cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Senior Contributor

It occured to me

That if you justify abortion as a persons choice to do what they wish with their own body how do you justify socialism?  Which is of course forcing some to labor for others.

8 Replies
Senior Contributor

Re: It occured to me

I guess that paying willing workers to build an interstate highway is legal, is not in question of legality and never will be illegal, thus it is not the same as abortion.

You wold do well to start thinking about how the law should be applied regarding abortion. Should abortion be legal, or not legal and if there are circumstances that would change the legality? That is the question you should ask rather than trying to distract yourself with questions that do not really pertain to the subject.

Senior Contributor

Re: It occured to me

Me thinks you're considering the largess end of the deal not the end where one is forced to labor for another.

And it does pertain to the subject.   One should be able to justify ones thoughts and actions.

 

Senior Contributor

Re: It occured to me

Yes, people should be able to justify their thoughts and actions.

Interstate highways are indeed Socialist projects, but like any socialist project, you do pay money in taxes that build the interstates and maintain them. I guess you could say that you are "forced" to labor so that others may use the highway. To avoid that, and all of our other Socialist programs, you would have to drop into a welfare or disability status so that you legally would not have to pay. The justification of all this of course is that interstates are good for the social and financial interests of almost all of our society, for without them, everything would cost a great deal more money because of the lack of being able to move commerce, goods and services efficiently and at low cost.

However for abortion, the justifications, either for or against, are completely different reasons than why we have Socialist projects.

Sam, if this all boils down for you whether you have to pay for abortions or not, then I don't think the dearness of life can be your primary concern. Surely you do not simply consider this a financial decision for tax payers? If that's the case, then I guess one should have no problem with abortion provided that no tax funds are used. I think you believe in something greater such as the sanctity of life and in the end, that is your justification. PS - You are already being forced to work to pay taxes that support children born to people on welfare or disability.

If that is the case, then you really should drop your Socialism debate. If it's truly only about whether you have to work to pay taxes that may supplement abortions in some places, thus forcing you to labor for the small sliver you provide, then that is your Socialism argument.

Senior Contributor

Re: It occured to me

 

Anyone who condemns government funded health care system has never had any experience with socialist medicine. It does NOT mean the government will choose when you die. It’s is a clever campaign by big health to stop it. 

That is the best socialism ever invented and unless you have had it, you know nothing. 

Senior Contributor

Re: It occured to me


@KNAPPer wrote:

Yes, people should be able to justify their thoughts and actions.

 

If that is the case, then you really should drop your Socialism debate. If it's truly only about whether you have to work to pay taxes that may supplement abortions in some places, thus forcing you to labor for the small sliver you provide, then that is your Socialism argument.


It's difficult for people to think in the abstract, even more difficult for people to form a clear line of thought, try to stick with me.

The argument is presented here that abortion is a right because a woman has the right to chose what occurs with her own body.    Under socialism a person does not have that right. A certain amount of ones time, what one is doing with their own body, is unwillingly under the control of the community.  The idea that a person has the right to do with their body as they choose and the concept of socialism are in conflict.   One can not hold both ideas as valid.

I would contend that you can think of many instances where the community places  bounds on what you  may do freely of your own body.    Many that abortion advocates are fine with.

 

And I would contend that people using the argument in defence of abortion are using it falsely.   The argument they truly hold is the same one which leads them to accept socialism.   That it is for the good of the community.  

 

Senior Advisor

Re: It occured to me

Who pays for an interstate highway? How was the money appropriated? Was it given free will or was it taken under penalty of law?

Now lets get away from the interstate highway system. When the government funds an abortion who pays the bill. Was the money given freely or was it taken under penalty of law?

Was there choice or was there corrosion?

Senior Advisor

Re: It occured to me

Why do you think Trump should have control of anyone's health care? Do you consider him that intelligent and honest? I don't want him or any politician anywhere near my health care. Too much of the funds will be lost to waste and fraud.

Veteran Advisor

Re: It occured to me

The government should not fund abortions, except in extreme cases -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyde_Amendment