What would the criteria be for a who makes the cut for the 'cap' and who doesn't? That's just another way of deciding which babies matter and which don't. Seems contradictory to say all children's' live are equally valuable in one instance and not in another.
I am not at all saying it is a humane or correct approach, but it is a solution politicians are willing to implement.
And you could credibly make the argument that while the government doesn't waltz up to homeless people and euthanize them, it condemns them to death via neglect and criminalization.
disagree. They condemn themselves by not being responsible or caring for themselves. There is a large argument to be made that many of these homeless ate incapable of caring for themselves and belong in state hospitals. I would happily let my taxes fund that.
In fact, the medical and public safety costs created by homelessness far outweigh even generous estimates of what housing them would cost. However, homeless people are still people in every legal sense while fetuses are not.
the legal arguments which have defined this issue were fundamentally flawed and soon to be void. Nothing about this issue has been decided except that states will have the power to decide their own laws.
In that same vein, whether or not crimes committed against pregnant women are considered to be against two individuals varies greatly across municipalities, and generally such fetal personhood bills are passed with the ulterior motive of lending legitimacy to anti-choice rhetoric.
this is not an excuse for the fact that preborn infants are considered human beings legally at least some part of the time. That makes it a grey area at best, not settled like you claimed above.
Again, fetuses don't have social security numbers,
Neither do illegal immigrants but they are still people.
they aren't counted in census data, they aren't considered dependents, etc. In the eyes of the government, you do not exist without that documentation,
Lie. People without socials do get tax ids, and there are multiple legal immigration statuses that don't earn you an SSN. That is on top of the fact that many state governments issue drivers licenses to non citizens and even illegal immigrants.
and one legal exception created to persecute crimes against pregnant women does not change that.
the crime against the pregnant woman and the separate crime against the unborn person are entirely separate issues. What you are describing is unconstitutional sexism.
Now, does that mean that people without legal documentation (like invisible children in China) literally don't exist? Obviously not. My purpose in pointing out the issue with documentation is that the government cannot regulate that which it does not acknowledge the existence of.
FISA courts are a direct contradiction to this statement.
The draft has been rendered obsolete by a combination technological innovations and the sheer size of the U.S. military dwarfing literally every other force on Earth. It's extremely unlikely that the draft will ever be reinstated in our lifetimes.
This is retarded nonsense. It is unconstitutional because of gender discrimination regardless of how likely it is to be enforced.
You signing a piece of paper saying that you might potentially have to give up your autonomy in the unlikely event of a draft is not remotely the same as every woman in the country (even ones under the age of 18 ) being required to risk their lives to bring a fetus to term should they concieve.
you are right, it's not the same. A woman has a choice to not have sex, a man does not have a choice whether or not he will be compelled to risk his life in war. Stop pretending a woman doesn't have a variety of choices before ending a human life, it's insulting and infantilizing to women. With choice comes responsibility.
Which do you think is more likely, an accidental conception, or a draft in the age of drone strikes?
there is no such thing as an accidental conception. Pregnancy is an easily predictable outcome from having sex and anyone who claims to not understand this is either mentally disabled or lying.
Selective service should be abolished as well. People should be able to choose whether they risk their lives for others-- that goes for drafted men and pregnant women.
Women can choose to not have sex. I agree selective service should be banned, or at least apply equally.
Are you seriously trying to argue that not being able to molest children is a restriction on your bodily autonomy?
Technically it is, but i am arguing that certain restrictions on bodily autonomy are reasonable and make sense. I am not advocating for being able to fuck children. Pedos deserve the rope.
Again, children are people in every legal sense. By sexually assaulting them, you violate their autonomy because they cannot give informed consent. I understand the discussion here is mainly about the U.S., but there are several first world countries were drug use is not a crime-- only drug trafficking.
banning the possession of drugs is a restriction on bodily autonomy. As are drug testing laws.
Speaking of crimes, prisons restrict your autonomy as a punishment-- you technically sign away your autonomy the moment you commit a crime.
or choose to have sex, of which pregnancy is an extremely predictable outcome. Men don't get the choice of whether or not to support a child through child support, and i think that is fair, for the same reason. If you choose to have sex, you choose to accept the risks of having a child.
with that said, i don't oppose exceptions for rape or incest.
Is getting pregnant on the level of a crime in that sense, in that it's a "punishment" you subject yourself to the potentiality of when you have sex or get raped? I don't think so.
I don't think it's a punishment at all. Most people change in ways they could have never imagined through being a parent. Ways that mature them and make them tougher far beyond what they could imagine they were capable of.
Hey man, I'm just as sick of the abortion debate as you are, but the point at which life begins HAS been defined.
this is being reversed and has never been settled.
Again, the entity arbitrating this issue, the U.S. government, gives you a social security number when you're born. Boom. That's when your life begins as far as the government is concerned. If you're gonna call abortion murder, you better start issuing documents to zygotes.
Conditionally, killing a fetus is already murder. This has extensive legal precedent. Miscarriage is going to make prosecuting abortions only work for the most egregious cases.
I will add that this is a horrible position for any woman to be in. Women don't often face the prospect of abortion lightly and many suffer silently for years afterwards. I have sympathy for their plight and I also feel women are being manipulated and lied to about how big of a deal abortion is psychologically. I've met 3 women who have told me their abortion story and none of them feel good about it. Obviously that is not the entire range of human experience. Just my views, maybe I'm wrong but i enjoy your willingness to engage.