Author Topic: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong  (Read 5332 times)

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #45 on: April 18, 2017, 11:07:47 pm »
I'm sorry, man, but this really is hilarious. :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: You just don't understand why yet.

I feel kind of like a jerk because you are clearly making an effort to educate yourself and that is highly admirable.





This is still funny tho.
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #46 on: April 18, 2017, 11:29:43 pm »
Here are a few starting points that can help you catch up on the debate, and why bodily integrity and not fetus viability is the core argument in favor of legal medical abortion:

http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1042&context=yjlf
http://www.healthrights.am/practitioner-guide/more/579/
https://www.mmfllaw.com/ones-right-to-bodily-integrity.shtml

Now, consider the argument you are making, which is that the right to bodily integrity alone is insufficient to justify abortion. In order for that argument to be valid, you must assume that pregnancy is a special case in which a woman's bodily integrity is suspended in favor of another organism, which we will assume for the sake of the discussion is a person. Therefore, the woman's right to bodily integrity is suspended in order to confer the right to use her body to another person, placing her in a category of less-than-human, as bodily integrity is legally considered a human right.

Yes. Please read that again, and understand that the argument you are making, at its core, is that the human rights argument is insufficient because women just aren't quite people enough.
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


PoFP

  • Word-Salad Enthusiast and Terrified Meat Sack
  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 13068
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #47 on: April 19, 2017, 12:30:18 am »
I'm sorry, man, but this really is hilarious. :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: You just don't understand why yet.

I feel kind of like a jerk because you are clearly making an effort to educate yourself and that is highly admirable.





This is still funny tho.

I'm 21, and understand that I have often said, and will often say things that are outrageously stupid for quite awhile longer than Imight expect. I accept that.

But don't be surprised that I find this annoying.

On second thought, I've intentionally walked into threads and turned into an exploding shitfountain before. I'll give you this one.


Here are a few starting points that can help you catch up on the debate, and why bodily integrity and not fetus viability is the core argument in favor of legal medical abortion:

http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1042&context=yjlf
http://www.healthrights.am/practitioner-guide/more/579/
https://www.mmfllaw.com/ones-right-to-bodily-integrity.shtml

Now, consider the argument you are making, which is that the right to bodily integrity alone is insufficient to justify abortion. In order for that argument to be valid, you must assume that pregnancy is a special case in which a woman's bodily integrity is suspended in favor of another organism, which we will assume for the sake of the discussion is a person. Therefore, the woman's right to bodily integrity is suspended in order to confer the right to use her body to another person, placing her in a category of less-than-human, as bodily integrity is legally considered a human right.

Yes. Please read that again, and understand that the argument you are making, at its core, is that the human rights argument is insufficient because women just aren't quite people enough.

Before I jump into this,  I wanna have something clarified:

By bodily integrity, do you mean the ability for the body to live? Or do any changes/damage to the body whatsoever count as "affecting bodily integrity?" I looked up the definition, but my young male brain shit the bed and resorted to pterodactyl sex fantasies and pepe memes.
Listen carefully. I don't have much time, and I only have 462 characters left. I'm a scientist from Area 52 (Area 51 was used to draw attention from Area 52, where the aliens were ACTUALLY stored) who was working on neural interfacing with networked devices. In an experiment gone wrong, I accidentally uploaded my mind to the internet. In the 2 seconds I had before my mind scrambled itself with the world's network traffic, I was able to store this snippet in this random internet signature. If you're reading this, let the world know tha

MithridatesXXIII

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 3638
  • I am yeti
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #48 on: April 19, 2017, 12:35:17 am »
Sovereignty over your person

LMNO

  • Lubricated and Rabid Lungfish of Impending Sexdoom
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 87071
  • Internet Fuckweasel of Haunted Pork Dimensions.
    • View Profile
    • Earfatigue Productions: When it has to sound like you give a shit.
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #49 on: April 19, 2017, 12:59:33 am »
Following the links would be a good start.

Also paying attention to what women say about abortion is also a good idea.

The Good Reverend Roger

  • Horrible Bastard
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 36736
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #50 on: April 19, 2017, 01:22:09 am »

2) fathers should be allowed to request an abortion - if the mother chooses to have the child anyway, the father should not have to pay child support


Your trilby is crooked.

Thank you for referencing the correct style of hat.

Are you both sure? It sounds more like this kind of headwear:



Those are in fact my people, you know.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

 "Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

The Good Reverend Roger

  • Horrible Bastard
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 36736
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #51 on: April 19, 2017, 01:23:12 am »

2) fathers should be allowed to request an abortion - if the mother chooses to have the child anyway, the father should not have to pay child support


Your trilby is crooked.

Thank you for referencing the correct style of hat.

It's an important distinction.  I don't want to tar Tom Waits with this brush.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

 "Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

PoFP

  • Word-Salad Enthusiast and Terrified Meat Sack
  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 13068
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #52 on: April 19, 2017, 02:26:31 am »
Here are a few starting points that can help you catch up on the debate, and why bodily integrity and not fetus viability is the core argument in favor of legal medical abortion:

http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1042&context=yjlf
http://www.healthrights.am/practitioner-guide/more/579/
https://www.mmfllaw.com/ones-right-to-bodily-integrity.shtml

Now, consider the argument you are making, which is that the right to bodily integrity alone is insufficient to justify abortion. In order for that argument to be valid, you must assume that pregnancy is a special case in which a woman's bodily integrity is suspended in favor of another organism, which we will assume for the sake of the discussion is a person. Therefore, the woman's right to bodily integrity is suspended in order to confer the right to use her body to another person, placing her in a category of less-than-human, as bodily integrity is legally considered a human right.

Yes. Please read that again, and understand that the argument you are making, at its core, is that the human rights argument is insufficient because women just aren't quite people enough.

I have some information to digest.

Might take me a day or so to respond. Thank you for the response.
Listen carefully. I don't have much time, and I only have 462 characters left. I'm a scientist from Area 52 (Area 51 was used to draw attention from Area 52, where the aliens were ACTUALLY stored) who was working on neural interfacing with networked devices. In an experiment gone wrong, I accidentally uploaded my mind to the internet. In the 2 seconds I had before my mind scrambled itself with the world's network traffic, I was able to store this snippet in this random internet signature. If you're reading this, let the world know tha

rong

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 15386
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #53 on: April 19, 2017, 03:46:01 am »
Sovereignty over your person

the is the best pro-choice argument i've ever heard. 

kind of like the "stand your ground" laws
"he was a smart feller who felt smart"

MithridatesXXIII

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 3638
  • I am yeti
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #54 on: April 19, 2017, 03:55:18 am »
It's basically the cornerstone of freedom, followed by dominion over what you own and produce, followed by the authority of the state to tax all of the above. Conservatives tout this all the time, just as it pertains to every other conceivable phenomena.

The Good Reverend Roger

  • Horrible Bastard
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 36736
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #55 on: April 19, 2017, 03:57:18 am »
Sovereignty over your person

the is the best pro-choice argument i've ever heard. 

kind of like the "stand your ground" laws

Having the right to your own body is just like shooting Trayvon Martin.

You are a fucking genius.  Talking Ben Carson level brains, here.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

 "Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

MithridatesXXIII

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 3638
  • I am yeti
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #56 on: April 19, 2017, 04:11:07 am »
There's that, and that it also goes beyond self-defense. The important question is, if a human being can be considered a sovereignty unto themselves, What are the powers of the sovereign?

The Good Reverend Roger

  • Horrible Bastard
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 36736
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #57 on: April 19, 2017, 04:57:26 am »
There's that, and that it also goes beyond self-defense. The important question is, if a human being can be considered a sovereignty unto themselves, What are the powers of the sovereign?

Doing as they please with their own bodies.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

 "Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

rong

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 15386
    • View Profile
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #58 on: April 19, 2017, 06:44:53 am »
Sovereignty over your person

the is the best pro-choice argument i've ever heard. 

kind of like the "stand your ground" laws

Having the right to your own body is just like shooting Trayvon Martin.

You are a fucking genius.  Talking Ben Carson level brains, here.

 :thanks:
"he was a smart feller who felt smart"

LMNO

  • Lubricated and Rabid Lungfish of Impending Sexdoom
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 87071
  • Internet Fuckweasel of Haunted Pork Dimensions.
    • View Profile
    • Earfatigue Productions: When it has to sound like you give a shit.
Re: Autocatalysis, Hammers, and How We're Defending Abortion Wrong
« Reply #59 on: April 19, 2017, 12:45:38 pm »

2) fathers should be allowed to request an abortion - if the mother chooses to have the child anyway, the father should not have to pay child support


Your trilby is crooked.

Thank you for referencing the correct style of hat.

It's an important distinction.  I don't want to tar Tom Waits with this brush.

They fact that I know the difference, and am sometimes upset when an error is made, worries me that I may be part of the former group, rather than the latter.



m'lady.