I'm glad this line of thinking about the tension between abortion bans and the First Amendment's Establishment Clause is getting aired. I remain astonished that it has not been more fully developed in legal scholarship.https://nyti.ms/2HN3XnO
-
-
Beginning from "don't kill" is already prejudicing the answer in the direction you want. Your opponents don't see it as killing, and saying it in this way just ensures that you look like you're trying to bring your religious belief that it *is* killing through the side door.
-
No, the front door.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It’s not the pro life side that believes the magical personhood fairy comes out of the sky at some arbitrary time in a pregnancy and bestows humanity on a fetus (or newborn, or toddler, or whenever it is a person becomes a person).
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
But opposition to abortion on the same grounds as opposition to murder is not a "normative proposition." This is where public opinion matters. You can't claim your position is "normative" if a substantial sector of the population -- in this case a majority -- disagrees with it.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It’s just another lazy way to win a debate without debating. “Your beliefs are tainted at the source and thus invalid”. They are too arrogant to consider they might be attacked in a similar fashion. I believe C.S. Lewis called it “sawing off the branch you are standing on”.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.