Comments on: Ah, Sanity http://www.juliansanchez.com/2008/09/08/ah-sanity/ Just another geek in the geek kingdom Fri, 30 Jul 2010 06:46:49 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: JL http://www.juliansanchez.com/2008/09/08/ah-sanity/comment-page-1/#comment-5712 JL Thu, 11 Sep 2008 17:25:35 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=2654#comment-5712 "I dunno, JL, conrad over there seems to want to argue that if Jill concedes (a) the government has an interest in decreasing unwanted pregnancies, then, necessarily, (b) the government is constitutionally empowered to ban abortion. I don’t think that follows." It depends on why she thinks they ought to decrease abortions. clearly they portray their position as desiring a decrease in abortions because it is morally inferior to the alternative. So if they admit that aborting a fetus is equivalent to murder then it is absolutely the responsibility of government to criminalize abortion. But they simultaneously claim that a woman has the right to have an abortion. If a woman has that right, then how and why does the government have any authority what so ever to interfere with these decisions? and how do they justify using tax dollars in doing so? And if one claims a decrease is desired because of the health risks to women, then that would imply that government has the authority to regulate our food consumption, personal lifestyle and everything else. unfortunately, government has already begun assuming many of these roles. “I dunno, JL, conrad over there seems to want to argue that if Jill concedes (a) the government has an interest in decreasing unwanted pregnancies, then, necessarily, (b) the government is constitutionally empowered to ban abortion. I don’t think that follows.”

It depends on why she thinks they ought to decrease abortions. clearly they portray their position as desiring a decrease in abortions because it is morally inferior to the alternative.

So if they admit that aborting a fetus is equivalent to murder then it is absolutely the responsibility of government to criminalize abortion.

But they simultaneously claim that a woman has the right to have an abortion. If a woman has that right, then how and why does the government have any authority what so ever to interfere with these decisions? and how do they justify using tax dollars in doing so?

And if one claims a decrease is desired because of the health risks to women, then that would imply that government has the authority to regulate our food consumption, personal lifestyle and everything else.

unfortunately, government has already begun assuming many of these roles.

]]> By: Sanjay http://www.juliansanchez.com/2008/09/08/ah-sanity/comment-page-1/#comment-5711 Sanjay Thu, 11 Sep 2008 15:33:57 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=2654#comment-5711 That's an antypically silly comment, Mr. Sanchez. I mean, sure, when "life" begins doesn't have to be relevant to when or whether abortion ought to be permissible. But both the questioner, and Joe Biden, knew what was being asked was the latter thing. OK, the language is unfortunate but it was a question about how he feels about abortion, not a deep philosophical one about when "life" begins. And that's how people are taking it, and how I imagine everyone involved figured people would take it. That’s an antypically silly comment, Mr. Sanchez. I mean, sure, when “life” begins doesn’t have to be relevant to when or whether abortion ought to be permissible.
But both the questioner, and Joe Biden, knew what was being asked was the latter thing. OK, the language is unfortunate but it was a question about how he feels about abortion, not a deep philosophical one about when “life” begins. And that’s how people are taking it, and how I imagine everyone involved figured people would take it.

]]> By: southpaw http://www.juliansanchez.com/2008/09/08/ah-sanity/comment-page-1/#comment-5700 southpaw Tue, 09 Sep 2008 04:20:14 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=2654#comment-5700 I dunno, JL, conrad over there seems to want to argue that if Jill concedes (a) the government has an interest in decreasing unwanted pregnancies, then, necessarily, (b) the government is constitutionally empowered to ban abortion. I don't think that follows. Plus, that's all a side issue to the contract work Julian wanted Jill to do: demonstrate that bickering over the precise moment when "life begins" is beside the point. She does that adequately, and I didn't really see anyone effectively undermine the point. I dunno, JL, conrad over there seems to want to argue that if Jill concedes (a) the government has an interest in decreasing unwanted pregnancies, then, necessarily, (b) the government is constitutionally empowered to ban abortion. I don’t think that follows.

Plus, that’s all a side issue to the contract work Julian wanted Jill to do: demonstrate that bickering over the precise moment when “life begins” is beside the point. She does that adequately, and I didn’t really see anyone effectively undermine the point.

]]> By: JL http://www.juliansanchez.com/2008/09/08/ah-sanity/comment-page-1/#comment-5699 JL Mon, 08 Sep 2008 19:12:28 +0000 http://www.juliansanchez.com/?p=2654#comment-5699 thanks for the link, but your subcontractor's blog was fraught with inconsistencies and contradictions as pointed out by conrad in the comments. thanks for the link, but your subcontractor’s blog was fraught with inconsistencies and contradictions as pointed out by conrad in the comments.

]]>