re: Prior to Roe v Wade being overturned I had no idea that abortions were that common.

quote:

---

f society says “we agree that a negative right vests at 16 weeks gestation,”

---

Society would not say that— a sovereign state would codify that. As explained earlier this has implications. First the US government not any state can deprive one of a right without due process. Thus once granted, it can’t be taken away except by process

Whether it’s a positive or negative right is immaterial. Indeed, if you are hooked on this distinction, many state constitutions will express life as a positive right so such sophistry about positive or negative rights are practically Immaterially and unnecessary

Thus, you would require a proceeding to defease rights. That would be needed every time we have a health of the mother as a reason to terminate pregnancy after your arbitrary date

Moreover, the date is arbitrary. We have no basis to determine cognition. The whole viability test previously used was silly for the same reason

If you legally recognize rights at a certain age, you have other statutory problems as well. For instance , non homicide statutes don’t deal with “human beings”, they deal with rights. Thus, you would have violations on 18 .U.S.C. § 242 for state actions (including public health persons) and conspiracy for the private actors of nvolved. (This also speaks directly to killing so the positive/negative distinction you pose would make no difference). Considering most states have similar civil rights violation statutes ( and many without reference to color of law), you will have even a bigger problem under state law

Legislators craft laws to avoid these problems, not invite them.

quote:

---

The analysis I outline is completely amoral

---

The fact that you do not see this as an issue for this forum means you are being tone deaf. Indeed many are positing that a lack of sanction does transgress morals.

I would agree that the rule needs the ability to be judicially enforced, but Roger makes the better point, not using morality is asinine

Any ethical decision making framework will include items that are consistent with personal morality and the relevant communities values

quote:

---

Deprivation of life is pretty common concern against any belief systems, codified laws, or social systems.

---

Not trying to be an azz here, but you're arguing with someone who has a looooong History of Sociopathic behavior.

He once BRAGGED about having a lack of empathy, calling it a feature, not a bug.

On more than one occasion he compared himself to TV Character "Sheldon Cooper" from Big Bang Theory, a character also known for his inability to conjure up any true emotion.

In essence, you're arguing with someone who possesses the emotional capacity of a cell phone.

what about the modern man who knocks up the modern woman and doesn't give 2 shits that she aborts his child? it takes 2 but we only shite on one part of the abortion debate.