long winded fool

Why is the analogy ridiculous?

dk

You have a point, there may be < 1,000 blue chip abortion doctors in the US, and in 1860 perhaps < 1,000 large slave holders in the Confederacy. But, then again, it wasn’t only slavers that died in the Civil War.

Yesterday, like today, good people tend to frown upon acts of institutional slavery and cold blooded murder precisely because they commit themselves to the proposition that all people are created equal. What woke me up to the truth about abortion, is that so many people have no commitment to life at all. very, very sad .

JGL53

Yes, it's all very sad, isn't it? The saddest part is that millions upon millions upon millions of women worldwide year after year after year have abortions. And even if you two geniuses could get your anti- legal abortion message to any small portion of them, the bitches just wouldn't pay you the slightest bit of attention. Sad, so sad. Life is so sad for morally superior moral reformers, I would imagine. How do you get up in the morning and face the horror that is human existence. My hat is off to you. Sad, so sad.

yguy

So is there anything in this deluge of sanctimonious, pseudo-compassionate drivel that adresses the topic at hand?

JGL53

I was trying for satire. Sorry for the misunderstanding,

The POINT here is that all this boils down to a trivial discussion.
Anti- legal abortionists are like flat earthers; they could be right -
if there's a god who gives a shit, of course - but what's the connection
to reality here? Idealists like Objectavists, Marxists, and various
literalist religionists affect the same morally superior attitude, and
no one cares. I mean, really.

But rattle on if it makes you happy. Get it ALL off your chest. Entertain me.

yguy

To be effective, satire needs an element of truth. Better luck next time.

What connection to reality did abolitionists have in the 1800's?

dk

Don't you find it a little ironic that women assigned by nature to deliver life into the world, must COMMIT THEIR sisters and daughters to destroy life to become the equal of men under Human Law. That sounds like man's law to me.

JGL53

Millions of women have abortions worldwide each year, year after year. None of them give a healthy shit what YOU think about it. THAT'S an 'element of truth' in it's rawest form.

As to your second question, abortionists in the 1800s were providing a requested and needed service. It was illegal at the time, but so what? I'm not arguing that just because something is legal it must be morally right, or if something is illegal it must be morally wrong. I hold to a libertarian morality, e.g., I believe possession of any drug for personal use by an adult should be legal, e.g., I believe smoking should be illegal in all public enclosed areas.

To be effective, irony needs an element of truth. Better luck next time.

Man's law, so-called, is anti-abortion, at least in the western democracies. 'Women's law' theoretically would be freedom of choice. In any case, I don't believe 'nature' has 'assigned' women to give birth, regardless of said women's opinion on the matter.

long winded fool

Slaves in the 1800's were providing a requested and needed service, and it was legal, at first. Morally right or wrong is irrelevant. Legal abortion is as irrational as legal slavery if the goal is the improvement of society with equal and inalienable human rights. The raw truth is that abortion is irrational, detrimental to society, and legal. The pro-lifers here have logically proven the first two. The pro-choicers have logically proven the last. I accept all three conclusions as truth, until they are shown otherwise.

Man's law and women's law ought to be the same if human rights are indeed equal and not subject to sex discrimination. If women have the right to choose what to do with their fetuses, men ought to as well. Yet, Scott Peterson is being charged with a double murder for killing his pregnant wife and his unborn child instead of being charged with killing his wife only. Subjective morality aside, this is not just because this is not equal rights. If Laci had had an abortion and then killed her husband, she'd face one count of murder. The "freedom of choice" in this case is obviously a freedom that men do not share with women.

yguy

I don't guess slave owners gave a flying puck about what abolitionists thought either.

Looking past this cowardly bit of evasion, I think it is abundantly clear that you don't give a damn whether abortion is murder or not.