 | | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Hi Maggie, This is debate, so that's what we'll do. "Maggie Cambron" <mcambron@pacbell.net> wrote in message... (...) I'm (...) clarification. I disagree. I don't believe anyone's viewpoint will be swayed if we all keep our opinions to ourselves. I (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
OK, I am taking on the somewhat daunting task of responding to this huge note. (...) Me too, I guess that's why I read and respond to this stuff. (...) How much damage has to be included in the threat to the woman's body before it's OK for her to (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Thank you, John , for a well thought out response to my post. You have swayed my viewpoint, as did Larry's referral to the poll of Libertarians on their opinions on the matter of choice. It was naive of me to assume that because one is a (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Maggie, I don't want to be harsh or insulting, but this basically sounds like what I have been hearing for years from the pro-choice people, and it hasn't put a dent in my way of thinking in all those years. I can empathize with you not wanting (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I'll take you up on this one John D. Simple. If the child is born at 16 weeks (4 months), it will NOT be viable. Therefore, I see no problem with it. I think that up until around that point (consider premie babies, they die mostly at under 24 (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) That should be self-evident, and if it is not, then no amount of rational discourse will aid your understanding. (...) My "wisecrack," as you call it, was an appropriately glib response to the original glib post. Dave! (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) There are some interesting things to explore here. I agree that a "viability" test is certainly part of the rights based calculus which should be used to evaluate these things. One way to examine the issue is that the unborn baby only has the (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Thanks James, You kinda scare me when you start off with the word Simple... none of this has seemed simple yet, and if it's so simple to someone else, I question whether they have given it enough thought. However, thats a pretty good point that I (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Maggie Cambron wrote: Thank you Maggie..:-) (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Maggie Cambron writes: [big snip] (...) your (...) I believe the same logic can be applied to any act that we consider crimes. e.g. If someone inconvenienced me, I suspect I would choose to kill them. "I hope never to be (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I think you have crystallized why the abortion issue is so thorny, because it deals with 2 issues at the same time. Maggie is right that woman should have the right to do what they will with their bodies. But the fact is that a fetus *in* a (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Of course, it was emotional. This is an emotionally charged subject. You'll have to pardon me, this was my first time posting to debate and I did not know that one of the rules was that you must leave your emotions at the door. (...) Actually (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
No, thank *YOU*, John. That was an incredibly lucid, well-reasoned and powerful argument. (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Maggie: I apologize for jumping on your case. Being in the minority of opinion politically and err...just about everything else...I sometimes like to throw a philosophical wrench into the works when I feel like the forum is about to play (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Did I get side-tracked into lugnet.off-topic.mut...n-society? ;-) Chris (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) But (...) granted (...) in (...) in. (...) Well, let's see.... if you want to apply the same logic, you need to choose a comparable crime. So it couldn't be one that either of us would consider a mere inconvenience, could it? (Or am I wrong to (...) (24 years ago, 14-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Did you not get it on purpose? (...) I did. Murder of an adult and murder of a fetus. You're turning it around wrong. (...) The inconvenience that my scenario runs paralell to is that of bearing a child for nine months in your abdomen. (...) I don't (...) (24 years ago, 15-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) <SNIPPED> Sorry to barge in. I think you could argue, as you do, that both your hypothetical adult & foetus could be considered victims in murder. However, the if a foetus were to cease to exist, society would not notice - there would be no (...) (24 years ago, 15-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Agreed. Absolutely. I personally value most adults more than any fetus. On the other hand, I'm not sure that we want our laws to set the severity of penalty for murder based on the societal importance of the victim. In that case, killing a (...) (24 years ago, 15-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) No, it's just that you and I disagree. To me the "crime", as you would call it, is the violation of the woman's body. I believe a woman is fully within her rights to have an abortion if she wants to terminate an unwanted pregnancy as long as (...) (24 years ago, 15-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Maggie Cambron wrote: I hope it's okay to butt in, but I have a question for you, Maggie (or anyone, really; I guess that I just find women's perspectives more vested on this topic). Should a woman who engages in sexual activity as a willing (...) (24 years ago, 15-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) topic). (...) all (...) I think the problem is that pro-choice people would say that of course she's responsible. Not because of any law or ethic, but because she ends up with the loaf in the oven. And it is her responsibility to have it (...) (24 years ago, 16-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) IMO, yes. (...) Yes. (...) Well. Now that's a tougher one. My opinion on this is that the number of abortions should be decreased through means of *education* about contraceptives, about sex abstinance, and yes, values. I've been distilled (...) (24 years ago, 16-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Why should abortions be reduced? (...) Unwanted how? Rape? Carelessness? Would it matter? What would the options be? (...) For what reasons exactly would it be a hard decision? Do they revolve around you or the fetus? (...) *good* values:-) (...) (24 years ago, 16-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Because at a certain point, abortion IS murder. By the end of the pregnancy the fetus is all but a baby, and deflating its/his/her skull is not letting it live. The rpoblem is, when exactly is that point; no one can say. The best solution is (...) (24 years ago, 16-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Yes, I agree she should be responsible for becoming pregnant or not becoming pregnant if that's her preference. In an ideal world I would say it should jointly be agreed upon with her partner and they should both take responsibility, however (...) (24 years ago, 16-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Yes, I had thought of that when I drafted my last post. I suppose society has "invested" in your hypothetical 9 year old... but that is not a very strong argument. I suppose my original argument reflects the current trend for the views of (...) (24 years ago, 16-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Note below that in my questions, I'm not arguing, I'm asking for clarification. (...) So what? Do you think that pre-murder abortions should be reduced too? Why? (...) Why can no one say? That point must be based on something. If it's based on (...) (24 years ago, 16-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Previously, you wrote: (...) I took that to mean that you thought that laissez-faire stance was to allow murder. And that you hoped that while murder might make you uncomfortable, you would allow it to remain a personal decision for everyone. (...) (24 years ago, 16-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) The statement you quoted from before had to do with IF I were pro-life and thought that any abortion was murder. In that case, I might vote for people who would put the likes of Thomas and Scalia (sp?) on the Supreme Court in the hope that (...) (24 years ago, 16-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) No prob. Thanks for making that clear! (...) See below... (...) Not really. Whatever you decide that point might be (sentential tissue issues were brought up here IIRC?, and the fetus being viable (i.e. can survive outside the womb), etc) it (...) (24 years ago, 17-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Yes, exactly. And your response was that you'd try to keep it a personal decision. Now obviously, that's not what you meant, or how you meant it. Fine. For the sake of the next two points below, I'm assuming that we're defining murder as a (...) (24 years ago, 17-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) We both agree that is murder. (...) I would convict him as long as I could be sure the sentence he is given is no more than about 2 weeks. (...) Ironically, I think in actual fact I would find it much more than mildly distasteful. (...) That's (...) (24 years ago, 17-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) This stance kind of troubles me. It suggests that not only do you view the death penalty as an appropriate penalty for rape, but you don't even expect that the alleged perpetrator should get a trial. (24 years ago, 17-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Hi Frank, When you say that I approve of "the death pnealty" it sounds like you're talking about a court-ordered penalty. I don't believe that courts should pass out death. Ever. Really! One of my stances is this: Government (at all, I mean as (...) (24 years ago, 17-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I think there's a big difference between an act of self defense, and chasing someone down after the fact. Vigilante justice should not be tolerated. I know that it is a very fine line, but my feeling is that once a perpetrator is leaving the (...) (24 years ago, 18-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I too think that. Self defense doesn't even need to go to court. (...) Your opinion is noted and disagreed with. For two reasons: First, I think there is nothing inherently wrong with vigilante justice, if it is rightly applied. And I'll be (...) (24 years ago, 18-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | feticide Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
"Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:G42sw2.pM@lugnet.com... (...) around (...) However, (...) in (...) mind, (...) Au contraire. The cases are basically the same. In my country murder is murder... if you kill a postman or a (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Uh, society is not the victim here, dude. When talking about murder, the victim normally is the person who was murdered, but maybe on your planet the purpose of justice in a murder trial is to figure out how the unfortunate slaying of an innocent (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
