It means we get to vote and make our arguments too, just as other people trading under the name “secularists” “liberals” “feminists’ and “egalitarians” do. All of them have metaphysical commitments. Why should theirs be privileged?
-
-
I agree. At some point it's killing. And I think it is a lot earlier in a pregnancy than a lot of people. I used to say: err on the side of caution, and decide in favor of life as often as you can. Unfortunately, that is now taken as "never" by people whose motives I distrust. /1
-
"Err on the side of caution" and "engage your moral sense" has turned into "Some old cranks are passing a law to trigger the libs and start a shitstorm for the 2020 election." So, I'll defend the status quo against that for now. /2x
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
You want to give personhood to fetuses. That’s fine. But I hope you can see that a woman’s personhood supersedes a fetuses. But tbh it shouldn’t be up to us anyway. It should only be up to the person who carries the fetus.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Why not just say Catholics and Evangelicals and others we don't like are bigots and second-class citizens and don't have the same right to have their views adopted? Why do we need to pretend there's some larger point to the Nichols/Greenhouse position?
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.