3RU7AL

I'm not going to force you to adopt a starving African kid even if it saves their life,

What coherent moral theory would deny that a man's first obligation is to his children?

Yeah but it doesn't really matter. The fact is that the left will always hate us, it's obvious

I know it's possible I'll get run over when I cross the road, doesn't mean I won't cross the road. That something bad may happen isn't necessarily a good reason not to do it.

I think they should also be required to either reside with their children as a parent or pay the parents who do reside with their children an additional child minders fee set at minimum wage, at least.

In other words, once you remove the massive, overwhelming, near-undeniable advantage of capitalism by "adjusting" for it, capitalism doesn't look as good.

But a beginning is unimaginable.

Perhaps a simpler resolution is to relieve him of coerced financial responsibility.

We all require an explicit protection from government intervention. And it's not a contest over proportionality or even equality. A prospective pregnant female is an individual human being who first and foremost bears a right to herself. This is maintained for all individuals. I'm not going to argue some platitude that the zygote/embryo/fetus isn't human, or even, isn't a "life." I acknowledge that zygotes/embryos/fetuses are human beings. My response is: so what? The alleged "right to life" does not grant any individual to coerce the service of another. Zygotes/embryos/fetuses require their mother's womb for development--no doubt. But that need does not supersede their mother's prerogative.

The culpability of the gun's wielder is by default mitigated in part due to my culpability as described before.

This is the primary point of my inquiry.

how do you know that the mind and body clearly interact?

which aren't accurate and serve the purposes of red herrings. If the focus is on the prospective pregnant female's right, then the zygote/embryo/fetus's status as a human being, tumor, or citizen would still remain subordinate to said right.

The example I gave was just to prove my idea in action,

Abortions are painful for those that endure them.

"When you have people wanting to redistribute the wealth from the few productive members and give to the mass of unproductive members like the Germans did with the Jews, Fascism starts to look appealing. The demonization of the white male is the first step. Next will be boxcars loaded with rich white men sent to re-education centers."

what's an apatheist?

Then you're either an agnostic or a deist.

We also don't really fall under the agnostic umbrella either.

This leads me to be a simulationist.

the state itself is obligated to prosecute

It only guarantees that Congress (and, through the operation of the 14th Amendment, the states) can’t pass a law abridging your freedom of speech. Everything else is at the suffrage of your audiences.

I did say the basics.

South America and Africa are already getting hit pretty bad with fertilizer costs.

But let's not use a comparable standard when assessing how miscarriages should be handled in a pro-life society, any loss of a child should be the death penalty!

the overall assessment of the planet as overpopulated and unsustainable seems hard to deny.

Hospitals at any rate,

Regarding possible child abuse,

I'd say have a duty to ask probing questions, or flag investigators.

The individual mugged,

Or individual born deformed,

'Might disagree.

that neglect laws never limit otherwise perfectly legal activities

If you 'thought 'maybe you saw someone being mugged, should you call the police?

But it would seem to me a mistake, to put a completely physical man in a woman's prison, or a completely physical woman in a man's prison.

Does the law say anything about pregnant women engaging in "activities that are known to be potentially harmful to the development of the unborn"?

Think that it's healthier, less dangerous to society, for people to keep in society the position of sex they were born.

Perhaps something similar in the way individuals are deemed flight risks, and prevented from leaving prison,

Deemed suicide risks, and prevented from leaving a short term inpatient psych ward,

Deemed of unsound mind, and prevented from leaving a hospital.

I thought you might mean inevitable collapses as happen to populations naturally in course of history or environment,

We are fools not to demand substantially increased protections

A place similar to a hospital, or a prison, or an asylum, I suppose.

I don't know what you mean?

But she 'would end up somewhere where she was under watch.

Parents who burn their children with their cigarettes, or break their babies legs for crying, ought not have custody.

@#113

On a case by case basis.

But it's 'not the same as executing them.

Do we also have right, as Washington did, to treat our slaves as we like?

We 'should force women not to drink or smoke while pregnant, in my opinion.

America does not make it a policy, to kill illegal immigrants.

I don't actually remember 'why he called it a shaky foundation, I'm just assuming.