“Preventing,” when you use it, is a problem because you classify the termination of a pregnancy - a separate human life - as prevention. It’s not prevention. For an abortion, there is generally knowledge and intent. Knowledge of a pregnancy and intent to end the human life that was created as part of the pregnancy. The thing most abortions are trying to “prevent” is a harder life for the mother. That would be fine if another person didn’t have to lose their life in order to “prevent” that from occurring.
When I use the word, “preventing,” I’m talking about contraception or abstinence. Neither knowledge or intent exist for contraception usage or abstinence. There is no knowledge new human life was created because the contraception (or decision to not have sex) was used/made beforehand. And clearly there is no intent to end a life.
And here is the other terrible argument your side uses. “You’re not involved, so mind your business.” It’s akin to, “don’t like abortions, don’t get one.” But that argument doesn’t work for my underlying premise. “Don’t like slavery, don’t own slaves,” and, “Don’t like owning fully-automatic weapons without registering them with the government, don’t own one yourself.” We as a society have decided that when it comes to questions of morality and safety, what people do that affects others, even minimally, is the business of the rest of us in society. Think hard and I’m sure you’ll come up with plenty of things you don’t do that I might want to do, but you are perfectly fine with (and probably even support) the fact that the law prohibits me from doing them.
So you are okay with outlawing abortion at 35 weeks and okay with restricting it at 26 weeks to… only abortions for medial reasons like severe developmental abnormalities or the life of the mother that are discovered between 26-35 weeks? All mothers that only care about their own quality of life (the vast majority of abortions) should have made their decision by 26 weeks, before the baby inside them really starts to develop into a viable human being? What’s up with those extreme Europeans that think 15 weeks is plenty of time? Are they just misogynists giving too much protection to clumps of cells, or do they recognize the humanity of the unborn baby at a stage closer to when it starts looking like one, and are therefore, more willing to compromise?
I’ve already pointed out how untruthful your position is when it comes to biological development. Anything you’re said that is true, doesn’t bother me. I am mostly bothered by your virus/clump of cells rhetoric
Correct. But my reasons aren’t as uncommon as you think they are.
It will matter in lots of states where the majority agrees with me if this decision comes down in a form similar to what Alito has drafter.
I have a dog, he’s amazing and I feed him everyday and don’t let him engage in deadly dog fights, but I’m not so arrogant as to tell others whether they have to feed their non-human pets or keep them from deadly non-human combat.
Just kidding, you and I and society are absolutely that arrogant. That’s part of being in a society. If I convince enough people in my state that aborting babies is morally reprehensible, I can absolutely impart my will against them - just as we are already doing for nearly everything else.