Roe vs Wade overturned [To have or not to have]

[Parodite]

Not only are there many different personal opinions, but also many scenarios and circumstances where the question begs for an answer and a decision needs to be made.

A man and a woman had consensual sex. (Or at least consensual enough for the woman not to charge the guy with rape in a court of law) Now she is pregnant. After 18 weeks she decides the baby is not welcome and wants an abortion. The country/state they live in allows for an abortion within the first 22 weeks of pregnancy so all she needs to do is make an appointment in a hospital where they can perform the procedure.

But the man objects and claims he also has legal rights. In his opinion, it cannot happen without his consent. He reminds everybody that the fetus grows in her body, but that only 50% of its genes are hers and the other 50% are his. In his opinion they both own 50% of the rights and responsabilities regarding the fetus and future child. He also points to the fact that males in most species also have a very strong hard-wired instinct to care for and protect their own genetic off-spring. Both the mother and father have loads of shared skin in the game, a biological reality for millions of years across species.

He tells that on the biological level all belongs to the same process with one single goal: to succesfully reproduce by combining male and female DNA. Sexual intercourse followed by the pregnancy of the female, the process of giving birth by the female and after that the care for and protection of the infants by both parents usually. He claims that rightfully so, sexual intercourse should be a consensual activity but that for the same reason anything that happens afterwards with the fetus and infant should be consensual as well!

He points out that in the upbringing of children there may be differences of opinion, but every social worker helping families will promote the idea of the father and mother improve their communication skills in finding a consensus, or in negotiating a deal if consensus turns out not possible. Mediators and therapists agree on all of that. But somehow, the other parent i.e. the male in this case who also has a tremendous amount of skin in the game, is sidelined completely when the single most important consequential decision has to be made: to kill-abort or not to kill-abort the fetus. He claims that a non-consensual abortion is or should be illegal. Even after a divorce, since the mother could decide to divorce just to be able to get the abortion. This father claims he has an inalienable right to consensual decisionmaking when it comes to his own off-spring from the moment of conception to the moment his child reaches legal adulthood.

He is furthermore of the opinion that even a week old fetus has rights: the right to have a life in the future.
Like a heritage ready to be transferred to somebody at a future moment. There is a new human life on the shelves ready for delivery!

The mother argues that she understands his points but differs on two important ones. As a mother giving birth and being the primary caretaker the first years, she has much more skin in the game than he has! Furthermore, she doesn't feel comfortable with his beliefs such as that everything needs to be a consensus - which she believes to be very unrealistic. In the end he could use that as a whip to contain and constrain her.
If consensus is required on everything, all he needs is saying NO to something he doesn't want or like. Is he willing to negotiate when she says NO to something? Men don't have a convincing track-record when it comes to respecting the rights and needs of women. Part of not wanting this baby with him is that she realized she doesn't really trust him. Something odd and fishy about this guy. A gut feeling.

As for the fetus'own rights, she feels a bit sad but not bad or guilty ending the life of an 18 week old fetus. She has no feelings for it yet and she believes it's not experiencing anything conscious. She feels it is extremely important the child is wanted by both parents. To her, this fetus is growing in her womb at the wrong place at the wrong time. She also reminds the father and his legal crew that if nature ought to be a guideline: it is red in tooth and claw by default. Parental care and love is a reality, but so are the to eat or being eaten, most off-spring in the animal world dying before life really started. "Don't get too sentimental bro.." she was heard whispering in the court room.

Who feels the urge to as a judge or otherwise decide for those people? When is their business becoming my business? etc

[Nonc Hilaire]

Now the trade in body parts; I would welcome links with proof and/or reasons for serious concern.

https://www.centerformedicalprogress.or ... e-footage/

[Parodite]

Now the trade in body parts; I would welcome links with proof and/or reasons for serious concern.

https://www.centerformedicalprogress.or ... e-footage/

Certainly worrying. Making money on fetal tissue harvested from abortions is like a demonic incentive.

[Nonc Hilaire]

Now the trade in body parts; I would welcome links with proof and/or reasons for serious concern.

https://www.centerformedicalprogress.or ... e-footage/

Certainly worrying. Making money on fetal tissue harvested from abortions is like a demonic incentive.

Yes, it is an evil system.

Females and blacks are selectively targeted. The baby parts industry has all but eliminated contraception and abortifacients.

They push the date of abortions later and later, which is more dangerous for the mother but means more money per infant cadaver.

[Miss_Faucie_Fishtits]

As for the fetus' own rights, she feels a bit sad but not bad or guilty ending the life of an 18 week old fetus. She has no feelings for it yet and she believes it's not experiencing anything conscious. She feels it is extremely important the child is wanted by both parents. To her, this fetus is growing in her womb at the wrong place at the wrong time. She also reminds the father and his legal crew that if nature ought to be a guideline: it is red in tooth and claw by default. Parental care and love is a reality, but so are the to eat or being eaten, most off-spring in the animal world dying before life really started. "Don't get too sentimental bro.." she was heard whispering in the court room.

My POV on Pro Choice is it being the outcome of the emancipation of the individual from constraints imposed by family, culture, religion and especially biology. The conservative finds comfort and meaning in the constraints imposed on the individual by the tribe, or nation in the modern context; faith, family and obligation to the higher good. The 'when life begins' argument is a sham for the real difference between the factions. The naturalist and secular concept of a person as just a unit of meat and the older and perhaps more sophisticated understanding of a human being as an experience - notably from conception to death, also before and beyond.......

What will be interesting is what effect more or less elective pregnancy will have on the conception of human rights. Without the covenant of pregnancy embedded in the covenant of marriage and the family, all relationships between human beings will be contractual. To me, this will be fatal to the concept of inalienable human rights, but we may not know it for a generation or two.......

[Parodite]

What will be interesting is what effect more or less elective pregnancy will have on the conception of human rights. Without the covenant of pregnancy embedded in the covenant of marriage and the family, all relationships between human beings will be contractual. To me, this will be fatal to the concept of inalienable human rights, but we may not know it for a generation or two.......

It seems the issue is not "Roe vs Wade" but "Individual vs Collective" in a broader sense. Also human rights emerged from that battle. As individuals we all operate in and are part of an environment which is a sort of collection of nested and overlapping collectives. "Cogs in a machine" is a bit low resolution poo in the face, but something like that. "Co-creating, participating units in a non-linear causal web where being rides on the crest of becoming" i.e. poetry (tm) where the conscious self is a pebble in the shoe that never fits.

In the mean time, the world is moving to a globalist techno-bureaucratic dictatorship of sorts. China is the model and the way. Social credit scores, digital currencies... the usual suspects smell the power. But they have not looked around much IMO. If there is one experiment that always failed in history, it is trying to outsmart and outlive the only constant: unpredictable change. Something re-assuring about the sum-total Cosmic Collective always destroying its constituents.. in the end. Everything is a pattern that persists for only a limited amount of time.

Human Rights facing the Cosmic Collective sounds like a thriller. A wrestling tournament that never ends. We are now in the woke era where who is actually awake or asleep.. remains to be seen. A woke individual who is a deep sleeper may wake up one day, fully refreshed! The woke dream is over, but the waken-up woke may not resemble a conservative betting on tradition with God and family at all.

The best bet would seem that our future is extinction and no Elon Musk able to save us. Maybe evolution, fwiw, will change us all beyond recognition.

[Miss_Faucie_Fishtits]

I'm listening to a YouTube clip where Lex Fridman is interviewing Bishop Barron. Barron makes the distinction between the current definition of freedom as determining the meaning of one's life vs. the definition of freedom from Aquinas as disciplining one's desires in the service of the good. "Freedom is not self determination. Freedom is the disciplining of desire so as to make the achievement of the good at first possible, and then effortless".......

[Parodite]

I'm listening to a YouTube clip where Lex Fridman is interviewing Bishop Barron.

I watched it. I like BB but he is still a boy scout on a track of artificially prolonged adolescence. Wearing a religious garment, a cloak 24/7.. I can' t help but always wonder why. BB would be more convincing and congruent if he wears regular cloths during those interviews. Only in underpants would make him immediately a hero among his potential customers. Now he is a suspect: a RC soldier on a mission to steal the souls esp. of young guys back into the Roman Army?

Barron makes the distinction between the current definition of freedom as determining the meaning of one's life vs. the definition of freedom from Aquinas as disciplining one's desires in the service of the good. "Freedom is not self determination. Freedom is the disciplining of desire so as to make the achievement of the good at first possible, and then effortless".......

Idk.. I associate freedom with having something (more) to choose from, with making decisions with no gun pointed at my head at least, and with being able to vote in a democratic framework. Looking for the meaning of life and its associated thinking is what you do during adolescance. It seems to me the required discipline that comes with adulthood is more an imposed, trained/conditioned necessity than a voluntary choice you make.

Air Jordan Peterson often claims the voluntary action of taking responsability is what justifies your life and gives it meaning. But voluntary choice is only abt 10% of what your life consists of and in an ideal scenario. 95% of all events, situations, daily facts of life we deal with, have to deal with and do deal with are occuring outside our contemporary "meaningful" frameworks under consideration. Does that mean that 95% of our life is meaningless because not much "conscious free choice" is involved there?

Maybe the crisis of meaning arises only when there is no problem to solve. Then we create a solution for a non-existing problem.

[Miss_Faucie_Fishtits]

Air Jordan Peterson often claims the voluntary action of taking responsability is what justifies your life and gives it meaning. But voluntary choice is only abt 10% of what your life consists of and in an ideal scenario. 95% of all events, situations, daily facts of life we deal with, have to deal with and do deal with are occuring outside our contemporary "meaningful" frameworks under consideration. Does that mean that 95% of our life is meaningless because not much "conscious free choice" is involved there?

And his response would be even if you had agency in 10% of the choices you are faced with in life, you still have 100% in choosing how you deal with that other 90%. It may all boil down to a stoic outlook and that doesn't look like much of a choice - but it's still a choice.....'>......

[Nonc Hilaire]

Freedom is the ability to effectively say “No”.

[Parodite]

Freedom is the ability to effectively say “No”.

That too... i.e. using the breaks. Also saying yes by accelerating, adapt using throttle and gear, turning left instead of right when you changed your mind. Or going into a mode of mindfulness by either driving a car with auto pilot, or stop the car and mindfully sit under a tree. Or even better... just take a nap and effectively say No to everything.

[Parodite]

Air Jordan Peterson often claims the voluntary action of taking responsability is what justifies your life and gives it meaning. But voluntary choice is only abt 10% of what your life consists of and in an ideal scenario. 95% of all events, situations, daily facts of life we deal with, have to deal with and do deal with are occuring outside our contemporary "meaningful" frameworks under consideration. Does that mean that 95% of our life is meaningless because not much "conscious free choice" is involved there?

And his response would be even if you had agency in 10% of the choices you are faced with in life, you still have 100% in choosing how you deal with that other 90%. It may all boil down to a stoic outlook and that doesn't look like much of a choice - but it's still a choice.....'>......

JBP hasn't thought it all through enough. I'm the devils advocate claiming we can't be sure those 95% of "unconscious not-free events" are not infact more conscious and more free than they appear to be. Or even less free for that matter... but that's the point. Whatever the case may be, we don't know much about that 95%. Things hardly ever are exactly how they appear to be.

An analogy: your private, 1st person subjective stream of conscious experience is hidden from mine and so is your private mental decisionmaking process. When I'm participating in a game of basketbal, all members of my (and other) team have only access to our own conscious experience and decision making, but have no problem assuming - for all practical purposes and beyond reasonable doubt - that all players have private 1st person experiences making their own private mental-bodily decisions during the game.

My claim is that what is true for playing basketbal where the 1ste person conscious experience and mental decisionmaking of other players is factually and actually hidden from mine but yet a reality beyond reasonable doubt... might also be true within our individual body-brains. What appears to be 95% of just "unconscious brain processes and reflexive sub-conscious motor behaviors" might very well be a incomplete and even completely wrong picture of what actually happens. Just like the 95% of other basketball players... whose 1st person stream of conscious experience is hidden from mine but a reality nevertheless. (lest thou arth a fundamentalist solipsist, which me am not)

I'm not claiming my body is inhabited by conscious basketbal players or other spooky sentient entities that are hidden from my 1stp conscious view.. just that most likely certain properties are real-but-hidden from my view by default. Just as when I observe other people around me, also "things observed in my body and environment" have properties that are hidden, structurally unavailable to me.

So my claim is we know very little about that 95%.. in fact. Which means we can loosen up a bit on questions of consciousness, yes/no free will, how the decisions we make come about or appear to come about. Then think again about "individual" vs "collective". For me those categories have lost meaning as they expired already. In this poetic purgatory where the glass is still dark, chicken and egg do not seem to agree on who was first any time soon.

My worry about killing fetuses is... how much and what is hidden from my view there?

[Nonc Hilaire]

My worry about killing fetuses is... how much and what is hidden from my view there?

We may never know. There is a concerted effort to avoid rational discussion.

The abortion issue is such a wonderful lever to divide society the mischief makers in our parasite class will do anything possible to keep people at each other’s throats.