re: #202 gegenkritik

As an atheist, I don’t believe in spirits entering childs. But I do believe in the right of human self-determination, rather than a cluster of cells ruling a human’s life.
My critique towards pro-choice-activists is different: contrary to what they postulate, no human being is uninfluenced by social totality, and neither is a pregnant woman.

There goes the “cluster of cells” crap again. Extreme left-wing pseudo-intellectual talking points. Rationalization of what boils down to “anything goes”. Dehumanize the infant so you can justify infanticide when carrying the infant is too inconvenient (ie harshing my buzz or killing my social life).

You talk a good game on self-determination, but apparently that does not apply to a unborn child. Where is his or her right life and self-determination?

Whether you believe in “souls” entering bodies is irrelevant. You want to take that down a notch into the realm of science, how about when the CNS is developed enough for independent neural activity to commence?

I am not an anti-abortion absolutist. It’s not a litmus test to me or a hill to die on. I support overturning RvW so that this can go to the states (where most of them will legalize it anyway) because RvW is bad law and a 10th amendment violation IMO. I’m ok with emergency contraception and extremely early abortions where its likely no neural activity has stated yet.

That being said I cannot stomach the absolute disregard for the seriousness of this issue taken by you and your disregard of the rights of a sentient being for some asinine philosophical logical extreme. As far as I’m concerned the “choice” was whether or not to have unprotected sex and/or not use emergency contraception in the first place.