3 ms·

So at what point should we no longer be ok with ending the life of the developing human? 39 weeks? 24 weeks? 16 weeks? Somewhere else?

by yucky 4y ago

SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
At what point do you stop reducing issues to misleading "trick questions"?
- yucky 4y ago
  It's not a trick question, it's a recognition that abortion support is rarely binary. The majority of people (even pro-choice) believe there is a point in the pregnancy where an elective abortion would be grotesque and shouldn't be allowed. What drives the divide in the debate is where we should draw that line. Conception? Viability? Birth? It's the fundamental point in the debate, so it's far from a trick question?
  - SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
    a) You're moving the goalposts by inserting the word "elective" that was not there before. b) As Mr Buttigieg said, ""If it's that late in your pregnancy, then almost by definition, you've been expecting to carry it to term" - engage with that instead of repeating yourself? c) As the other commenter (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31892643 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31892643) says, this is a nonsense hypothetical > One singular example of an abortion at 39 weeks where the mother didn't want the baby. I guarantee you can't actually find one even though you claim it exists > It's the fundamental point in the debate It is not, or should not be. > believe there is a point ... shouldn't be allowed. Again, should be a medical decision between patient and doctor, not a legal one, and not a numeric comparison.
    - yucky 4y ago
      Dr Kermit Gosnell performed a number of elective abortions that late in term, and we only know about those because he was dumb enough to get caught killing a few after delivery.
      - SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
        See this is the trick, the sleight-of hand - is draws you into arguing about unsubstantiated, viscerally affecting irrelevancies and hopes that you won't notice that this diverts from the substance.

So at what point should we no longer be ok with ending the life of the developing human? 39 weeks? 24 weeks? 16 weeks? Somewhere else?

by yucky 4y ago

So at what point should we no longer be ok with ending the life of the developing human? 39 weeks? 24 weeks? 16 weeks? Somewhere else?

SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago

At what point do you stop reducing issues to misleading "trick questions"?

yucky 4y ago
It's not a trick question, it's a recognition that abortion support is rarely binary. The majority of people (even pro-choice) believe there is a point in the pregnancy where an elective abortion would be grotesque and shouldn't be allowed. What drives the divide in the debate is where we should draw that line. Conception? Viability? Birth? It's the fundamental point in the debate, so it's far from a trick question?
- SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
  a) You're moving the goalposts by inserting the word "elective" that was not there before. b) As Mr Buttigieg said, ""If it's that late in your pregnancy, then almost by definition, you've been expecting to carry it to term" - engage with that instead of repeating yourself? c) As the other commenter (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31892643 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31892643) says, this is a nonsense hypothetical > One singular example of an abortion at 39 weeks where the mother didn't want the baby. I guarantee you can't actually find one even though you claim it exists > It's the fundamental point in the debate It is not, or should not be. > believe there is a point ... shouldn't be allowed. Again, should be a medical decision between patient and doctor, not a legal one, and not a numeric comparison.
  - yucky 4y ago
    Dr Kermit Gosnell performed a number of elective abortions that late in term, and we only know about those because he was dumb enough to get caught killing a few after delivery.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
      See this is the trick, the sleight-of hand - is draws you into arguing about unsubstantiated, viscerally affecting irrelevancies and hopes that you won't notice that this diverts from the substance.