Total Posts:47|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Weird Abortion Laws

Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 5:01:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I've learned about a rather odd abortion law that is either on the table or already in place in several US states that requires abortion seekers/providers introduce ultrasounds before the provision of service. You can read about it here: http://www.guttmacher.org...

In reality, this actually makes sense: the idea is that by introducing mandatory ultrasounds of a fetus, the mother can be dissuaded from getting an abortion, since that "connection" is made. It might be effective, might not, but it is a clear attempt to do something.

I don't know about anyone else, but I think this is very wrong. By forcing abortion providers to do an ultrasound, and by trying to convince mothers that abortion is wrong, the state is starting to cross a well defined line that is, or should be, marked around reproductive health. I can understand having it available, but making it mandatory?

What does everyone else think?
alto2osu
Posts: 277
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 5:15:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Just out of curiosity, do proponents of the law cite any other motivations behind the law? I agree with your assessment, that this is basically a tactic of conscience. I have a difficult time finding myself in total opposition, though. To be perfectly honest, abortion (at least for me) has more to do with the circumstances surrounding the fetus than the fetus itself. For example, if a particularly promiscuous woman is using the procedure because of a total lack of responsibility, I think that a healthy dose of reality is in order, if for no other reason than to dissuade her from making the same mistakes. Seeing the critter you are killing is a powerful image. On the other hand, do I think that a rape victim or a woman in dire medical straits should be subjected to further emotional scarring, which is inevitably what that ultrasound will inflict?

Tough calls...
Frodobaggins
Posts: 602
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 5:15:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I think it's an excellent law. It's easy to destroy something when you don't see it. If you're going to make the choice to kill life, you should at least have what it is you're killing. Some people love to make the rational that its "just a bunch of cells" until it is born. It's about time that those notions were dispelled.
Frodobaggins
Posts: 602
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 5:16:51 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 5:15:55 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
I think it's an excellent law. It's easy to destroy something when you don't see it. If you're going to make the choice to kill life, you should at least have to see what it is you're killing. Some people love to make the rational that its "just a bunch of cells" until it is born. It's about time that those notions were dispelled.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 5:36:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 5:16:51 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
At 1/15/2010 5:15:55 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
I think it's an excellent law. It's easy to destroy something when you don't see it. If you're going to make the choice to kill life, you should at least have to see what it is you're killing. Some people love to make the rational that its "just a bunch of cells" until it is born. It's about time that those notions were dispelled.

Agreed.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 6:23:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 5:16:51 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
At 1/15/2010 5:15:55 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
I think it's an excellent law. It's easy to destroy something when you don't see it. If you're going to make the choice to kill life, you should at least have to see what it is you're killing. Some people love to make the rational that its "just a bunch of cells" until it is born. It's about time that those notions were dispelled.

For a person that advocates the government getting out of people's lives, you're advocating a lot of government being in people's lives.

As I said, I don't mind if the option is there - but here is no excuse to making it mandatory.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 6:27:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 5:15:27 PM, alto2osu wrote:
Just out of curiosity, do proponents of the law cite any other motivations behind the law? I agree with your assessment, that this is basically a tactic of conscience. I have a difficult time finding myself in total opposition, though. To be perfectly honest, abortion (at least for me) has more to do with the circumstances surrounding the fetus than the fetus itself. For example, if a particularly promiscuous woman is using the procedure because of a total lack of responsibility, I think that a healthy dose of reality is in order, if for no other reason than to dissuade her from making the same mistakes. Seeing the critter you are killing is a powerful image. On the other hand, do I think that a rape victim or a woman in dire medical straits should be subjected to further emotional scarring, which is inevitably what that ultrasound will inflict?

Tough calls...

I don't know if they cite any other issues, because this is the first time I've heard of it myself. I guarantee there is more rationale, however I can't see any aside from doctors checking to see if there is any anomalies with the fetus. There doesn't seem to be any medical rationale - just emotional.

And I think on the latter part, about rape victims, is a very powerful one, because I didn't even think of that. It would certainly constitute as cruel and unusual punishment to expose someone in that situation to a constant reminder of trauma. I hope they took that into account when devising these "laws."
Frodobaggins
Posts: 602
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 6:43:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 6:23:56 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 1/15/2010 5:16:51 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
At 1/15/2010 5:15:55 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
I think it's an excellent law. It's easy to destroy something when you don't see it. If you're going to make the choice to kill life, you should at least have to see what it is you're killing. Some people love to make the rational that its "just a bunch of cells" until it is born. It's about time that those notions were dispelled.

For a person that advocates the government getting out of people's lives, you're advocating a lot of government being in people's lives.

As I said, I don't mind if the option is there - but here is no excuse to making it mandatory.

How is making knowledge mandatory a bad thing? I can name plenty instances of it throughout or current government, none of which I think do a detriment to anyone.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 6:47:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 6:43:38 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
How is making knowledge mandatory a bad thing? I can name plenty instances of it throughout or current government, none of which I think do a detriment to anyone.

Because it isn't knowledge - its a willful attempt to coerce. If the mother so wished to have this "knowledge," then the doctor may provide it - but it should not be mandatory, or a requirement, to go through with the procedure.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 6:47:59 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 6:47:03 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 1/15/2010 6:43:38 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
How is making knowledge mandatory a bad thing? I can name plenty instances of it throughout or current government, none of which I think do a detriment to anyone.

Because it isn't knowledge - its a willful attempt to coerce. If the mother so wished to have this "knowledge," then the doctor may provide it - but it should not be mandatory, or a requirement, to go through with the procedure.

Danger! You are sounding like a libertarian.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Frodobaggins
Posts: 602
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 6:51:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 6:47:03 PM, Volkov wrote:
Because it isn't knowledge - its a willful attempt to coerce. If the mother so wished to have this "knowledge," then the doctor may provide it - but it should not be mandatory, or a requirement, to go through with the procedure.

Really? Seeing what your baby looks like isn't knowledge? Are they having biased ultrasounds? Are the Christians conservatives trying to tamper with the evidence?

Serious Volkov, think before you call something "isn't knowledge it's coercion". That is pure BS and you know it.

That would be like being against an effort to educate highschool dropouts about the cons of dropping out of highschool.

If they're facts they're facts. All knowledge is beneficial.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 6:59:52 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 6:51:06 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
Really? Seeing what your baby looks like isn't knowledge? Are they having biased ultrasounds? Are the Christians conservatives trying to tamper with the evidence?

Serious Volkov, think before you call something "isn't knowledge it's coercion". That is pure BS and you know it.

That would be like being against an effort to educate highschool dropouts about the cons of dropping out of highschool.

If they're facts they're facts. All knowledge is beneficial.

What you're saying is akin to believing that being forced to know the US is great is right. Or being being forced to know that God is real is right. Or being forced to know that the minimum wage is best is right.

Sure, knowledge can be beneficial - but you shouldn't have it forced upon you, if you don't want it.
Frodobaggins
Posts: 602
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 7:03:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 6:59:52 PM, Volkov wrote:
What you're saying is akin to believing that being forced to know the US is great is right. Or being being forced to know that God is real is right. Or being forced to know that the minimum wage is best is right.

Sure, knowledge can be beneficial - but you shouldn't have it forced upon you, if you don't want it.

Incorrect. None of the following are facts but are opinions or beliefs based on facts.

Knowledge should and is forced upon you from the moment you enter kindergarten. It's effects are nothing but beneficial to society as a whole.

An ultrasound is not a belief, it is a fact.

You're attempting to distort my personal views to prove your own point. Admit you're wrong instead of attempting to put words in my mouth and strawman the argument.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 7:27:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 7:03:17 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
Incorrect. None of the following are facts but are opinions or beliefs based on facts.

Knowledge should and is forced upon you from the moment you enter kindergarten.

Yeah, it is, it absolutely is - but we already have lots of issues surrounding indoctrination in schools, so I don't quite understand the point you're making. Is indoctrination good?

It's effects are nothing but beneficial to society as a whole.

That depends. Are you engineering your society? If you are, then yes, it is beneficial.

However, I don't believe in engineering society. Schools are there to teach children how to communicate, how to do maths, some history, some knowledge of the political system they live in, some languages, etc. - things they need to basically survive in the world that is before them. Its education for survival - not education for ideology.

There is a big difference between this kind of knowledge being taught, and the kind of knowledge you're trying to teach, which has a goal of coercing someone to do something they may not want to do, or know. Its an attempt at indoctrination.

An ultrasound is not a belief, it is a fact.

A fact of what - machinery? A fact of a video? Or a fact that there is a child inside the mother? Well, you know, I think she knows that.

You're attempting to distort my personal views to prove your own point. Admit you're wrong instead of attempting to put words in my mouth and strawman the argument.

But I am not wrong. You are not forcing a "fact" upon a mother through using an ultrasound to show her the fetus - you're coercing her by forcing knowledge upon her that she may not want, that knowledge being specifically the form of the fetus inside her. This "knowledge" is meant to coerce her to make this much talked about "connection" in hopes of changing her mind about the abortion. That is the rational, nothing else. If she wants the ultrasound, then she can get the ultrasound - that is her decision, not doctor's, not the state's, and definitely not yours.
Discipulus
Posts: 36
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 7:29:52 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
The law is wrong. This is a simple fact. Should the government force me to read a certain book if I do not wish to do so, even if I would be better for it? No. It is just another form of government control, and no argument can justify it.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 7:31:23 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 7:29:52 PM, Discipulus wrote:
The law is wrong. This is a simple fact. Should the government force me to read a certain book if I do not wish to do so, even if I would be better for it? No. It is just another form of government control, and no argument can justify it.

Thank you my libertarian friend!

You know a thread brings ideologies together when we're arguing on the same side. xD
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 7:38:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Normally when you force a woman to lie down and have a clear gel like substance applied to her before using a strange device to look inside her Christian conservatives would be against it-- heck normally they'd be against it if she's willing unless she's married to the one doing it. How odd.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 7:41:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 7:38:54 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Normally when you force a woman to lie down and have a clear gel like substance applied to her before using a strange device to look inside her Christian conservatives would be against it-- heck normally they'd be against it if she's willing unless she's married to the one doing it. How odd.

LOL. Sigged.
Frodobaggins
Posts: 602
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 7:44:48 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 7:27:41 PM, Volkov wrote:
Yeah, it is, it absolutely is - but we already have lots of issues surrounding indoctrination in schools, so I don't quite understand the point you're making. Is indoctrination good?
No but knowledge is, that's commonly known as information or true reliable facts. If people are "indoctrinated" with knowledge that's generally positive.

That depends. Are you engineering your society? If you are, then yes, it is beneficial.
Straw man. The argument is whether if its beneficial to society. Facts are. Get over it.

However, I don't believe in engineering society. Schools are there to teach children how to communicate, how to do maths, some history, some knowledge of the political system they live in, some languages, etc. - things they need to basically survive in the world that is before them. Its education for survival - not education for ideology.

You're right, uneducated ideology is much more beneficial to society than educated society. Seriously this is pathetic.

There is a big difference between this kind of knowledge being taught, and the kind of knowledge you're trying to teach, which has a goal of coercing someone to do something they may not want to do, or know. Its an attempt at indoctrination.

Straw man. There are no "types" of knowledge. There is fact and there is opinion. "Indoctrination" is simply a straw man you are trying to set up to make it seem like a ultrasound is manipulated by the conservatives. It's a fact. Accept it. Stop making these ridiculous straw man arguments which have no bearing on the original argument and are merely an attempt by you to divert the original topic.

An ultrasound is not a belief, it is a fact.

A fact of what - machinery? A fact of a video? Or a fact that there is a child inside the mother? Well, you know, I think she knows that.

Well in many instances you would think incorrectly then. It's a fact. Many women believe that only a mass of cells exist. The fact or "EVIDENCE" shows otherwise. It doesn't matter what it's a fact of. Do facts deriving from technology make something anything less of a fact?? Seriously.

But I am not wrong. You are not forcing a "fact" upon a mother through using an ultrasound to show her the fetus - you're coercing her by forcing knowledge upon her that she may not want, that knowledge being specifically the form of the fetus inside her. This "knowledge" is meant to coerce her to make this much talked about "connection" in hopes of changing her mind about the abortion. That is the rational, nothing else. If she wants the ultrasound, then she can get the ultrasound - that is her decision, not doctor's, not the state's, and definitely not yours.

But you are. "Forcing a fact" otherwise known as education is proven to be a positive thing for society. You're simply angry that the facts might change peoples opinion from yours. Get over it. Education is always postive. Its indoctrination if the facts are biased or not true. An ultrasound is either.
Frodobaggins
Posts: 602
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 7:46:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 7:29:52 PM, Discipulus wrote:
The law is wrong. This is a simple fact. Should the government force me to read a certain book if I do not wish to do so, even if I would be better for it? No. It is just another form of government control, and no argument can justify it.

The law is wrong. This is a simple fact. Should the government teach children how to spell if they do not wish to do so, even if they would be better for it? No. It's just another form of government control, and no argument can justify it.
Frodobaggins
Posts: 602
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 7:49:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 7:44:48 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
You're right, uneducated ideology is much more beneficial to society than educated ideology.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 7:51:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 7:46:41 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
At 1/15/2010 7:29:52 PM, Discipulus wrote:
The law is wrong. This is a simple fact. Should the government force me to read a certain book if I do not wish to do so, even if I would be better for it? No. It is just another form of government control, and no argument can justify it.

The law is wrong. This is a simple fact. Should the government teach children how to spell if they do not wish to do so, even if they would be better for it? No. It's just another form of government control, and no argument can justify it.

The law is wrong. This is a simple fact. Should the government teach children how to breath if they do not wish to do so, even if they would be better for it? No. It's just another form of government control, and no argument can justify it.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 7:58:46 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 7:44:48 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
No but knowledge is, that's commonly known as information or true reliable facts. If people are "indoctrinated" with knowledge that's generally positive.

So, tell me, what "true and reliable facts" can a woman who is going for an abortion get from being forced to have an ultrasound? That she's pregnant? And don't give me the "mass of cells" BS.

Straw man. The argument is whether if its beneficial to society. Facts are. Get over it.

It was far from a straw man - it was a question. And you have yet to prove any "fact" to be received, just "knowledge" which is coerced for purposes of swaying opinion.

You're right, uneducated ideology is much more beneficial to society than educated society. Seriously this is pathetic.

"Uneducated ideology is much more beneficial to society than educated society."

I explained what education is and what its purpose is. I explained the difference between education and indoctrination. You fire back with a half-assed sentence that doesn't make any sense except that having biased ideology intertwined with education is good. 'Kay.

Straw man. There are no "types" of knowledge. There is fact and there is opinion. "Indoctrination" is simply a straw man you are trying to set up to make it seem like a ultrasound is manipulated by the conservatives. It's a fact. Accept it. Stop making these ridiculous straw man arguments which have no bearing on the original argument and are merely an attempt by you to divert the original topic.

A forced ultrasound is not a "fact," its an attempt to sway opinion by forcing women to look at it and become guilt-tripped by the state.

Well in many instances you would think incorrectly then. It's a fact. Many women believe that only a mass of cells exist. The fact or "EVIDENCE" shows otherwise. It doesn't matter what it's a fact of. Do facts deriving from technology make something anything less of a fact?? Seriously.

You're seriously skewing this argument. "Many women" do not simply believe that their fetus is only a "mass of cells." Most take these decisions with heavy hearts and full knowledge of what they're doing. This law forces them to look at an ultrasound that they may not want, and become guilt-tripped into no longer having the abortion.

But you are. "Forcing a fact" otherwise known as education is proven to be a positive thing for society. You're simply angry that the facts might change peoples opinion from yours. Get over it. Education is always postive. Its indoctrination if the facts are biased or not true. An ultrasound is either.

A forced ultrasound is not a "fact," its an attempt to sway opinion by forcing women to look at it and become guilt-tripped by the state. There is nothing else to it.

If a woman wanted to look at the ultrasound, then let them. By why force them? Why, for the love of God, why?
Frodobaggins
Posts: 602
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 8:32:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 7:58:46 PM, Volkov wrote:
So, tell me, what "true and reliable facts" can a woman who is going for an abortion get from being forced to have an ultrasound? That she's pregnant? And don't give me the "mass of cells" BS.

Why shouldn't I give you the "mass of cells argument"?

Obviously the knowledge of what the life whom she is deciding to kill looks like.

Clearly, seeing something happening is a more effective means of education vs being told it is happening is.

I can describe what an ocean is but do you really get a good idea of what it is until you see it?

It was far from a straw man - it was a question. And you have yet to prove any "fact" to be received, just "knowledge" which is coerced for purposes of swaying opinion.
It was a question that had no relevance or bearing on the original argument. Knowledge can't be coerced. Knowledge is knowledge. You're attempt to misconstrue facts for beliefs and conservative opinions are ridiculous and is clearly a straw man because there is no real argument against education.


You're right, uneducated ideology is much more beneficial to society than educated society. Seriously this is pathetic.

"Uneducated ideology is much more beneficial to society than educated society."

I explained what education is and what its purpose is. I explained the difference between education and indoctrination. You fire back with a half-assed sentence that doesn't make any sense except that having biased ideology intertwined with education is good. 'Kay.

Protip: Read right below this post where I corrected the statement. You're attempting to make the argument that education should only be used for survival purposes which is ludicrous. I suppose you believe college is a dangerous institution created by the conservative right wing?

Seriously. All education is beneficial. Your strawman that all education that doesn't involve survival is political indoctrination is ridiculous. Facts are facts. Facts are not biased as you're trying to imply or suggest.

A forced ultrasound is not a "fact," its an attempt to sway opinion by forcing women to look at it and become guilt-tripped by the state.

Really? an ultrasound is not a fact? Is it merely an opinion? Seriously.

One could make the same argument that documented proof of evolution is political indoctrination by the liberals because the theory of evolution doesn't rely on survival and is merely an attempt to guilt-trip people into believing it.

Do you see how ridiculous that argument is?

You're seriously skewing this argument. "Many women" do not simply believe that their fetus is only a "mass of cells." Most take these decisions with heavy hearts and full knowledge of what they're doing. This law forces them to look at an ultrasound that they may not want, and become guilt-tripped into no longer having the abortion.

If even one of the women believe their fetus is a mass of cells then it is beneficial. When 1 out of 5 americans believe the sun revolves around the earth your argument fails to hold water and is simply some conspiracy theorist that the government is trying to guilt-trip everyone rather than educate them.
http://www.nytimes.com...

If women know what a fetus looks like, then seeing what the fetus looks like shouldn't unnerve them.

Such would be making the argument that a jury shouldn't have to see the person they are sentencing to death because by seeing them they are guilt-tripped into sparing his life.

A forced ultrasound is not a "fact," its an attempt to sway opinion by forcing women to look at it and become guilt-tripped by the state. There is nothing else to it.

Incorrect. A fact is a fact. An opinion is an opinion. A woman who is swayed by an ultrasound shouldn't be having an abortion in the first place.

If a woman wanted to look at the ultrasound, then let them. By why force them? Why, for the love of God, why?

Why force anyone to learn anything?
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 9:10:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 8:32:53 PM, Frodobaggins wrote:
I can describe what an ocean is but do you really get a good idea of what it is until you see it?

So this excuses you forcing me to see the ocean?

It was a question that had no relevance or bearing on the original argument. Knowledge can't be coerced. Knowledge is knowledge. You're attempt to misconstrue facts for beliefs and conservative opinions are ridiculous and is clearly a straw man because there is no real argument against education.

Except there is nothing educative about forcing women to have an ultrasound in order to guilt trip them into not having an abortion.

Protip: Read right below this post where I corrected the statement.

You know you're insecure when you can't face your opponent's argument. Now, let me lay it out for you one more time:

Education is not what you're advocating - its an attempt at coercion, an attempt at indoctrination. Education is about facts and intellectual inquiry - not attempted guilt trips in order to force a specific outcome.

Seriously. All education is beneficial. Your strawman that all education that doesn't involve survival is political indoctrination is ridiculous. Facts are facts. Facts are not biased as you're trying to imply or suggest.

What? When did I say "education isn't survival." Who is strawmanning who here?

Really? an ultrasound is not a fact? Is it merely an opinion? Seriously.

Forcing a woman to look at an ultrasound in order to guilt trip her is not a "fact" - its coercion.

One could make the same argument that documented proof of evolution is political indoctrination by the liberals because the theory of evolution doesn't rely on survival and is merely an attempt to guilt-trip people into believing it.

False. The theory of evolution is scientific fact upon which all modern biology is based on. Without it, you couldn't understand today's science. Thats a fact.

What is not a "fact" is forcing a woman who knows full well what is inside her body in order to guilt trip her to make a specific decision.

Do you see how ridiculous that argument is?

More than you know.

If even one of the women believe their fetus is a mass of cells then it is beneficial. When 1 out of 5 americans believe the sun revolves around the earth your argument fails to hold water and is simply some conspiracy theorist that the government is trying to guilt-trip everyone rather than educate them.

Oh, so the government is trying to educate now. Thats good - lets educate bankers on what to do. Lets educate businesses on what wages to set. Lets educate women that they're wrong to have an abortion!

Please, give it a rest. You're advocating social control, not "education."

And may I remind you that those polled were adults - adults who have the right to make their own choices. If the government wants to put out the information that shows them they're wrong, then so be it. But you can't force those adults to learn anything. They have to learn of their own accord, not forced by the government to.

And, INB4 "what about children": children and adolescents are quite different in terms of intellect and biology from adults, who have the full capability to make their own decisions. Children usually do not, which is why primary education is focused on communication and decision making - working to build that reasoning capacity.

If women know what a fetus looks like, then seeing what the fetus looks like shouldn't unnerve them.

Aha. And of course, we see the ideology claw its way to the top.

Lets put it together here. What you're saying is that if abortion seekers know what a fetus looks like, then it shouldn't unnerve them - but by providing forced ultrasounds, you're trying to catch those that either don't know or are unnerved into this web of coercion, guilt-tripping them into not going through with the abortion. It isn't voluntary, asking "do you want an ultrasound?", its forced and done in order to get a certain outcome. Score one for the pro-lifers!

Such would be making the argument that a jury shouldn't have to see the person they are sentencing to death because by seeing them they are guilt-tripped into sparing his life.

Lol. You are of course away that a large portion of prosecutors in the United States will no longer bring forward death penalty charges because juries tend to acquit if its on the table, right?

Incorrect. A fact is a fact. An opinion is an opinion. A woman who is swayed by an ultrasound shouldn't be having an abortion in the first place.

That's an opinion, and quite a telling one at that. :)

Anyways, I'm not going to argue this with you all night. Have your opinion, I don't care - but don't insult everyone's intelligence by saying its a "fact."
Frodobaggins
Posts: 602
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 9:41:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/15/2010 9:10:16 PM, Volkov wrote:
So this excuses you forcing me to see the ocean?
Ignoring the point I was trying to make that visual education is superior to other forms + Changing the argument to one that is different to the point I was making = strawman

Except there is nothing educative about forcing women to have an ultrasound in order to guilt trip them into not having an abortion.
Really? There is nothing educational about an ultrasound? So I suppose everything learned in school is not educational because it is forced?

You know you're insecure when you can't face your opponent's argument. Now, let me lay it out for you one more time:
Ad hominem

Education is not what you're advocating - its an attempt at coercion, an attempt at indoctrination. Education is about facts and intellectual inquiry - not attempted guilt trips in order to force a specific outcome.

Incorrect. Education = teaching someone facts. Ultrasound = fact thus Ultrasound = education. You argument is that making someone guilty by teaching a fact is indoctrination. So essentially you are saying that if I make children guilty by teaching them that the colonists killed innocent indians, despite that this is a fact = indoctrination?

What? When did I say "education isn't survival." Who is strawmanning who here?

Not me as you stated: "Schools are there to teach children how to communicate, how to do maths, some history, some knowledge of the political system they live in, some languages, etc. - things they need to basically survive in the world that is before them. Its education for survival - not education for ideology."

Really? an ultrasound is not a fact? Is it merely an opinion? Seriously.

Forcing a woman to look at an ultrasound in order to guilt trip her is not a "fact" - its coercion.

Repeating what you say doesn't make you anymore correct. Ad Nauseam. Video evidence is factual despite its intended purpose.

False. The theory of evolution is scientific fact upon which all modern biology is based on. Without it, you couldn't understand today's science. Thats a fact.

NO ITS NOT ITS COERCION! INDOCTRINATION! but science isn't essential to survival. Thus its education for an ideology which we all know = indoctrination. You're trying to guilt trip a child into believing evolution.

What is not a "fact" is forcing a woman who knows full well what is inside her body in order to guilt trip her to make a specific decision.
Really? Do you have proof that 100% of women know what a fetus looks like at the exact time they are giving an abortion?

More than you know.
Ignore the analogy, that's always a great argument.

If even one of the women believe their fetus is a mass of cells then it is beneficial. When 1 out of 5 americans believe the sun revolves around the earth your argument fails to hold water and is simply some conspiracy theorist that the government is trying to guilt-trip everyone rather than educate them.

Oh, so the government is trying to educate now. Thats good - lets educate bankers on what to do. Lets educate businesses on what wages to set. Lets educate women that they're wrong to have an abortion!

Strawman again. Attempting to equate facts with beliefs or opinion. But you keep trying, I'm sure the 10th time you try to do so, it will really make you look more intelligent and magically prove your point to be correct

Please, give it a rest. You're advocating social control, not "education."
Incorrect you're strawmanning 90% of your argument the other 5% you are ignoring and the other 5% you're repeating the same phrase that knowledge that you feel makes people guilty is indoctrination.

And may I remind you that those polled were adults - adults who have the right to make their own choices. If the government wants to put out the information that shows them they're wrong, then so be it. But you can't force those adults to learn anything. They have to learn of their own accord, not forced by the government to.

Strawman again. Attempting to equate the teaching of facts with forcing people to make decisions. No one is forcing the mothers to learn it, it is as you said, they are "put out the information that shows them they're wrong"

And, INB4 "what about children": children and adolescents are quite different in terms of intellect and biology from adults, who have the full capability to make their own decisions. Children usually do not, which is why primary education is focused on communication and decision making - working to build that reasoning capacity.

Education is forced on people at all stages of their life. From adults who are forced to retrain for their work or forced to retrain to retain their CPA degree, etc. Teachers are forced to learn, everyone that has a job or lives is forced to learn or is at least presented with factual information. The news spouts it out, would you want to legalize the news because it presents others with facts and thus is indoctrination?


If women know what a fetus looks like, then seeing what the fetus looks like shouldn't unnerve them.

Aha. And of course, we see the ideology claw its way to the top.

??? I fail to see how this is ideology.

Lets put it together here. What you're saying is that if abortion seekers know what a fetus looks like, then it shouldn't unnerve them - but by providing forced ultrasounds, you're trying to catch those that either don't know or are unnerved into this web of coercion, guilt-tripping them into not going through with the abortion. It isn't voluntary, asking "do you want an ultrasound?", its forced and done in order to get a certain outcome. Score one for the pro-lifers!

How about score one for the people who wish others to be educated before making a decision? This entire argument has been you essentially trying to turn this into a pro life pro choice argument by strawmaning every point I make. Good try, better luck next time bud.

The argument is about forcing information on people vs leaving them uneducated.

Sorry but education will win out every time.

Lol. You are of course aware that a large portion of prosecutors in the United States will no longer bring forward death penalty charges because juries tend to acquit if its on the table, right?
Again ignoring the analogy.

Incorrect. A fact is a fact. An opinion is an opinion. A woman who is swayed by an ultrasound shouldn't be having an abortion in the first place.

That's an opinion, and quite a telling one at that. :)

Anyways, I'm not going to argue this with you all night. Have your opinion, I don't care - but don't insult everyone's intelligence by saying its a "fact."

I'm sure everyone is insulted by me insinuating that an ultrasound is a fact rather than an opinion.

LOL
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2010 9:48:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At____...Volkov wrote... reproductive health

I think using the term "reproductive health" as the main focus of abortions is misleading, as really the thing people are most concerned about is whether or not they're gonna have a baby, from what I can tell their "health" is not really the main concern of Abortion seekers.

However I agree, The law seems an overstep into what is legally the mother's decision.

I checked your profile Volkov... Late term abortion?.. For shame :*(
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2010 12:03:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
By forcing the woman to have an ultrasound you force her to fully recognise the fact that she is pregnant and what this really means. If she proceeds she does so with full certainty that what she is doing is ultimately for the right, or for the greater good.

Without the ultrasound she may make a decision that she will later regret.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2010 12:22:10 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Here's something that I'm surprised Volkov hasn't brought up.

I agree that a sonogram is education that provides a mother with more information, and surely it is best for a mother to have all the information available.

However, a mother cannot possibly have all the information available. So, who gets to decide which information the mother should receive? If doctors are mandated to give all women a sonogram, then surely doctors must also show her documentaries about postpartum depression and about unfit mothers who harm and abuse their children.

You claim to want to provide eduction, because is education is good. Education is good, but who gets to decide which education to provide? I think you're advocating sonograms because you're against abortion. Here's the thing: I'm against abortion, too.

But I know that the choice of what to education herself with lies best with the mother--not the government, not some bureaucratic hospital system, and certainly not you or I.
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2010 12:26:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/16/2010 12:22:10 AM, PoeJoe wrote:

But I know that the choice of what to education herself with lies best with the mother--not the government, not some bureaucratic hospital system, and certainly not you or I.

what to education herself with

Leave it to a socialist to undermine the case for liberty from the inside.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.