Roe V Wade has been repealed

[SyphenFreht]

"Intrinsic value", and I was quoting @SyphenFreht . Thanks.


Look. You've already undone yourself with @smf's post and there is nothing that can undo that. All I can see from you, now, is flailing. Good chat though.

I mean, if you say so. Sounds to me like you're getting tired of being called out for being hollow and consistently disingenuous. But whatever helps you sleep at night. Just remember while you go back to cruising 4chan for chicks, the rest of us will uphold what ideals we can to ensure that women are treated as people, not whatever incubator/household equipment holders on your view typically see them as.

Any time you wanna be told of yourself, you know where to find me

Did you ask for a source. I must have missed that. Sorry.

Uh, no ma'am, you asked for a source.

Are you trying to troll at this point? I feel like you could've easily inferred what I was saying.

 

[Lacius]

I'd still see that as temporal and conditional. If you need a state or a federal government to represent you for you, then we aren't there yet. Banning abortion might be a wake up call. I don't know.

If you agree that bodily autonomy takes precedence over, say, pregnancy, then you agree that state bans on abortion are wrong. I don't know what you're babbling on about.

 

[tabzer]

I mean, if you say so. Sounds to me like you're getting tired of being called out for being hollow and consistently disingenuous. But whatever helps you sleep at night. Just remember while you go back to cruising 4chan for chicks, the rest of us will uphold what ideals we can to ensure that women are treated as people, not whatever incubator/household equipment holders on your view typically see them as.

Any time you wanna be told of yourself, you know where to find me

Yuck man. Between me and you, it was you who suggested that. I'm antagonistic, but I'm not imagining the things you are. Is it my fault that you think that for me?

 

[tabzer]

If you agree that bodily autonomy takes precedence over, say, pregnancy, then you agree that state bans on abortion are wrong. I don't know what you're babbling on about.

It doesn't always. It's the goal, but we aren't there yet.

 

[Lacius]

It doesn't always.

Yes, it always does.

 

[SyphenFreht]

Yuck man. Between me and you, it was you who suggested that. I'm antagonistic, but I'm not imagining the things you are. Is it my fault that you think that for me?

Lol, you're absolutely right I suggested that. It's more of that "implied inference on perspective" you mentioned earlier (I probably misquoted that. Just a little). I imply based on what I perceive, which is based on what you provide.

Care to have another 14 post, 3 page back and forth on that or you wanna get back to talking about abortions? The former is probably going to require another thread at this point

 

[tabzer]

Yes, it always does.

Is your opinion more powerful than state laws?

 

[Lacius]

Is your opinion more powerful than state laws?

My opinion is more correct than these state laws.

 

[tabzer]

"implied inference on perspective"

That was some dumb shit you originally said. I was quoting you. Lol.

I don't like talking about abortion. I like talking about pregnancy. I have an issue with people talking about pregnancy like it's a bad thing. Circumstances around pregnancy can be bad, I admit, but that's not pregnancy's fault.

 

[tabzer]

My opinion is more correct than these state laws.

I believe you and I want to believe in you. But I'm sad that I cannot.

 

[Lacius]

I don't like talking about abortion. I like talking about pregnancy.

Right-wing politicians are taking away abortion rights, not pregnancy rights.

I believe you and I want to believe in you. But I'm sad that I cannot.

A state that can take away a woman's bodily rights in the name of saving a life can take away your bodily rights in the name of saving a life. A state where only some citizens are free is a state where no citizen is free.

 

[The Catboy]

Why are non-women argue about abortion rights?

Because men hold their opinions above others and for some reason that’s respected.

 

[smf]

Why are non-women argue about abortion rights?

I feel my only input is to fight for women to have the opportunity to make the decision themselves.

"Intrinsic value", and I was quoting @SyphenFreht . Thanks.

This is what you said.
I haven't seen anybody agree with the idea that pregnancy is worthless.

So what intrinsic value do you think pregnancy has?

Intrinsic value is a measure of what an asset is worth. This measure is arrived at by means of an objective calculation or complex financial model, rather than using the currently trading market price of that asset.

By saying you haven't seen anybody agree, then you are inviting discussion.

 

[smf]

I tend to be very accurate.

No, you tend to be very arrogant.

 

[tabzer]

Right-wing politicians are taking away abortion rights, not pregnancy rights.

I responded to a claim about pregnancy.

A state that can take away a woman's bodily rights in the name of saving a life can take away your bodily rights in the name of saving a life. A state where only some citizens are free is a state where no citizen is free.

Absolutely. But what are "rights" if not a social construct? Facetious.

So what intrinsic value do you think pregnancy has?

You are right that the discussion is invited. But I didn't make the claim. If @SyphenFreht could answer first, then I'd be happy to chime in. I only brought it up because it was his claim.

No, you tend to be very arrogant.

Though not mutually exclusive the claim that I am being arrogant has yet to be substantiated.

 

[smf]

Though not mutually exclusive the claim that I am being arrogant has yet to be substantiated.

Let's have a vote shall we?

You are right that the discussion is invited. But I didn't make the claim.

You didn't make what claim? You said you had not seen anyone make that argument, that is the only claim in that post.

As you obviously disagree with the argument, then you must have a way of determining the intrinsic value.

 

[Lacius]

Absolutely. But what are "rights" if not a social construct? Facetious.

Assuming we are talking about the same thing when we say "morality," morality isn't subjective. It is objectively immoral to take away a person's bodily autonomy.

 

[smf]

Assuming we are talking about the same thing when we say "morality," morality isn't subjective. It is objectively immoral to take away a person's bodily autonomy.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/115/Is_Morality_Objective

 

[tabzer]

Assuming we are talking about the same thing when we say "morality," morality isn't subjective. It is objectively immoral to take away a person's bodily autonomy.

If we assume the same thing, about anything, subjectivity thrown out. So, of course? You are going to be disappointed with my response, but a person only has the bodily autonomy that they can enforce. The state is a problem. The government is a problem. I won't be satisfied until we, as people aren't interested in governing over each other. I'll probably die before that. For the meantime, I'll live for it though.

Let's have a vote shall we?

I'll accept the results, but it probably won't change how I act.

You didn't make what claim? You said you had not seen anyone make that argument, that is the only claim in that post.

I didn't originally pen the claim that everything has intrinsic value. You see the contradiction between suggesting that and suggesting that pregnancy has no value, right?

 

[KennyAtom]

while this is sad, if you really need an abortion, what's stopping you from going to a state that allows it?