Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
... Yes. That's what the debate is about. If you're just ignoring all of that then you've copped out of the argument entirely and you're not saying anything interesting on this topic.
|
No argument there!
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
I'm not sure what you've been trying to demonstrate. Where the line is drawn legally in Canada is not up for debate, this thread would be ten posts long if that was what it was about.
|
If you don't think we're debating the law (or lack thereof) then I don't think you're paying attention. This thread spawned from the American legal situation, and the are plenty of people he who would like us to move in the same direction. Plenty of people in our (possible) next government think that way. The first step in legislating against something is the formation of broad opinion that "there oughta be a law." I'm specifically arguing that there oughtn'ta be one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
Well, the law has to stand somewhere, and obviously people are going to argue about whether it stands in the right place. This statement would appear to entail that it doesn't actually matter what law you have on the books about abortion, and we can pick at random...
|
No, it's the thing that matters most because it affects everyone, and I'm arguing that is in the right place because it's the only place that doesn't
cause or exacerbate a moral debate. I'd gladly argue what I think makes a human and how we should balance conflicting rights, but the risk of going down the Alabama path is too great right now. I believe it's important to distinguish the legal question from the ethical/moral question. So that's what I'm trying to do.