Comments by "nuqwestr" (@nuqwestr) on "Supreme Court Hears Arguments Concerning Legality Of Texas Abortion Law" video.

@catzdollz9810 I'd say not murder, but a Homicide, sometimes justifiable, but certainly not a "woman's health issue".
3
Why is Sotomayor wearing a mask, can hardly understand what she is saying?
3
@daintycaked Despite having been an active slave holder for 56 years, George Washington struggled with the institution of slavery and spoke frequently of his desire to end the practice. At the end of his life, Washington made the decision to free all his slaves in his 1799 will - the only slave-holding Founding Father to do so.
2
Agreed, but there is no space for that debate, neither side will allow for any debate, so rule of law must prevail, it is fundamental to civilization.
1
@daintycaked It was not all ONE story at the beginning: Stephen Hopkins, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, introduced a bill while serving in the Rhode Island Assembly in 1774 that prohibited the importation of slaves into the colony, and this became one of the first anti-slavery laws in the United States. In February 1784, the Rhode Island Legislature passed a compromise measure for gradual emancipation of slaves within the state. All children of slaves born after March 1 were to become apprentices, the girls to become free at 18, the boys at 21.
1
Justifiable Homicide is.
1
@rlkenna4374 That would be the debate. If for any reason another human threatens your life, you have the right to kill that person. My argument is not moral, ethical, or scientific, it is strictly legal. Justified in the case of harm to the mother, but we should not call it "a woman's health issue", let's call it what it is, "Justifiable Homicide".
1
@commonsense6967 Agreed, but that's not what I was responding to. RBG never thought Roe good law, this is going to hit the Court again at some point, which I don't think it should, the consensus needs to either be at State level, or Federal law. We will live with this for years to come, because we will not agree on what consciousness is, or is not. I argue consciousness is partly a material extension of the mother and father, so should come under the jurisdiction of both, perhaps by contract, just like consensual sex has to be negotiated these days. This would give material rights to the father, something missing now, and a gross social imbalance tearing us apart.
1
@commonsense6967 You make a scientific claim as to what life is, same as I do, and we both have just an opinion. "Heartbeat" is really just another abstraction. If life, or consciousness, does not begin at conception, but is an extension of life given by both the mother and father, we have a more productive framework for social cohesion. The agreement doesn't have to be marriage, it can be a contract, a pre-conception agreement. Our society will become more secular, not less, so rule of law will be what settles this question. 6 weeks is not the answer, it's just another abstraction, not unlike Roe.
1