RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Arpig -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 1:03:23 PM)

quote:

And some people feel they have the right to shoot other people.
Sorry tazzy, but that's a red herring and you know it. It has nothing to do with the OP's premise.



tazzygirl -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 1:07:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

And some people feel they have the right to shoot other people.
Sorry tazzy, but that's a red herring and you know it. It has nothing to do with the OP's premise.


According to her position just a few posts ago.. its a choice since its prosecutable. The same as drugs... prosecutable.



Arpig -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 1:16:42 PM)

You misunderstood what she said tazzy.
I think perhaps it would be helpful to restate the OP's premise (or at least what I think it is) more clearly.

1) Abortion is legal on the basis that a woman has the right to control her own body.
2) By extension, any person has the right to control their own body
3) This right of control extends to the right to do harmful things to one's body, such as doing crack (or any other drug).
4) Therefore, since it is in fact your right to do crack (or any other drug), it should be legal to do so.

The present legal status of the drugs are not important, the issue is the proper legal status of the drugs. Not if drugs ARE illegal, but if they SHOULD be.

And now I'm off to work, I'll check in when I get back...play nice and have fun kids.



imperatrixx -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 1:17:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
According to her position just a few posts ago.. its a choice since its prosecutable. The same as drugs... prosecutable.


All A are C
All B are C

A=B y/n?



imperatrixx -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 1:18:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

You misunderstood what she said tazzy.
I think perhaps it would be helpful to restate the OP's premise (or at least what I think it is) more clearly.

1) Abortion is legal on the basis that a woman has the right to control her own body.
2) By extension, any person has the right to control their own body
3) This right of control extends to the right to do harmful things to one's body, such as doing crack (or any other drug).
4) Therefore, since it is in fact your right to do crack (or any other drug), it should be legal to do so.

The present legal status of the drugs are not important, the issue is the proper legal status of the drugs. Not if drugs ARE illegal, but if they SHOULD be.



OMG THANK YOU
I was all like [sm=banghead.gif] and now I'm all like [sm=hearts.gif]




tazzygirl -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 1:29:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

You misunderstood what she said tazzy.
I think perhaps it would be helpful to restate the OP's premise (or at least what I think it is) more clearly.

1) Abortion is legal on the basis that a woman has the right to control her own body.
2) By extension, any person has the right to control their own body
3) This right of control extends to the right to do harmful things to one's body, such as doing crack (or any other drug).
4) Therefore, since it is in fact your right to do crack (or any other drug), it should be legal to do so.

The present legal status of the drugs are not important, the issue is the proper legal status of the drugs. Not if drugs ARE illegal, but if they SHOULD be.

And now I'm off to work, I'll check in when I get back...play nice and have fun kids.



quote:

1) Abortion is legal on the basis that a woman has the right to control her own body
2) By extension, any person has the right to control their own body


Exactly. Affecting no one but herself for that decision. If I have an abortion today, what is the risk that I will kill someone else as a result of that abortion?

quote:

3) This right of control extends to the right to do harmful things to one's body, such as doing crack (or any other drug).
4) Therefore, since it is in fact your right to do crack (or any other drug), it should be legal to do so.


As I have repeatedly said... do to yourself what you want. But, unless you can guarentee that it will not affect someone else... Decisions have consequences. Im not willing to pay with my life for the decisions of someone else seeking a "high" in life. Something abortion does not do.

And thats the whole point. Other people will and do pay for the decisions of s drug user... often with horrible consequences.

Equating that with abortion is a silly premise.



imperatrixx -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 1:38:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Exactly. Affecting no one but herself for that decision. If I have an abortion today, what is the risk that I will kill someone else as a result of that abortion?


inb4 100% fetus is person too

quote:

As I have repeatedly said... do to yourself what you want. But, unless you can guarentee that it will not affect someone else... Decisions have consequences. Im not willing to pay with my life for the decisions of someone else seeking a "high" in life. Something abortion does not do.

And thats the whole point. Other people will and do pay for the decisions of s drug user... often with horrible consequences.

Equating that with abortion is a silly premise.


First of all, I'm not equating it with abortion, I'm saying that both fall under being able to make choices for yourself that other people (or society as a whole) might find abhorrent.

Second of all, I see where you're coming from. I really do. I'm not going to say crack use is good or responsible or anything like that. I just feel that the action of using the drug should be separated from whatever irresponsible thing done on the drug.

We talked a bit about alcohol before. I'm not sure whether you feel alcohol should be illegal or not. But I feel that the logical conclusion of your argument would lead to alcohol prohibition as well.

Most people, however, don't blame alcohol for drunk drivers. They blame the driver for recklessness and irresponsibility. That's what I feel is important - giving someone a free pass to use a substance that only affects them isn't giving them a free pass to go out in public high, or drive high, or go to work high, or anything else that affects other people.

Laws against public intoxication protect other people. Laws against driving while intoxicated protect other people. Laws (or employer rules, depending on your line of work) against showing up for work intoxicated protect other people.

Laws against consuming a substance only protect the one doing the consumption.



ChatteParfaitt -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 1:41:17 PM)

I have been quasi paying attention to this thread and have not read all the posts.

In my never humble opinion, I think everyone should have the right to do what they wish with their own body, including having an abortion and doing drugs.

If drugs were legal, all that money spent on apprehension and maintenance of drug dealers and users could go to good drug programs for those who want them. But we'd need a different society for that to work, one that didn't merely pay lip service to the social services, one that actually supported families. (See the recent thread on French public school lunches.)

There are many things that cause people to be alcoholic or drug addicted, even in a "near perfect" society you would have a few who needed to alter their brain waves. Earlier societies made these people shamans and medicine men/women, and considered them visionaries. We've come along way, baby!



tazzygirl -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 1:48:25 PM)

quote:

inb4 100% fetus is person too


Before the age of viability its just a fetus, not a person. Drs wont treat a miscarriage before 20 weeks in most cases. If what you are saying is true, then those miscarriages would be considered murder as well.

quote:

Second of all, I see where you're coming from. I really do. I'm not going to say crack use is good or responsible or anything like that. I just feel that the action of using the drug should be separated from whatever irresponsible thing done on the drug.

We talked a bit about alcohol before. I'm not sure whether you feel alcohol should be illegal or not. But I feel that the logical conclusion of your argument would lead to alcohol prohibition as well.



I dont believe in prohibition for anything. You cannt drink in public (public being outside on the streets). You cannot take drugs in public. If you are caught doing either, you will be arrested. Both actions are illegal.
quote:



Most people, however, don't blame alcohol for drunk drivers. They blame the driver for recklessness and irresponsibility. That's what I feel is important - giving someone a free pass to use a substance that only affects them isn't giving them a free pass to go out in public high, or drive high, or go to work high, or anything else that affects other people.


I dont blame alcohol for drunk drivers. Prohibition? no. better regulation, yes. Why not install breathlyzers on every car? Simple solution that would reduce the numbers of drunk drivers, no? That way you can drink, you cant drive, and we can go on knowing many lives are being saved.

quote:


Laws against public intoxication protect other people. Laws against driving while intoxicated protect other people. Laws (or employer rules, depending on your line of work) against showing up for work intoxicated protect other people.



Those same laws protect the drunk as well. Less car crashes, less complications at work.
quote:



Laws against consuming a substance only protect the one doing the consumption.


Are you saying drug addicts dont cause crimes in the same way a drunk causes accidents?

Do I agree with the laws in the US concerning drugs? Not all of them, no.

But I will never agree legalization is the answer.



imperatrixx -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 1:56:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

inb4 100% fetus is person too


Before the age of viability its just a fetus, not a person. Drs wont treat a miscarriage before 20 weeks in most cases. If what you are saying is true, then those miscarriages would be considered murder as well.


It was a joke.

quote:

I dont believe in prohibition for anything. You cannt drink in public (public being outside on the streets). You cannot take drugs in public. If you are caught doing either, you will be arrested. Both actions are illegal.


Now I'm confused. When you say you don't believe in prohibition for anything, do you mean you don't believe in prohibition for drugs? That is, making drugs illegal?

quote:

I dont blame alcohol for drunk drivers. Prohibition? no. better regulation, yes. Why not install breathlyzers on every car? Simple solution that would reduce the numbers of drunk drivers, no? That way you can drink, you cant drive, and we can go on knowing many lives are being saved.


I'm neither for nor against this.


quote:

Are you saying drug addicts dont cause crimes in the same way a drunk causes accidents?


No, I'm saying that those crimes can still be prosecuted even if the drug use is legal.

quote:

Do I agree with the laws in the US concerning drugs? Not all of them, no.

But I will never agree legalization is the answer.


So, going back 19 pages to the original topic...would it be fair to say you don't believe a woman (or person) should have the right to do what they want with their own body?



tazzygirl -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 2:00:47 PM)

quote:

Now I'm confused. When you say you don't believe in prohibition for anything, do you mean you don't believe in prohibition for drugs? That is, making drugs illegal?



Prohibition for anything is just what I said. Drugs are currently illegal. So unless you can get everyone to change their minds, as abortion proponents did through the courts, they will stay illegal.

quote:

would it be fair to say you don't believe a woman (or person) should have the right to do what they want with their own body?


If it has the potential to affect others then she does not.



imperatrixx -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 2:09:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Prohibition for anything is just what I said. Drugs are currently illegal. So unless you can get everyone to change their minds, as abortion proponents did through the courts, they will stay illegal.


That's why I'm so confused.

Drugs are currently prohibited.

You say you don't support prohibition for anything.

Yet you say you will "never agree legalization is the answer."

So...if you don't support the current drug prohibition, and you don't agree legalization is the answer...you see where I'm lost here?

quote:

quote:

would it be fair to say you don't believe a woman (or person) should have the right to do what they want with their own body?


If it has the potential to affect others then she does not.


Well I'm going to set aside my argument that consuming the substance and interacting with others on the substance are two separate things. I still believe that, but I've said it enough times that I don't think I can say it any more clearly.

So we will just go with the thought that drug use can affect others by the person's irresponsibility while high. We've also established that drinking alcohol can affect others by the person's irresponsibility while drunk (driving, stumbling in the street, etc).

So then we get to...drinking alcohol has the potential to affect others. So, then, a person does not have the right to drink alcohol since "If it has the potential to affect others then she does not."

Like I said earlier, it would seem that the logical conclusion of this argument is alcohol prohibition. Which is why I'm so confused when you say you don't support that.



tazzygirl -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 2:30:12 PM)

quote:

That's why I'm so confused.

Drugs are currently prohibited.

You say you don't support prohibition for anything.

Yet you say you will "never agree legalization is the answer."

So...if you don't support the current drug prohibition, and you don't agree legalization is the answer...you see where I'm lost here?


I dont support the prohibition of anything. I believe you should be allowed to follow your own path.. to a point. And its that point we diverge.

Let me try one last time.

An abortion affects only the woman... im not speaking of emotional aspects, im speaking of physical ones.

An acoholic affects only himself, physically, as long as he doesnt assault anyone, attempt to drive or try to rob anyone. But you cant bank on any of those things. Now, wait a second, and I will address this again.

A drug user, same premise... as long as they dont try and drive, assault or rob anyone, they affect only themselves.

I think these are pretty much agreed upon points.

The divergence is simple.

An abortion affects no one but the woman.

A drunk driver affects multiple people, or has the high potential of doing so.

A drug addict, same potential.

The difference between the last two? We can prevent drunk driving with the installation of a simple device that prevents the car from starting to begin with. So, it comes down to fighting and robbing... both with inherent abilities to make the user just as likely to get hurt. In part, those laws are protecting the user as well as the public. But people rob and fight without the benefit of either... so its not something we can safely measure pointing to the fact that drugs or alcohol "cause" these things specifically. The driving accidents, we can.

If alcohol were prohibited, it wouldnt bother me. I rarely drink. There are numerous people who partake of alcohol who never become addicts. There are a number of people who partake of drugs who never become addicts either (raises my hand on that one). Nor do I have relapse statistics available. For something like this, I dont believe they are accurate enough to be much use. Alcohol was more my parents generation, drug use mine and lower...

If there were ways to prevent an addict from hurting society while they do unto themselves as they please, I would whole heartedly embrace that. There is a way with drinking... though I wont hold my breath to see that as a mandatory component of all vehicles.



slvemike4u -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 2:59:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: imperatrixx


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Prohibition for anything is just what I said. Drugs are currently illegal. So unless you can get everyone to change their minds, as abortion proponents did through the courts, they will stay illegal.


That's why I'm so confused.

Drugs are currently prohibited.

You say you don't support prohibition for anything.

Yet you say you will "never agree legalization is the answer."

So...if you don't support the current drug prohibition, and you don't agree legalization is the answer...you see where I'm lost here?

quote:

quote:

would it be fair to say you don't believe a woman (or person) should have the right to do what they want with their own body?


If it has the potential to affect others then she does not.


Well I'm going to set aside my argument that consuming the substance and interacting with others on the substance are two separate things. I still believe that, but I've said it enough times that I don't think I can say it any more clearly.

So we will just go with the thought that drug use can affect others by the person's irresponsibility while high. We've also established that drinking alcohol can affect others by the person's irresponsibility while drunk (driving, stumbling in the street, etc).

So then we get to...drinking alcohol has the potential to affect others. So, then, a person does not have the right to drink alcohol since "If it has the potential to affect others then she does not."

Like I said earlier, it would seem that the logical conclusion of this argument is alcohol prohibition. Which is why I'm so confused when you say you don't support that.
Correct me if I am wrong here but you are basically taking the position that society does not posses the right to pass those laws which they deem prudent...in other words...at one time Prohibition was the law of the land...enough folks ignored,broke that law that society decided to take a look at it...and strike it from the books.
Is that not how a society works....and will work again.
What you seem to be suggesting is that society doesn't have the right to enact the law in the first place....and yet,whether you like it or not you are a member of,and derive certain advantages from,that same society.To me the basic premise is a total repudiation of any societies ability to collectively decide,and enforce laws in general.That way....as I think I said many pages ago leads to anarchy and chaos....plain and simple.



Arpig -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 8:00:58 PM)

quote:

As I have repeatedly said... do to yourself what you want. But, unless you can guarentee that it will not affect someone else...
Done. I can indeed offer a 100% guarantee that you will never be in any way harmed by anybody doing any drug. What those people may or may not do while under the influence of those drugs is another matter, but the actual taking of the drug itself harms nobody but the taker. You are far more likely to be harmed or killed by somebody not on drugs than by somebody on drugs.

quote:

Im not willing to pay with my life for the decisions of someone else seeking a "high" in life.
So you advocate the illegalization of alcohol then?

quote:

Equating that with abortion is a silly premise.

Agreed, it would be silly to equate them, but I am not.

Once again, the position I am taking is simply the logical extension of the generally accepted belief that a woman has the right to control her own body. If such a right exists, then by the rules of logic, my final position must also be correct, rendering all drug laws morally void.

If, as it clearly seems to be, your position is that drugs should indeed be illegal, then how do you reconcile this with the fact that you also recognize a woman's right to control her own body?




Arpig -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 8:17:30 PM)

quote:

What you seem to be suggesting is that society doesn't have the right to enact the law in the first place....
Correct mike, based on the assumption of a right to control one's own body, those laws are morally void. Any other conclusion is quite simply illogical.

Now, this may present many with a dilemma, which is why I asked earlier that we consider the question of if a person does indeed have the right to control their own body.

quote:

To me the basic premise is a total repudiation of any societies ability to collectively decide,and enforce laws in general.
Not quite, the problem here is that I am not making "a total repudiation of any societies ability to collectively decide,and enforce laws in general", what I am challenging is society's right to make laws that override or ignore a right that that same society recognizes. By simple logic, drug laws are as morally (and in the US, constitutionally) wrong as laws preventing abortion. A law that runs roughshod over an individual's rights is by definition, wrong.

It isn't all laws I am rejecting, it is a certain set of laws, one's that are contradictory to an established right.



HannahLynHeather -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 8:48:22 PM)

quote:

There is a difference between being free to do something and having the right... don't ya think
no i don't see it, please elaborate.

hannah lynn



HannahLynHeather -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 8:52:52 PM)

quote:

some folks shouldn't be allowed to take a car out of park
like your sister? [:D][:D]

quote:

your insistence that the laws needed changing in order to more closely reflect your own values.
the laws in question are wrong. they restrict my rights as an individual. that is why i say they must be changed.

hannah lynn



HannahLynHeather -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 8:58:13 PM)

quote:

Equating that with abortion is a silly premise.
you are the only person doing so.

abortion really isn't involved here. what we are talking about is the right that was used to rationalise the legalisation of abortion.

hannah lynn



HannahLynHeather -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:00:12 PM)

quote:

Drugs are currently illegal. So unless you can get everyone to change their minds, as abortion proponents did through the courts, they will stay illegal.
unfortunatly correct. however that does not change the fact that they should be legal.

hannah lynn



Page: <<   < prev  17 18 [19] 20 21   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875