Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 4 10 11 12 13 14
Results 261 to 270 of 270
  1. #261
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,250
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Abortion - How to Solve the Controversy?

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    It does mean that.

    If a patient wants a certain procedure, the state has no right to interfere which means it can't interfere with the doctor providing that procedure.

    And as I said before, rights are not absolute. Sometimes there are exceptions to rights so in some limited circumstances the state can interfere with one's rights to pretty much anything one has a right to. But the exceptions are quite limited and specific. For example, a policeman can legally enter someone's house without a warrant (thereby violating the right to privacy) if they are aware of a life-threatening situation from inside the house.
    1) While not successful, groups have attempted to ban circumcisions.
    2) Per the Hyde amendment, abortion is banned from being covered by Medicaid.
    3) Doctors are prohibited from prescribing many types of medication.
    4) There are bans on some types of gene therapy both at the federal and state level.

    The state has a right to declare any procedure unethical or dangerous and, subsequently, ban it. The difference between abortion being protected and the doctor/patient privilege being protected is that under one, abortion would be immune from such bans and in the latter it is not. There is a difference in a someone's 1st amendment right to free speech and someone's "right" to abortion by way of the 14th amendment. The difference is that abortion, itself, simply is not a protected right per the Constitution.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  2. #262
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,060
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Abortion - How to Solve the Controversy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    1) While not successful, groups have attempted to ban circumcisions.
    2) Per the Hyde amendment, abortion is banned from being covered by Medicaid.
    3) Doctors are prohibited from prescribing many types of medication.
    4) There are bans on some types of gene therapy both at the federal and state level.

    The state has a right to declare any procedure unethical or dangerous and, subsequently, ban it. The difference between abortion being protected and the doctor/patient privilege being protected is that under one, abortion would be immune from such bans and in the latter it is not. There is a difference in a someone's 1st amendment right to free speech and someone's "right" to abortion by way of the 14th amendment. The difference is that abortion, itself, simply is not a protected right per the Constitution.
    Legally, it is. I mean the SCOTUS has ruled that it is.

    Now, if you are arguing that it SHOULD not be protected, then we are back to something that is debatable. But I believe I've covered this already and none of your points counter it. I'm saying that just because people have the right to X, does not mean that the government cannot legally violate their rights to X. Sometimes the government has a legitimate reason to violate rights, such as the police entering without a warrant if they suspect a life is in danger.

    So pointing out other examples of the interference with medical privacy does not show that:
    1. There is no right to medical privacy
    2. Abortion (in the first trimester) is a legitimate exception to the right to privacy.

  3. #263
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,250
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Abortion - How to Solve the Controversy?

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Legally, it is. I mean the SCOTUS has ruled that it is.

    Now, if you are arguing that it SHOULD not be protected, then we are back to something that is debatable. But I believe I've covered this already and none of your points counter it. I'm saying that just because people have the right to X, does not mean that the government cannot legally violate their rights to X. Sometimes the government has a legitimate reason to violate rights, such as the police entering without a warrant if they suspect a life is in danger.

    So pointing out other examples of the interference with medical privacy does not show that:
    1. There is no right to medical privacy
    2. Abortion (in the first trimester) is a legitimate exception to the right to privacy.
    Legally, SCOTUS has offered that abortion is protected under the 14th amendment. I am not a lawyer, so maybe there is more case history there. Don't know. We are obviously debating what should be rather than making an actual legal argument here. We are arguing theoretically rather than trying a case in front of the court.


    The legal distinction between an actual right to perform a behavior and a right conferred upon the existence of some other right is important. For instance, my first amendment right is near absolute. The government must go to great lengths to demonstrate a reason to abridge my free speech right. However, abortion is protected by way of the 14th amendment and the implicit right to privacy. Should the state continue to take over healthcare, then abortion will become less of a right and more of a federally granted privilege. We see this today as medicare cannot be used to pay for abortion and the ACA may not use subsidized funds to pay for abortion. If abortion was a right on par with free speech, then the federal and state governments would be compelled to pay for abortion services as part of their management of healthcare for all. The example of the lack of limits for free speech would be the National Endowment of the Arts. So long as this federally funded program existed, it was compelled to support all forms of speech, even those fundamentally offensive to the taxpayer and legislators. So, the government can either choose to end the program or tolerate offensive speech. However, with the ACA, no such concession to abortion must be made. This is the difference.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  4. #264
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,060
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Abortion - How to Solve the Controversy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    Should the state continue to take over healthcare, then abortion will become less of a right and more of a federally granted privilege. We see this today as medicare cannot be used to pay for abortion and the ACA may not use subsidized funds to pay for abortion. If abortion was a right on par with free speech, then the federal and state governments would be compelled to pay for abortion services as part of their management of healthcare for all. The example of the lack of limits for free speech would be the National Endowment of the Arts. So long as this federally funded program existed, it was compelled to support all forms of speech, even those fundamentally offensive to the taxpayer and legislators. So, the government can either choose to end the program or tolerate offensive speech. However, with the ACA, no such concession to abortion must be made. This is the difference.
    Whether the government funds the NEA or under what circumstances they fund the NEA has no bearing on whether the average person has the right to free speech.

    Similarly how, or if, the government funds certain medical procedures has no bearing on whether people have a right to have those medical procedures. So the ACA or whatever method the government uses to fund medical procedures has no bearing on whether there is a right to abortion.

    There is a right to abortion regardless of how it is or is not funded.

  5. #265
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,202
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Abortion - How to Solve the Controversy?

    Abortion is protected under the notion of a right to privacy which is an implicit right according to the court, best implied by the restriction on unreasonable search and seizure. This gives an underlying sense that the govnerment can't poke its nose into your private life without some compelling cause for the national good. AKA its no business of the state whether a woman has an abortion or not. Roe-V-Wade carves out an exception for later term abortions, post viability as it says, where it says the state has some case for protecting the unborn.

    So while abortion is a right in the sense state's can't ban it outright, it is a right only by virtue of it being a private matter and there fore protected under the implicit right of privacy. By no means must the government provide it, but it neither must make in inacessible. Were the states to have a monopoly on the health care system, and then choose not to provide abortions, then they would de-facto be acting to prevent abortions and in violation of the law.

    Not sure that helps the discussion or not but this is my understanding of it.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  6. Thanks mican333 thanked for this post
  7. #266
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    4
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Abortion - How to Solve the Controversy?

    No debate is more futile than the abortion debate. No one will ever be convinced to move their own personal definition of where life begins; be it from conception, to a day before birth. There's no objective criteria for declaring the point where an embryo suddenly becomes a human being, with human rights.

  8. #267
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,202
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Abortion - How to Solve the Controversy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Landrew View Post
    No debate is more futile than the abortion debate. No one will ever be convinced to move their own personal definition of where life begins; be it from conception, to a day before birth. There's no objective criteria for declaring the point where an embryo suddenly becomes a human being, with human rights.
    Many people have changed their minds on the issue over the years and society has shifted back and forth as to what is allowed and what is not. Thus, not so futile. I think its true that it will never be solved for all time but the day to day engagement will go on so long as new humans are born and have to confront the issue for themselves.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  9. #268
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    4
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Abortion - How to Solve the Controversy?

    The abortion debate is insoluble for one simple reason; there is no objective point where a human life begins. There are plenty of opinions, and some of them masquerade as "objective facts" but they are anything but that. A human life develops gradually; from 2 joined cells, which are the survivors from hundreds of other cells which die. Just as there is no objective point where a boy becomes a man, any such point is simply an arbitrary opinion.

    This is why nothing is ever settled in an abortion debate.

  10. #269
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    2
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Abortion - How to Solve the Controversy?

    Abortion should be completely illegal. There should be prison sentences for abortion. It's murder. There should be no exceptions. They should choose to put the baby up for adoption if they don't want her/him. Abortion is absolutely selfish. Choosing to snuff out a life just because it isn't convenient for you. You never know what that child might have been or will be. They might even find the cure for cancer (not highly likely but a possibility).

    ---------- Post added at 12:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:12 PM ----------

    The Roe vs Wade case was complete rubbish and should never have happened

  11. #270
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    679
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Abortion - How to Solve the Controversy?

    Welcome to ODN, Nightlock!

    While I've been refraining from engaging in abortion debates here recently due to the excessively emotionally-charged responses from most pro-lifers, I thought I should address your statements here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightlock View Post
    Abortion should be completely illegal. There should be prison sentences for abortion. It's murder. There should be no exceptions.
    Unfortunately, simply stating that "it's murder" isn't enough. There is a clear difference of opinion between the opposing sides and their opinions regarding the personhood of fetuses, upon which the question of whether abortion is murder rests. You'd need to provide actual support if you truly want to convince anyone.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightlock View Post
    They should choose to put the baby up for adoption if they don't want her/him.
    This is ignoring a large part of the pro-choice argument, which is the right to bodily autonomy. You're focusing here on only the desire to not have to raise a child.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightlock View Post
    Abortion is absolutely selfish. Choosing to snuff out a life just because it isn't convenient for you.
    "Absolutely" is a pretty strong word to use here. Are you aware that many folks who choose to have an abortion do so because they don't consider themselves to be good candidates for parenthood? They are making a rational consideration of the needs of the child, which is not at all selfish.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightlock View Post
    You never know what that child might have been or will be. They might even find the cure for cancer (not highly likely but a possibility).
    This is an interesting point you make. However, upon deeper consideration it necessarily leads to the goal here being to ensure that all children who are born are raised, cared for, and educated in such a way to maximize their potential - essentially, to try and guarantee that those "cures for cancer" are found and fostered in order that they fulfill the possibility you refer to in your point.

    Can you honestly say that our society is truly organized in such a way to achieve this goal? How many possible cures for cancer have been born and have died of illness, starvation, conflict, or have just been left to stagnate in less-fortunate societies?

    It seems that, until we can organize our society in such a way to maximize each and every born child's potential, saying that the loss of that potential through abortion should be eliminated is entirely vacuous. Bottom line, if the potential of the child is what you care about, then you should be directing your efforts elsewhere to actual children that have been born and are suffering right now. Making abortion illegal won't stop hundreds of potential cures for cancer from needlessly going to waste every day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightlock View Post
    The Roe vs Wade case was complete rubbish and should never have happened
    This and the rest of your post is mostly opinions and "shoulds". Here at ODN you'll find that most folks require actual support for what you say.
    Last edited by futureboy; March 16th, 2018 at 07:23 AM.

 

 
Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 4 10 11 12 13 14

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 20
    Last Post: May 13th, 2009, 05:11 AM
  2. Righteous Controversy
    By minorwork in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: November 19th, 2008, 09:55 AM
  3. Please solve this mystery
    By Snoop in forum Community Advice Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: April 15th, 2007, 06:35 AM
  4. Solve this mystery
    By Snoop in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: February 19th, 2006, 08:20 AM
  5. Which Branch Should Step In And Solve This Problem?
    By ophelia in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: April 8th, 2005, 05:01 PM

Members who have read this thread in the last 45 days : 1

You do not have permission to view the list of names.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •