6 ms·

As a Bernie-style 'leftist', I can't say a response to this abortion assertion any better than Pete Buttigieg did on Fox news (<2 min clip), and I bet the vast

by mijkal 4y ago

As a Bernie-style 'leftist', I can't say a response to this abortion assertion any better than Pete Buttigieg did on Fox news (<2 min clip), and I bet the vast majority of _all_ Americans would agree with this take: https://youtu.be/wKOoWYfIzIw https://youtu.be/wKOoWYfIzIw

leereeves 4y ago
Laws are necessary because we can't trust everyone. Some women throw their newborn babies in the trash. Are you willing to trust them to "draw the line" too, or would you insist that the legislature draw a line at birth?
- fzeroracer 4y ago
  The line is drawn at birth. I'm not sure what you're trying to say here unless you're arguing that those states that allow abortions at all stages allow you to abort a baby that has already been delivered.
  - leereeves 4y ago
    Buttigieg asked "who gets to draw the line?" The answer is: the legislature, always, everywhere. Some legislatures draw the line at six weeks, others draw it at birth, but every legislature draws a line.
    - fzeroracer 4y ago
      Yes, and the legislature is often incorrect. For example, Texas draws the line at 'never', and it's medical exemption is so narrow as to never be used even in cases like ectopic pregnancies. The point is that those states don't trust women to handle their own health and so they force the issue upon them. If you have an actual point to make can you explain it.
      - leereeves 4y ago
        It's very simple. No state or nation "trusts women" to draw the line where a new human being acquires the right to life. Every legislature takes that responsibility on itself (even those that draw the line at birth). Do you trust women to decide whether newborns should live or die? Does Buttigieg?
        fzeroracer 4y ago
        So your point is an entirely irrelevant argument about moving the goalposts past abortion to make a nitpicky argument around trust. The entire point is that ultimately it's her body you're trying to dictate. Do you think the legislature has a vested interest in controlling what men do with their organs? Should they pass laws preventing men from tying their tubes because the legislature has a vested interest in keeping population growth high?
        leereeves 4y ago
        You do understand that a fetus is not part of the mother's body, right? It's quite normal for the legislature to get involved when the interests of two parties are in conflict.

by mijkal 4y ago

leereeves 4y ago

Laws are necessary because we can't trust everyone. Some women throw their newborn babies in the trash. Are you willing to trust them to "draw the line" too, or would you insist that the legislature draw a line at birth?

fzeroracer 4y ago
The line is drawn at birth. I'm not sure what you're trying to say here unless you're arguing that those states that allow abortions at all stages allow you to abort a baby that has already been delivered.
- leereeves 4y ago
  Buttigieg asked "who gets to draw the line?" The answer is: the legislature, always, everywhere. Some legislatures draw the line at six weeks, others draw it at birth, but every legislature draws a line.
  - fzeroracer 4y ago
    Yes, and the legislature is often incorrect. For example, Texas draws the line at 'never', and it's medical exemption is so narrow as to never be used even in cases like ectopic pregnancies. The point is that those states don't trust women to handle their own health and so they force the issue upon them. If you have an actual point to make can you explain it.
    - leereeves 4y ago
      It's very simple. No state or nation "trusts women" to draw the line where a new human being acquires the right to life. Every legislature takes that responsibility on itself (even those that draw the line at birth). Do you trust women to decide whether newborns should live or die? Does Buttigieg?
      - fzeroracer 4y ago
        So your point is an entirely irrelevant argument about moving the goalposts past abortion to make a nitpicky argument around trust. The entire point is that ultimately it's her body you're trying to dictate. Do you think the legislature has a vested interest in controlling what men do with their organs? Should they pass laws preventing men from tying their tubes because the legislature has a vested interest in keeping population growth high?
        leereeves 4y ago
        You do understand that a fetus is not part of the mother's body, right? It's quite normal for the legislature to get involved when the interests of two parties are in conflict.