Random Thought on the Scope of Governmental Authority

Dec 2018
4,922
1,344
New England
I try to find something I can agree with, common ground. It is not there.
The government has no business protecting me from myself. Zero. Zip. Nada. Ninguna. Empty set. Null. Void.
The government has no business dictating to me what it believes is harmful to me. It can restrict actions that directly harm society, realizing that has the possibility to be abused. Telling me I may not eat certain foods, not their business.


As to abortion, the point is when does life become a human being. No one denies ova and sperm are alive, that does not make them a human being. No one denies a zygote is alive, not everyone believes it is a human being.it certain lacks most of the characteristics we use to identify a human being.
A human acquires the rights of humanhood the moment it comes into existence. Universal agreement, no dissenters. That solves nothing.
When I say "protecting people from harm" implied is a harm from some external source. Whether the government has an obligation to protect someone from suicide is a special case, more debatable, and not what I'm discussing here.

I have no idea what you're saying in your second paragraph, but my point stands. Where we agree a human has human rights, we should agree government has a compelling interest to protect that life from harm.
 
Aug 2019
305
32
USA
When I say "protecting people from harm" implied is a harm from some external source. Whether the government has an obligation to protect someone from suicide is a special case, more debatable, and not what I'm discussing here.

I made no reference to suicide.

I have no idea what you're saying in your second paragraph, but my point stands. Where we agree a human has human rights, we should agree government has a compelling interest to protect that life from harm.
Obviously this is a case of begging the question.
No one disagrees.
Hitler did not disagree. The holocaust was about exterminating the Jews, that he did no identify as human.
Your observation, or insight, or whatever you consider it, equates with "News flash! The sun will shine tomorrow, followed by a period of darkness." So what? No one cares.
 
Nov 2013
2,781
1,244
NM
...

As to abortion, the point is when does life become a human being. No one denies ova and sperm are alive, that does not make them a human being. No one denies a zygote is alive, not everyone believes it is a human being.it certain lacks most of the characteristics we use to identify a human being.
A human acquires the rights of humanhood the moment it comes into existence. Universal agreement, no dissenters. That solves nothing.
Roe v. Wade frames the question as When does a fetus legally become a person. The answer is @ birth; modified to upon fetal viability.
 
Dec 2018
4,922
1,344
New England
No one cares.
Apparently you do, otherwise you wouldn't be replying to my posts or participating in a thread I started.

The larger point stands, too. We need to be careful about giving excessive levels of authority to the federal government because you never know who's going to inherit that power next. Your Nazi reference is more apt than you realize. Hitler didn't need to create a government that had a tight grip on the lives and economy of Germany. The countries socialists did that in the 20's; the Nazi's just grabbed the reins.
 
Dec 2018
4,922
1,344
New England
Roe v. Wade frames the question as When does a fetus legally become a person. The answer is @ birth; modified to upon fetal viability.
Yes, that's what it does. Whether the court actually has the authority to decide what is and what is not human life is another matter entirely.
 
Dec 2018
2,626
1,632
Unionville Indiana
The larger point stands, too. We need to be careful about giving excessive levels of authority to the federal government because you never know who's going to inherit that power next.
Pregnant victims of rape in red states, like Alabama, could say make a similar statement about reactionary state legislatures.
 
Aug 2019
305
32
USA
Apparently you do, otherwise you wouldn't be replying to my posts or participating in a thread I started.

The larger point stands, too. We need to be careful about giving excessive levels of authority to the federal government because you never know who's going to inherit that power next. Your Nazi reference is more apt than you realize. Hitler didn't need to create a government that had a tight grip on the lives and economy of Germany. The countries socialists did that in the 20's; the Nazi's just grabbed the reins.
My mistake. You only expect replies from posters who agree with you.
What you post are platitudes.
 
Nov 2013
2,781
1,244
NM
Yes, that's what it does. Whether the court actually has the authority to decide what is and what is not human life is another matter entirely.
No, the Supreme Court stayed in the legal arena, defining what is a person (legally). That's basic information, in a legal context. We've had this discussion before, as I recall.