Sal@mander.xyz 1 year ago
I think that the woman being interviewed got caught off-guard, did not process the question correctly, and then did not want to back-track during what she considered to be a heated argument to appear strong... Then, unable to think quickly, kept repeating her original dumb response. I want to think that she would be able to come up with a better answer if given the time... An easy response is "No. And this is not the same situation as an abortion, because the child is now outside of the parent's body and can be taken away from the parent without dying".
iamtanmay@wolfballs.com 1 year ago
Yes, you are right.... but she inadvertently showed the logical extreme of "its the woman's choice" argument. That's why this clip is so dramatic. Real eye opener
Sal@mander.xyz 1 year ago
It is definitely a logical extreme - but of what argument? If the child is already born, then you are no longer dealing with a woman having a choice over what is happening to her body. If you have removed this constraint, then the argument is just about a dogmatic respect for a 'woman's choice', and this is not the logical extreme. You can go even further. It is a woman's choice if she wants to blow up the entire world using nuclear weapons, so we should make it possible for any woman to have access to the nuclear deployment system. We need to add constraints to move the boundary of the logical extreme, and even then we will usually be able to find logical extremes that are, well, too extreme. So that's why we as a society need to negotiate the limits... I don't think many people will agree with this woman's strange assertion that it is O.K. to kill a two year old child, and I really hope that not even the woman herself would agree with that limit if she stops to think for 30 seconds....
masterofballs@wolfballs.com 1 year ago
Lol, Repeal the nineteenth! Only way to save the world from nukes.
Sal@mander.xyz 1 year ago
Putin's next move: hormone replacement therapy and American naturalization.
iamtanmay@wolfballs.com 1 year ago
I meant the 9 month debate. No pro abortion activist is willing to say when the cutoff should be (so they don't get eaten by other wokes). Biden himself supported abortion upto birth. This is the most extreme view that the govt is behind.
A lot of people who didn't pay attention thought that people were arguing about 1st or 2nd trimester abortion. Hearing this idiot, may just have made those Folx google the limit. I didn't mean realistically, an abortion of a 2 year old.
Sal@mander.xyz 1 year ago
I am not following the debate because I am not from the US, but I think politicians are very good at making their actual positions vague enough to leave room for interpretation. The laws tend to be written using very specific language and defining the limits precisely, whereas the politician is more like a 'marketer' using broad generalized statements to sell an idea or show allegiance to a group (in this case the pro-choice voters). Then again, this room for interpretation is weaponized by the other political team by using the worst interpretation possible.
My (not very educated) guess is that Biden's group position is that under some circumstances, such as very high risk of death during child birth, it should be allowed to choose an abortive method that is less risky to the mother, and to allow this you can't code a hard limit on abortion into the law, you can only encode that specific conditions have to be met (which the Roe v. Wade decision very clearly already does).