Texas' HB2: Has 2 Backfire

[Lighthouse]

chrysostom, that fact that Granite is on your side on this issue should be a big red flag to you that you probably have taken the wrong side.

Yup.

Are you saying that laws don't influence behavior?

No. But a regulatory law will only lead to people following the regulation rather then making them not kill their child.

 

[Granite]

chrysostom, that fact that Granite is on your side on this issue should be a big red flag to you that you probably have taken the wrong side.

And I'm sure if you were drowning any life preserver I tossed you would be ignored.:chuckle:

 

[The Barbarian]

Of course you can legislate morality. Prohibition and the war on drugs, for example.

How did those work out?

 

[chrysostom]

chrysostom, that fact that Granite is on your side on this issue should be a big red flag to you that you probably have taken the wrong side.

And I'm sure if you were drowning any life preserver I tossed you would be ignored.:chuckle:

he would have to know
if
you had thrown one to everyone that is drowning

 

[chrysostom]

And in the meantime, abortions have declined markedly. Not by law, but by the efforts of hundreds of thousands of people who have been out there helping people to understand abortion and it's consequences.

A political party won't save those kids. Bringing God to people will.

That simple.

you mean it is now less than a million per year?
or
could it be reporting abortions is on the decline

would you be happy
if
they just stopped reporting it?????

 

[Christian Liberty]

Show us how a single regulation has saved any children, even a single one.

The government cannot save any children. Its impossible. Not without a police state.

What this will do is criminalize the murder of some children. Its not ideal, since the killing of ALL children should be criminalized, but it does criminalize the killing of some children. And therefore creates legal penalties for those killings.

If it is proper that murder be punished, a law that increases the number of murders that are punished is a good law.

 

[Lighthouse]

The government cannot save any children. Its impossible. Not without a police state.

What this will do is criminalize the murder of some children. Its not ideal, since the killing of ALL children should be criminalized, but it does criminalize the killing of some children. And therefore creates legal penalties for those killings.

If it is proper that murder be punished, a law that increases the number of murders that are punished is a good law.

All this will do is lead to people murdering their children before the time is up, and not a single child will be saved.

 

[Christian Liberty]

All this will do is lead to people murdering their children before the time is up, and not a single child will be saved.

OK, so, hypothetical: Let's say there was a law passed that banned all abortions after two weeks.

Now, that's not the ideal situation. We'd rather a law that banned all o them. That said, it is certainly the case that anyone who waited longer than 2 weeks would not get a chance to have an abortion. Which would be a lot of people. Many children would be saved. Would you dispute this?

As 20 weeks, its so late that it barely matters. That said, those few people who would actually otherwise wait longer than 20 weeks might find out that its too late.

If we legalized the murder of children up until age 5, do you think that some parents would have "More time to decide" and so would spare their children? The answer is that its irrelevant. The unfortunate fact that the murder of some kids is legal is no excuse for keeping the murder of even more kids legal. I support this law. It sucks, its useless, but passing the law is better than not passing it.

 

[Lighthouse]

OK, so, hypothetical: Let's say there was a law passed that banned all abortions after two weeks.

Now, that's not the ideal situation. We'd rather a law that banned all o them. That said, it is certainly the case that anyone who waited longer than 2 weeks would not get a chance to have an abortion. Which would be a lot of people. Many children would be saved. Would you dispute this?

As 20 weeks, its so late that it barely matters. That said, those few people who would actually otherwise wait longer than 20 weeks might find out that its too late.

If we legalized the murder of children up until age 5, do you think that some parents would have "More time to decide" and so would spare their children? The answer is that its irrelevant. The unfortunate fact that the murder of some kids is legal is no excuse for keeping the murder of even more kids legal. I support this law. It sucks, its useless, but passing the law is better than not passing it.

In any of those cases, including the reality, if Roe v. Wade were overturned tomorrow abortion would still be legal, because of such laws.

I'm not disputing your hypothetical would save some children seeing as how many women wouldn't even realize they were pregnant soon enough to even consider it if two weeks were the maximum. However, getting such a law passed would be impossible for that very reason, because the pro-murder politicians would shoot it down.