|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 11, 2024 21:37:47 GMT
Under California law, anyone in California who is pregnant has a legal right to choose to have an abortion before viability.More or less the same as UK then. You can also have an abortion in California at any time t o protect your life or health. Not because you 'hate the innocent' then. While Californian providers may refuse to give you abortion services based on their personal beliefs (presumably which includes wanting to " just harm the innocent"), they do not have the legal right to impose their beliefs on you or prevent you from getting an abortion. So as a hater of the innocent with that as your only expressed reason for termination, you may have to shop about some then. Most private insurance plans in California cover abortion. Under California law, abortion care is basic health care. This means many plans are required to cover abortion care. So you need insurance. Facts from abortion.ca.gov/your-rights/your-legal-right-to-an-abortion/index.htmlThat's all I will say. Except that Novastar's hyperbolic, off-the-top-of-his/her-head remark garnered no substantiation from him/her at all. And while people can say the cruellest and inhumane things that doesn't mean they will.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 11, 2024 21:53:19 GMT
Under California law, anyone in California who is pregnant has a legal right to choose to have an abortion before viability.More or less the same as UK then. You can also have an abortion in California at any time t o protect your life or health. Not because you 'hate the innocent' then. While Californian providers may refuse to give you abortion services based on their personal beliefs (presumably which includes wanting to " just harm the innocent"), they do not have the legal right to impose their beliefs on you or prevent you from getting an abortion. So as a hater of the innocent with that as your only expressed reason for termination, you may have to shop about some then. Most private insurance plans in California cover abortion. Under California law, abortion care is basic health care. This means many plans are required to cover abortion care. So you need insurance. Facts from abortion.ca.gov/your-rights/your-legal-right-to-an-abortion/index.htmlThat's all I will say. Except that Novastar's hyperbolic, off-the-top-of-his/her-head remark garnered no substantiation from him/her at all. And while people can say the cruellest and inhumane things that doesn't mean they will. You said, "It is reasonable to assume that any legislation which allows abortion would necessarily specify for what reasons it is legal, and hatred of the unborn would probably not be included." You were wrong. I'm sure there are people in the UK who have been denied abortions despite them being legal and affordable, but not in Cailfornia.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 11, 2024 21:58:59 GMT
You work in mysterious ways. Thank you for detailed rebuttal. Thank you for burying the point under a pile of convoluted logic. Trying to untie your knots only makes you tie more. By definition, anything you don't know is a mystery. Now, without speculation, tell the class why I parked my car on the grass today or admit that I work in mysterious ways.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 11, 2024 22:01:39 GMT
Under California law, anyone in California who is pregnant has a legal right to choose to have an abortion before viability.More or less the same as UK then. You can also have an abortion in California at any time t o protect your life or health. Not because you 'hate the innocent' then. While Californian providers may refuse to give you abortion services based on their personal beliefs (presumably which includes wanting to " just harm the innocent"), they do not have the legal right to impose their beliefs on you or prevent you from getting an abortion. So as a hater of the innocent with that as your only expressed reason for termination, you may have to shop about some then. Most private insurance plans in California cover abortion. Under California law, abortion care is basic health care. This means many plans are required to cover abortion care. So you need insurance. Facts from abortion.ca.gov/your-rights/your-legal-right-to-an-abortion/index.htmlThat's all I will say. Except that Novastar's hyperbolic, off-the-top-of-his/her-head remark garnered no substantiation from him/her at all. And while people can say the cruellest and inhumane things that doesn't mean they will. You said, "It is reasonable to assume that any legislation which allows abortion would necessarily specify for what reasons it is legal, and hatred of the unborn would probably not be included." You were wrong. I'm sure there are people in the UK who have been denied abortions despite them being legal and affordable, but not in Cailfornia. See above and the legal restrictions to be found in CA. And, as also suggested above, it is funny how Novastar's poorly substantiated remark has exercised you so much. Thank you for playing.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 11, 2024 22:16:56 GMT
You said, "It is reasonable to assume that any legislation which allows abortion would necessarily specify for what reasons it is legal, and hatred of the unborn would probably not be included." You were wrong. I'm sure there are people in the UK who have been denied abortions despite them being legal and affordable, but not in Cailfornia. See above and the legal restrictions to be found in CA. I see that. Do you see the part that says you can have an abortion in California without having to provide a reason?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 11, 2024 22:23:12 GMT
Interesting question. The issue of supporting the choice to give birth despite a complete inability to care for it does seem problematic for the pro-choice crowd. Is it? I would absolutely support her choice in that case. Given that you would also support an abortion because of a complete inability to care for it, it certainly seems like it.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 11, 2024 22:38:00 GMT
By definition, anything you don't know is a mystery. Now, without speculation, tell the class why I parked my car on the grass today or admit that I work in mysterious ways' As already mentioned, comparing humans to a deity is strictly speaking a category error. Since you insist though, the real comparison would be if it was always insisted that you were a Perfect Driver, in fact the best ever, who moreover condemns reckless driving outright and has even framed the Highway Code. And yet when parking on the grass you now deliberately killed several people and have even told others to do the same. "He drives in mysterious ways" does not shut down the quite reasonable moral condemnation, even if your supporters and apologist might think it is convenient to end matters. Or it could be that, more, they insist that just because you are that Perfect Driver, even if you kill people, that is still perfect driving as you are the Perfect Driver and cannot be otherwise. But to the objective contemplator of the tragedy, it is not that you drive in mysterious ways. It is that your ways cannot be reconciled with your views on road safety. You seem to be criticising speculation as a legitimate way to proceed when things are unknown, for reasons which only you can explain. It is in fact a common procedure in many areas of knowledge. I have said that speculation can be wrong, which is true. But sometimes speculation can be well grounded, natural and sensible and results in a deduction reasonable to objective people. (As in the legal "beyond a reasonable doubt"). One also notes that despite this claim when reading scripture the followers of the purported Almighty still know God's motives and ways when it suits them! The problem is when "god works in mysterious ways", (which we saw you yourself was reluctant to fall back on a while back, I suggest as you knew how weak it sounds) is used as special pleading, sufficient it is hoped to rule out speculation or further questions. Still the point. I hope that helps.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 11, 2024 22:49:34 GMT
See above and the legal restrictions to be found in CA. I see that. Do you see the part that says you can have an abortion in California without having to provide a reason? But there is a difference between not giving a reason, and giving one - like "I just hate the innocent", which all this is about. Did you see the bit where Californian providers may refuse to give you abortion services based on their personal beliefs? I am not saying that one cannot give stupid or sickening reasons for an abortion although in the UK and probably other places it won't wash. But that they can is really irrelevant. The point is, still, that Novastar was unable to provide any case of abortions being requested in the inhumane way he asserted in his offhand way, when he was suggesting that was the case. Now if you have finished quibbling, I have better things to do.
|
|
jimmyboy
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@jimmyboy
Posts: 185
Likes: 70
|
Post by jimmyboy on Jan 11, 2024 23:06:07 GMT
Here's a thought, what if the 13 year old who got raped and pregnant WANTS her baby? Do you support her CHOICE?I would think the parents would have input and would be making that decision. This sounds like the Madonna song "Papa don't preach". On your second point, some religions like the Catholics don't allow the pill. On second thought, what is it with you and victim blaming? I can see you telling a child that it's their fault for getting raped. Not surprising. I won't comment on your other points as they are too of topic, as usual.
So parents get to take away their daughter's CHOICE because they don't agree with her decision? Funny, if the same 13 year old decided she wanted her breasts cut off and to take testosterone because she's really a boy, those parents would be put in jail if they didn't let her do it.
Gees, when I was 13, my parents allowed me to make some decisions of a reasonable nature, like which afterschool sport I wanted to play. I did have to play one, as my parents dictated. The emphasis is on reasonable. Things of more serious nature they may have asked my input, but the final decision was theirs. As for getting a sex change, could you provide a source for what you said as I firmly believe you fabricated that example.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 11, 2024 23:09:13 GMT
As for getting a sex change, could you provide a source for what you said as I firmly believe you fabricated that example. He won't, he never does.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,679
Likes: 1,305
|
Post by The Lost One on Jan 11, 2024 23:14:22 GMT
Is it? I would absolutely support her choice in that case. Given that you would also support an abortion because of a complete inability to care for it, it certainly seems like it. I support the woman's right to choose. If she wants to carry the baby to term that's equally valid to her not wanting to. I think the state should also provide enough support to young mothers to dissuade women having an abortion out of desperation. Countries like Denmark despite having a strong pro-choice culture have low abortion rates because they offer a good support network to young mothers. Compare that to the US which despite a lot of condemnation of abortion has quite a high abortion rate because there's little support for young mothers.
|
|
jimmyboy
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@jimmyboy
Posts: 185
Likes: 70
|
Post by jimmyboy on Jan 11, 2024 23:15:49 GMT
Here's a thought, what if the 13 year old who got raped and pregnant WANTS her baby? Do you support her CHOICE? Interesting question. The issue of supporting the choice to give birth despite a complete inability to care for it does seem problematic for the pro-choice crowd. Interesting wording, and I would agree with you, except for the fact that we are dealing with a minor in this case. Years ago, in the fifties and earlier, there would be a shotgun wedding where the parents of the girl would make the father marry the young girl. Seen it happen, even in the case of rape. In those days, it was unheard of to press charges. I think we have progressed from that. As I mentioned earlier, the parents would be involved in deciding. The parents may ask, but chances are if it's a rape, they may decide to terminate the pregnancy to mitigate any psychological or physical issues over the pregnancy.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 11, 2024 23:27:24 GMT
By definition, anything you don't know is a mystery. Now, without speculation, tell the class why I parked my car on the grass today or admit that I work in mysterious ways' As already mentioned, comparing humans to a deity is strictly speaking a category error. Since you insist though, the real comparison would be if it was always insisted that you were a Perfect Driver, in fact the best ever, who moreover condemns reckless driving outright and has even framed the Highway Code. And yet when parking on the grass you now deliberately killed several people and have even told others to do the same. "He drives in mysterious ways" does not shut down the quite reasonable moral condemnation, even if your supporters and apologist might think it will do, and so want to end matters. Or it could be that, more, they insist that just because you are that Perfect Driver, even if you kill people, that is still perfect driving as you are the Perfect Driver and cannot be otherwise. You seem to be criticising speculation as a legitimate way to proceed when things are unknown, for reasons which only you can explain. It is in fact a common procedure in many areas of knowledge. I have said that speculation can be wrong, which is true. But sometimes speculation can be well grounded, natural and sensible and results in a deduction reasonable to objective people. (As in the legal "beyond a reasonable doubt"). One also notes that despite this claim when reading scripture the followers of the purported Almighty still know God's motives and ways when it suits them! The problem is when "god works in mysterious ways", (which we saw you yourself was reluctant to fall back on a while back, I suggest as you knew how weak it sounds) is used as special pleading, as if it is enough to rule out speculation. Still the point and I hope that helps. You were asked to tell everyone why I parked on the grass today without speculation. You failed. I can hear you running for the door now...
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 11, 2024 23:29:50 GMT
I see that. Do you see the part that says you can have an abortion in California without having to provide a reason? But there is a difference between not giving a reason, and giving one - like "I just hate the innocent", which all this is about. Did you see the bit where Californian providers may refuse to give you abortion services based on their personal beliefs? I am not saying that one cannot give stupid or sickening reasons for an abortion... You're also not saying that if someone in California wants an abortion because she hates the unborn, she can. Then you're in the wrong place at the moment. Don't let it hit ya where the good lord split ya.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 11, 2024 23:34:36 GMT
As already mentioned, comparing humans to a deity is strictly speaking a category error. Since you insist though, the real comparison would be if it was always insisted that you were a Perfect Driver, in fact the best ever, who moreover condemns reckless driving outright and has even framed the Highway Code. And yet when parking on the grass you now deliberately killed several people and have even told others to do the same. "He drives in mysterious ways" does not shut down the quite reasonable moral condemnation, even if your supporters and apologist might think it will do, and so want to end matters. Or it could be that, more, they insist that just because you are that Perfect Driver, even if you kill people, that is still perfect driving as you are the Perfect Driver and cannot be otherwise. You seem to be criticising speculation as a legitimate way to proceed when things are unknown, for reasons which only you can explain. It is in fact a common procedure in many areas of knowledge. I have said that speculation can be wrong, which is true. But sometimes speculation can be well grounded, natural and sensible and results in a deduction reasonable to objective people. (As in the legal "beyond a reasonable doubt"). One also notes that despite this claim when reading scripture the followers of the purported Almighty still know God's motives and ways when it suits them! The problem is when "god works in mysterious ways", (which we saw you yourself was reluctant to fall back on a while back, I suggest as you knew how weak it sounds) is used as special pleading, as if it is enough to rule out speculation. Still the point and I hope that helps. You were asked to tell everyone why I parked on the grass today without speculation. You failed. I can hear you running for the door now... LOL.Not quite. It could be that I know you are not the Perfect Driver (perhaps one probably does not exist) claimed and you parked on the grass deliberately to kill since, well, you announced your intentions beforehand and moreover have form. In fact you admit to being a vengeful and jealous driver. See how it works?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 11, 2024 23:41:51 GMT
You were asked to tell everyone why I parked on the grass today without speculation. You failed. I can hear you running for the door now... .Not quite. It could be that I know you are not the Perfect Driver (perhaps one does not exist) claimed and you parked on the grass deliberately to kill since you announced your intentions beforehand and moreover have form. See how it works? Or you could just admit that you don't know. Why is that a problem all of a sudden?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 11, 2024 23:46:30 GMT
.Not quite. It could be that I know you are not the Perfect Driver (perhaps one does not exist) claimed and you parked on the grass deliberately to kill since you announced your intentions beforehand and moreover have form. See how it works? Or you could just admit that you don't know. ? In this case I did know. In this case, I remember how you admitted to being an angry driver who really hated people walking on the wrong type of grass and they needed punishing. Remember how I said we are not comparing like with like? Remember how just a message or two back I explained how speculation is not necessarily a bad or worthless thing? I do. No problem. I think you are clutching at straws now, but thank you for playing.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 11, 2024 23:55:42 GMT
Given that you would also support an abortion because of a complete inability to care for it, it certainly seems like it. I support the woman's right to choose. If she wants to carry the baby to term that's equally valid to her not wanting to. I think the state should also provide enough support to young mothers to dissuade women having an abortion out of desperation. Countries like Denmark despite having a strong pro-choice culture have low abortion rates because they offer a good support network to young mothers. Compare that to the US which despite a lot of condemnation of abortion has quite a high abortion rate because there's little support for young mothers. Supporting an abortion isn't the same as supporting the freedom to choose one, and it seems problematic to support an abortion both despite and because of a complete inability to care for it.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 11, 2024 23:59:36 GMT
Or you could just admit that you don't know. ? In this case I did know. Remember how I said we are not comparing like with like? I remember you accusing me of first-degree murder. Gank of the Gaps? lol I believe you called it a "fall back," and not endearingly. How about this: I do not know why God ordered the massacres of the past. What happens now?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 12, 2024 0:09:53 GMT
Interesting question. The issue of supporting the choice to give birth despite a complete inability to care for it does seem problematic for the pro-choice crowd. Interesting wording, and I would agree with you, except for the fact that we are dealing with a minor in this case. Years ago, in the fifties and earlier, there would be a shotgun wedding where the parents of the girl would make the father marry the young girl. Seen it happen, even in the case of rape. In those days, it was unheard of to press charges. I think we have progressed from that. As I mentioned earlier, the parents would be involved in deciding. The parents may ask, but chances are if it's a rape, they may decide to terminate the pregnancy to mitigate any psychological or physical issues over the pregnancy. I broadened the issue.
|
|