Calling out "Personhood" supporters

am I the only one finding humor in this logic?

They call abortion murder and refuse to allow a woman to make that decision.

But these are the same people crying over "welfare queens" and doing their darnedest to strip any protections and government services that might help these people.

so you've got to make a choice, and REAL one.

Either you are against abortion and you are FOR funding parenting clinics, welfare and health costs for the child, counseling, the whole deal.

Or, you allow women to choose, while yourself choosing NOT to have an abortion, and NOT funding any of those services that would be in dire need if this ridiculous piece of crap bill gets passed.

you can't have your cake and eat it too, so make your choice and stand with it.

no abortions for anyone + added costs of services to provide for these youngsters
Abortions for those who seek them, no additional taxes required to pay for the services to decide these people don't deserve.

It's pure insanity.

I'm pro choice 100% of the way, and I'm a male so i kinda have to be. Would I support my wife if she wanted to have an abortion? Probably not. does this give me the right to dictate how everyone else can live? Of course not.

For people who, in thread A, rail against welfare mothers and "big government" intruding into their lives, to come to thread B and rally BEHIND a restrictive piece of legislation, allowing the government full access to your genitals, well, I don't even think hypocrisy is a worth term for that pile of none sense.

Having read the article and doing a bit of research on the web the following can be stated:

The very nature of this change could have large impacts on the state of Mississippi, as well as, the rest of the country. It does not seek to add in anything, rather it seeks to define when life starts and a person comes into being.

For many years the question of when does life begin has on the minds of many people, especially when it came to abortion. The original concept behind Roe V. Wade, was not about abortion directly, rather it was about the persons right to privacy in a doctors office, not being public knowledge. As many women at the time, who wanted an abortion, could be held accountable for their actions and thus be considered criminals due to a lack of privacy. The Roe decision set up a wall for what would be considered privacy, along with the doctor/patient privileges.

This change in the very definition of what a person is would have far more of a devastating effect on the general population, than the person who wants to change it could imagine. While that person may be anti-abortion, legally, if it gets onto the Mississippi ballot and passes, then the following could happen.

A woman or a girl who miscarries could be charged with manslaughter, even though it was beyond their capacity to prevent such. Any action that causes a woman to miscarry would carry with it a felony charge, makers of items that we all use, could be held liable for the lose of life. Even men who bump a woman who has just conceived and it does not take, means he can be held accountable for the lose of life.

And that is just the beginning, but beyond that the ramifications of this bill could have a far greater impact on the country than many people would realize, beyond the abortion debate. Privacy would become a thing of the past when it came to women as then doctors would be required to report when a woman was pregnant, after all would not a new life need to be protected, as it could not protect itself? And it would affect the following: Politics and the legislative branch of the country, namely the US House of Representatives.

There are only 435 seats in the house of Representatives, each distributive proportionately based off of the population of each state. If they were to take into account the number of women who just conceived at the time of the census, it would mean that Mississippi would end up picking up more seats, thus taking away from other states that may not recognize this bill, and create a political quagmire in DC, as if there was not enough problems there right now.

This definition is going to create problems and one can hope that it either does not pass the voters or does not get by the courts, as it would ultimately cause more problems than it seeks to remedy.

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger
Whether you agree or disagree, whether I agree or disagree, it is moot.

People are going to vote on the issue. The majority will have their say. Either for or against.

My personal beliefs? I hope they vote for personhood. I think it is a good idea.

But that is my opinion, my opinion only.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Or.. it's about Government stopping the murder of a child.

Again, it's about your own personal values and ethics, and everybody has to follow them.

No, a fertilized egg is not a child. And I'm sorry to give you this reality check, but fertilized eggs are ended on a daily basis through thousands of women in this country, whether it be through natural means (periods) or by other means (contraception/the pill). How is government exactly going to stop this? And how are they going to do this without stepping into private property and private lives?

But you want big government for this very reason, I understand. It's about control.

Thanks you for the strawman argument.

What is a strawman argument? It's an informal fallacy. Unless you were being sarcastic before, I'm fairly certain that you consider a fertilized egg a child. If you consider a fertilized egg a child, then, naturally, the laws over children will apply to that fertilized egg as well. You take what you give.

reply to post by Southern Guardian

What is a strawman argument? It's an informal fallacy. Unless you were being sarcastic before, I'm fairly certain that you consider a fertilized egg a child. If you consider a fertilized egg a child, then, naturally, the laws over children will apply to that fertilized egg as well. You take what you give.

following such an argument, we'd be paying the same price for a single egg, that one would normally pay for a grown chicken

what's really sickening is their sneaky,creeping fungus style of of always attempting to game the laws and systems in their favor.
these are the same pharisee's and hypocrites that screamed "crucify him" 2000 yrs ago and will do so again.
if Jesus ever returns he'll be lynched by these same control freaks as soon as he calls them out on it.

To those of you saying we are throwing out "strawmen" arguments by saying all of the side effects that this personhood initiative, you are incorrect. Here is why.

The word "person" or "persons" appear in many laws (many many). By changing the definition of person, to include fetus, you are impacting all those laws where the word person is used.

Even many pro-lifers say this initiative goes too far because of the above!

Claiming your fetus as a dependent; does each fetus get a social security number; is miscarriage a murder; is smoking one cigarette during the course of pregnancy "child endangerment", in-vitro for women WANTING to become pregnant becoming ilegal / vastly different....


Here is a thought experiment; I want answers to this from you pro-personhooders....

A building is on fire. In room A is a baby in his crib. In room B, is a tray with 10 fertilized eggs.

There is only enough time to save one of them, not both.

Are you people saying that a firefighter should go to the room with the eggs?

Assuming this passes

Reply to post by Confusion42

Aren't the products of rape or incest human as well?

As for the mother in danger, that is a tough one for most of you to swallow, but as a parent, I would gladly lay down my life so that my children can live.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Reply to post by Confusion42

 

Aren't the products of rape or incest human as well?

As for the mother in danger, that is a tough one for most of you to swallow, but as a parent, I would gladly lay down my life so that my children can live.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

What if a woman is raped, AND is in danger ?

When an initiative is as far reaching as this, possibly effecting every law with the word person, and reducing pregnant woman to second class status, all implications should be analysed (including the What If's, cause while rare, they happen, and theres alot of negative what if scenario's)

This thread is priceless it really is a lot of rape going on at a certian little protest and those same people are going no theres no rape and life is what we tell you what it is and violence is what we tell you it is.

Simple fact the holier than thou attitudes are bs 50 million "children" have been murdered no wait they aren't human and life begins when the egg gets fertilized.

I find it astounding for some posters in this thread defending murder and violence in here and go look at any other thread.
'
Since the topic of the "pro-lifers" was brought into question fair game to break reality to them and by of all people one of the most vocal pro protesters.

Yep can cut the hypocrisy in this thread with a knife.

Originally posted by neo96
This thread is priceless it really is a lot of rape going on at a certian little protest and those same people are going no theres no rape and life is what we tell you what it is and violence is what we tell you it is.

Simple fact the holier than thou attitudes are bs 50 million "children" have been murdered no wait they aren't human and life begins when the egg gets fertilized.

I find it astounding for some posters in this thread defending murder and violence in here and go look at any other thread.
'
Since the topic of the "pro-lifers" was brought into question fair game to break reality to them and by of all people one of the most vocal pro protesters.

Yep can cut the hypocrisy in this thread with a knife.

edit on 8-11-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

Get a grip.

Please quote me defending murder or violence. If you can;t, apologize or leave this thread.

I havn't even stated my opinion regarding normal abortion (of the non rape non incest non danger to mother variety)...

I'm only referring to this initiative and what it does for woman's rights, the slippery slope this might become.

Your the hypocrite

reply to post by Confusion42


Great selective reading issues for the simple fact that wasn't addressed to you and no i will not do either.

Anyone who has read the recent threads on here about a hot topic at the moment know what i meant by that furthermore fill me in out you thought that was addressed to you?

There was no reply to.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Confusion42

 

Great selective reading issues for the simple fact that wasn't addressed to you and no i will not do either.

Anyone who has read the recent threads on here about a hot topic at the moment know what i meant by that furthermore fill me in out you thought that was addressed to you?

There was no reply to.

edit on 8-11-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

Um, you addressed this thread; I made this thread; thus you addressed me....

Looks like voters spoke Anti-abo rtion ‘personhood’ amendment fails in Mississippi

You being alive doesn't give you rights to my organs.

No problem.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox

2) Grassroot or not, this is an effort to destroy autonomy for a little over 50% of the nation, and make their bodies subject to veto by people who will not actually ever have to worry about it one way or another. This is not something that I could support by any means.

50% is quite a humble number . According to the CDC 82% of women have used birth control pills , and I was too lazy to include IUDS into that percentage , which according to this bogus law would be outlawed. www.cdc.gov...
The obvious problem here is a draconian law being toted as a pro-life propaganda , because I can't see how a "majority " would vote for something obviously against themselves. (unless masochism and self-hatred have become a trend)

If people are really that naive to underestimate the precedent this kind of law will set , I don't know whether to pity them or hate them.