very clear to DH that I took care of the "symbiont" for first 9 months, and he got to take primary care of her for the next 19 years. We both considered it a fair trade especially considering my pregnancy.
I'm making light of this, but statements like this really do rub me the wrong way and without intending offense, DJ I really expected a more enlightened view from you.
Either biology defines us or it doesn't. I for one refuse to allow other people to set my role in life based on my gender. Damn good thing DH is on the same page with me.
(Not that he really would have been able to argue with me if he wasn't...)
But we aren't talking about a specific person or situation. Statistically speaking women are still more likely to be primary caretakers especially early on. And men are far more likely to be the ones to disappear into the night. thanks, Angel. i was actually trying to give proper credit to women, here- not come off like some Neanderthal. but whatever.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 20, 2014 14:35:50 GMT -5
We're not talking about Biblical standards here, Virgil Showlion. That's been made abundantly clear several times. I really don't want to lock this thread due to the inability of some to make a distinction between the law and morality/Biblical standard, but I will if I must. I'm going to create a thread in Religious Discussion and put b2r's post, any that refer to it, and your last post into it. You may discuss the morality issue there. mmhmm, Administrator Hence to be clear: you're extending the ban on moral arguments to cover moral arguments on marriage as well as arguments concerning abortion? Or are you banning all moral and ethical arguments entirely?
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Dec 20, 2014 14:36:59 GMT -5
Is it in a thread about Abortion and legality of same, Virgil? I do believe it is. You may discuss it here.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 20, 2014 14:43:26 GMT -5
I have no idea what we can discuss here. The rules change by the hour. But we'll resolve this in private.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,483
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 20, 2014 14:49:55 GMT -5
I have no idea what we can discuss here. The rules change by the hour. But we'll resolve this in private. Please let the rest of us know once it has been resolved in private.
|
|