Cambridge Chat

So to dismiss with a "for God's sake" or accusation of melodrama is myopic and unfortunate to say the least.

If the mother just HAPPENS to die and it was unknown before, I don't see why this is any different to when the mother actually wants the child. The government would not be to blame.

I was talking merely about the ethics of the issue and not the practicalities.

I think that the dangers of pregnancy are well documented enough for them to come into a lot of decisions regarding abortions. It's not straightforward. The government is blocking the mother from protecting herself from physical harm she can easily avoid through modern medical procedures.

Well I mean this is just rofltastic stuff. I hope you do well with your great achievement in proving something wrong only at the point at which you can't apply this wrongness to the social sphere (where, may I add, most of us theorists would like to derive any sense of truth.)

MB

I think to leave a discussion and not have the strength to be challenged is rather more myopic.

Question, not accusation.

OMG why won't the sodding Newton catalogue work? I need it for thesis-related stuff. *cries*

I'd like to reiterate that if in practice it has been shown that legislating against abortion has increased the rates of abortion (evidence?), then I disagree with the legislation. Only because I prefer the situation where fewer abortions occur.

But this is not interesting and not what other people are basing their arguments on, so why not actually talk about the controversial stuff, not the trivial?

I'd like to reiterate that if in practice it has been shown that legislating against abortion has increased the rates of abortion (evidence?), then I disagree with the legislation.

Apologies, Tom, I misinterpreted. Though in the question you did not include an option for "being entirely serious"...

I am concerned that you seem to think everything boils down to hypothetical argument. I think it was made clear very early on in this debate, when people were calling for it to stop, that this issue is highly personal and therefore inflammatory. Whilst some people may be able to retain philosophical 'distance', others might not. This is not about intellectual (or even character) "strength", really, and, well to be quite frank, anyone who manages to suggest that Bumblebee3 in some way lacks "strength" simply doesn't know her. But that's probably making this rather too personal.

Don't think, too, that those posting 'dispassionately' care less, or are less furious about one thing or another. What was said in the post Bumblebee3 reacted to, as you can surely see, is provocative, whether or not Puppy meant it that way? And, though you might be being all 'intellectual' or 'objective' about this, not all of us are, for one reason or another. Or, perhaps, people's very genuine and intelligent thinking about the issue has led them to be emotional about it? Complicated, isn't it.


Apologies, Tom, I misinterpreted. Though in the question you did not include an option for "being entirely serious"...

Are you arguing that a woman shouldn't be allowed an abortion if she wants one? If so, why? What's the justification?

Are you arguing that a woman shouldn't be allowed an abortion if she wants one? If so, why? What's the justification?

Do you a)think there's nothing inherently bad about abortion or b) that it is bad but that it is worse for mothers to die?

I think that if you can call me myopic even though you don't know me, you can't complain that I don't know someone else when I call them myopic. Maybe I shouldn't have been so dismissive, but I can't help feeling that it is SUCH a shame that someone can get upset simply by discussing something (and it is an important topic to discuss). The answer isn't so clear-cut that she has to get UPSET, and the fact that she felt THIS offended at my opinion that she couldn't even stick around to hear me out insults me a little.

What was said in the post Bumblebee3 reacted to, as you can surely see, is provocative, whether or not Puppy meant it that way?