Three people shot dead outside abortion clinic in the USA

Yes I am comfortable. Her body, her choice.
By your logic it's wrong to use a condom?

So personal, emotional choice goes above and beyond reason?

Why is that?

Posted from TSR Mobile

So personal, emotional choice goes above and beyond reason?

Why is that?

Posted from TSR Mobile

I don't actually understand what you are asking.

1. If, as a third party, you see no medical or ethical reason for a child to be aborted with both families and the man happy to have a child, you think a woman's choice to abort because she would prefer to have the same social life should be accepted still?

2. Why does my logic mean condoms should not be used.

Posted from TSR Mobile

America clearly has the biggest psychopath:normal person ratio in the western world.

1.) Yes. It's a woman's body. It's her personal autonomy to choose what grows or doesn't grow inside it.

2.) You're argument against abortion is that it prevents a potential life. So do condoms.

1. If, as a third party, you see no medical or ethical reason for a child to be aborted with both families and the man happy to have a child, you think a woman's choice to abort because she would prefer to have the same social life should be accepted still?

2. Why does my logic mean condoms should not be used.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I like how this isn't a terrorist act according to the media

Posted from TSR Mobile

1.) Yes. It's a woman's body. It's her personal autonomy to choose what grows or doesn't grow inside it.

2.) You're argument against abortion is that it prevents a potential life. So do condoms.

- but can you justify why a woman's autonomy that (in this hypothetical instance) has no medical or ethical reason is right?

- My argument is questioning your stance that because a baby grows in a woman's body, she has the overriding decision on killing it, regardless of whether it's morally right or not. It has nothing to do with and absolute rejection of abortion.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Ethical reasons are not a fixed concept. They are subjective by nature. You may think something unethical and others may reasonably think the opposite.
They are a bad justification for something alone.

As for medical evidence? What on earth do you mean by medical evidence for abortion being right?
It's her body, it's growing inside of her. It's her choice. It's not a 'baby' anyway until about 26 weeks. After then fair enough. But before then it's absolutely her choice.

But surely you think there is some substance to ethics. You would think those who think it right that an abortion clinic was shot are dead wrong don't you? It's not so entirely subjective as to be pointless, otherwise you would have no argument to countries who have abortion as illegal. I think ethical concepts can be concrete enough to be a factor.

There mother could have situations I've cancer etc. Such medical situations naturally bring forth the option of abortion.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I believe in personal autonomy. That it is a person's right to choose what happens/ doesn't happen to their body. It is therefore a woman's right to choose. After 26 weeks, the foetus is an actual person, so fair enough, they cannot abort after that. But before then it's not a person.
Ethical reasons are not enough to be a factor by themselves. They need to be backed up. Otherwise you have a situation where you state 'x is wrong because it's wrong'.

If someone cannot support why they judge something morally then it has little weight. Before the 26 weeks, the woman should have good reason for abortion, I think that if she can't justify her actions past repeating 'my problem my decision' then that's a sign she hasn't a good reason.

Posted from TSR Mobile

IRA...

ETA, red army.

I don't think the Soviet Army was involved in terrorism.

And who's body is it growing inside? Hers. It's in her body, it's her choice.

Tell me, do you agree with the death penalty?