Is abortion analogous to taxation?

jayem · May 16, 2019

Rubiks said:
Or perhaps taxation is a necessary evil in which there is no viable alternative?

In general, yes. Modern life is complicated. It's dependent upon services that most people cannot provide for themselves. Like police, fire, and emergency rescue. Modern commerce depends on decent roads and a transportation infrastructure. And on schools to educate people who can constructively participate in a technology-based economy. The world is still dangerous, so a modern country needs a national defense. And--since the vast majority of people in this day and age are not totally self-sufficient--a modern, civilized nation provides its population with some degree of a social safety net. It's just not feasible to fund these and other functions individually and voluntarily. It must be done collectively. Which means taxation. It's the only way to maintain a high standard of living in the 21st century and beyond.

LoAmmi · May 16, 2019

Rubiks said:
I was just noticing how the topic of bodily autonomy relates to financial autonomy. If it is a violation of rights to force a woman to hook up their organs to a fetus, would it not also be a violation of rights to force someone to pay taxes for something?

I don't really have a strong opinion either way, its just an amusing observation I made. I just wanted to bring up a discussion.

I think the difference is that most people generally recognize that our taxes are needed to run our government, something most of us believe we need at some level. Sure, some think we'd be better off without a government entirely, and they are welcome to their shortsighted, wrong opinion. The rest of us want there to be laws, protections, the military, and other things that only the government can bring us. Giving up some money in order for that to exist is part of being in society.

None of that applies to body autonomy in the sense of abortion.

redleghunter · May 16, 2019

Sparagmos said:
True. But 70% of Americans are openly pro-choice, and IMO another 10% are secretly pro-choice, including a lot of male politicians who have paid for abortions. The Supreme Court has an interest in upholding the will of the people and preventing social unrest. And there would be MAJOR social unrest.

Most of the surveys put the US at 50/50 and that number changes as the weeks pregnant increase.

redleghunter · May 16, 2019

Allandavid said:
Of course he does....and a woman who is in any meaningful relationship would take his views into account.

But the final decision should rest with her...

Therefore any argument against the consensual male is forfeit in the matter.

tall73 · May 16, 2019

redleghunter said:
Therefore any argument against the consensual male is forfeit in the matter.

In the current legal structure, yes. Only the woman has the legal choice.

I suppose the point the other poster is making is that once you declare abortion to be illegal, then there should also be penalties for the man assisting in said illegal abortion, etc. It would be consistent to do so.

For instance, murder is illegal. Incitement to murder, assisting in murder, etc. are also illegal.

redleghunter · May 16, 2019

tall73 said:
In the current legal structure, yes. Only the woman has the legal choice.

I suppose the point the other poster is making is that once you declare abortion to be illegal, then there should also be penalties for the man assisting in said illegal abortion, etc. It would be consistent to do so.

for instance, murder is illegal. Incitement to murder, assisting in murder, etc. are also illegal.

I agree. It takes two to tango and both got on the dance floor together. Both share 100% of the responsibility to the child. Not 50/50.

Speedwell · May 16, 2019

tall73 said:
In the current legal structure, yes. Only the woman has the legal choice.

I suppose the point the other poster is making is that once you declare abortion to be illegal, then there should also be penalties for the man assisting in said illegal abortion, etc. It would be consistent to do so.

for instance, murder is illegal. Incitement to murder, assisting in murder, etc. are also illegal.

The new Alabama law does not criminalize the woman having an abortion, only the doctor or other person performing it.

Sparagmos · May 16, 2019

redleghunter said:
Most of the surveys put the US at 50/50 and that number changes as the weeks pregnant increase.

Oh wow, perhaps I’m wrong. I haven’t looked at the numbers in a long time.

Albion · May 16, 2019

Rubiks said:
I think "bodily autonomy" is defined specifically to only refer one's own body.

...and there is no such policy as "bodily autonomy" in effect when it comes to other possible medical procedures. Its just something to say in defense of abortions.

You cannot, for instance, check into a hospital and ask that your arms be amputated simply because you have some strange body appearance issues and expect the surgeons on staff to do it.

Speedwell · May 16, 2019

Sparagmos said:
Oh wow, perhaps I’m wrong. I haven’t looked at the numbers in a long time.

And, of course, it depends on how any particular poll frames the question.

Rubiks · May 16, 2019

Albion said:
...and there is no such policy as "bodily autonomy" in effect when it comes to other possible medical procedures. Its just something to say in defense of abortions.

You cannot, for instance, check into a hospital and ask that your arms be amputated simply because you have some strange body appearance issues and expect the surgeons on staff to do it.

A person who wants that obviously isn't mentally competent to make that decision in that case, though.

Rubiks · May 16, 2019

tall73 said:
In the current legal structure, yes. Only the woman has the legal choice.

Should the biological father have to choice of whether to be the legal father?

Sparagmos · May 16, 2019

No Username Found said:
First, I should have been more specific in that I am not questioning the fact that access to conreaceptives reduce unwanted pregnancies. My issue is your claim that legalizing abortion results in less abortions. The only data provided is coincidental. There is evidence that legalizing abortion will result in less abortions. The study only shows that there are more abortions in developing countries in Africa and South America than in developed western countries. Poverty may be a more probable conclusion because people will choose to abort a baby they cannot afford. Additionally, almost all the sources you referenced used Guttmacher as their source. A organization who admits in their website that their mission is to push women's rights for abortion. Any source who openly admits to push an agenda is not a credible source.

I can concede that the correlation is not causation, and say that there is no evidence that making abortions illegal will reduce the abortion rate (although I would expect it to slightly). What we can conclude from the data (as you do) is that we can reduce abortion rates by making contraception readily available. I know I keep harping on this, but I’m not getting ANY answers as to why pro-lifers aren’t pushing contraception access and education in order to prevent abortions. Look at Switzerland - their abortion rate is less than half of the U.S. rate. What is really going on, why would pro-lifers not be aggressively pushing for measures pretty much guaranteed to reduce abortions?

Albion · May 16, 2019

Rubiks said:
A person who wants that obviously isn't mentally competent to make that decision in that case, though.

Sure, I used an extreme example in order to make the point. There are many less gruesome procedures that a hospital will not perform merely because the patient requests it.

If you have watched the TV show "Botched" you know that even plastic surgeons who perform certain operations simply for vanity reasons will refuse to do one if it is judged to be too threatening to the patients health.

jayem · May 16, 2019

redleghunter said:
Most of the surveys put the US at 50/50 and that number changes as the weeks pregnant increase.

I guarantee that a law criminalizing abortion for any reason except a life-threatening emergency, and from the time before a woman even knows she's pregnant would be reprehensible to a large majority of Americans. And to an even larger majority of women. Not to mention the idiotic new GA law. Which allows a 10 year prison sentence for a woman who has an abortion in a state where it's legal. (And I thought The Handmaid's Tale was fiction. :doh:

) Women will see this as a politically motivated, misogynistic, dictatorial, and insulting affront to their judgement and personal freedom. And they'll be absolutely right.

redleghunter · May 16, 2019

jayem said:
I guarantee that a law criminalizing abortion for any reason except a life-threatening emergency, and from the time before a woman even knows she's pregnant would be reprehensible to a large majority of Americans. And to an even larger majority of women. Not to mention the idiotic new GA law. Which allows a 10 year prison sentence for a woman who has an abortion in a state where it's legal. (And I thought The Handmaid's Tale was fiction. ) Women will see this as a politically motivated, misogynistic, dictatorial, and insulting affront to their judgement and personal freedom. And they'll be absolutely right.

Within those states. No I don’t think it will change.

Nationally? Sure. CA and NY is very populous and already have enshrined Roe in their laws. Any overturn of Roe v Wade would bring us back to the states deciding.

Belk · May 16, 2019

Albion said:
...and there is no such policy as "bodily autonomy" in effect when it comes to other possible medical procedures. Its just something to say in defense of abortions.

You cannot, for instance, check into a hospital and ask that your arms be amputated simply because you have some strange body appearance issues and expect the surgeons on staff to do it.

Yes there is. Bodily autonomy is so integrated into our legal system that it survives your death. You can not harvest organs from a person without their permission.

Albion · May 16, 2019

jayem said:
I guarantee that a law criminalizing abortion for any reason except a life-threatening emergency, and from the time before a woman even knows she's pregnant would be reprehensible to a large majority of Americans.

Well then, just think of how reprehensible it is to the half of America that disapproves of killing a baby simply because he is inconvenient.

That aside, the matter of all these laws being passed by various state legislatures in hopes that the Supreme Court will modify Roe v. Wade is not exclusively one of making all abortions illegal. It is more about getting the issue before the Court in hopes of it allowing states to put some restrictions on abortions, certainly on later term ones.

Rubiks · May 16, 2019

redleghunter said:
Within those states. No I don’t think it will change.

Nationally? Sure. CA and NY is very populous and already have enshrined Roe in their laws. Any overturn of Roe v Wade would bring us back to the states deciding.

Can SCOTUS declare abortion in general in violation of the constitution thus making it illegal everywhere?

Rubiks · May 16, 2019

Sparagmos said:
I know I keep harping on this, but I’m not getting ANY answers as to why pro-lifers aren’t pushing contraception access and education in order to prevent abortions. Look at Switzerland - their abortion rate is less than half of the U.S. rate. What is really going on, why would pro-lifers not be aggressively pushing for measures pretty much guaranteed to reduce abortions?

Don't assume that people make their political decisions rationally. Hearing that "pro-life" is a smokescreen for restricting women's rights over and over again can get really irritating.

Is abortion analogous to taxation?

Naturalist

Dispassionate

Thank You Jesus!

Thank You Jesus!

Sophia7's husband

Thank You Jesus!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Facilitator

Well-Known Member

proud libtard

proud libtard

Well-Known Member

Facilitator

Naturalist

Thank You Jesus!

Senior Member

Facilitator

proud libtard

proud libtard

Similar threads