# Does Abortion Violate Non Aggression Principles ?



## Monk-Eye

*" Does Abortion Violate Non Aggression Principles ? "*

** Relocated Opinion Poll Multiple Choice **

This is a reproduction of another thread and allows one a choice of more than one option .

Feel free to complete a survey at this site - Does Prohibiting Abortion Violate Non Aggression Principles ?



Monk-Eye said:


> *" Does Abortion Violate Non Aggression Principles ? "*
> 
> ** Hand Inn Clue Ding This **
> 
> Non-aggression principle - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> Many supporters and opponents of abortion rights justify their position on NAP grounds. One important question to determine whether or not abortion is consistent with NAP is at what stage of development a fertilized human egg cell can be considered a human being with the status and rights attributed to personhood. Some supporters of NAP argue this occurs at the moment of conception. *Others argue that since they believe the fetus lacks sentience until a certain stage of development, it does not qualify as a human being, and as such may be considered property of the mother.** Opponents of abortion, on the other hand, state sentience is not a qualifying factor.*
Click to expand...


----------



## Stratford57

Abortion is a murder and violates the human right to live.


----------



## Monk-Eye

*" Pointed Valiance Shadow Puppets "*

** Utopian Idealism With Dystopian Realism **



Stratford57 said:


> Abortion is a murder and violates the human right to live.


Could you elaborate on the " human right  to live " ?

Is it your assertion that some said " human right to live " is an inalienable right ?  Do you understand that such is an absurdity and that rights can be alienated ?

What does a " human right to live " have to do with concerns of a state according to us constitution , as a state is concerned with wright to life of citizens ?

US 14th Amendment Establishes Negative Liberty of Individuals to Acquire Abortion

Does Prohibiting Abortion Violate Non Aggression Principles ?


----------



## Bob Blaylock

See my response here in your other thread.


----------



## Meister

This is really a stupid poll.
How about them '69 Mets


----------



## Monk-Eye

*" Law Off Reciprocity Determining Roads Of Destiny "*

** Kinda Strange Reflective Conventions **



Meister said:


> This is really a stupid poll.
> How about them '69 Mets


I do agree that the second set of negative statements seem superfluous unless one believes that abortion until birth is acceptable , which should have been summarized into one statement .

Imagine when - treating others as one would like others to treat ones self - implies an expectation of aggression be implemented upon ones self for having engaged in some behavior .

Golden Rule - Wikipedia


> The *Golden Rule* (which can be considered a *law of reciprocity* in some religions) is the principle of treating others as one would wish to be treated. It is a maxim that is found in many religions and cultures.[1][2] The maxim may appear as either a positive or negative injunction governing conduct:
> 
> 
> One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself (positive or directive form).
> One should _not_ treat others in ways that one would _not_ like to be treated (negative or prohibitive form).[1]
> What you wish upon others, you wish upon yourself (empathic or responsive form).[1]


----------



## Meister

Monk-Eye said:


> *" Law Off Reciprocity Determining Roads Of Destiny "*
> 
> ** Kinda Strange Reflective Conventions **
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is really a stupid poll.
> How about them '69 Mets
> 
> 
> 
> I do agree that the second set of negative statements seem superfluous unless one believes that abortion until birth is acceptable , which should have been summarized into one statement .
> 
> Imagine when - treating others as one would like others to treat ones self - implies an expectation of aggression be implemented upon ones self for having engaged in some behavior .
> 
> Golden Rule - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> The *Golden Rule* (which can be considered a *law of reciprocity* in some religions) is the principle of treating others as one would wish to be treated. It is a maxim that is found in many religions and cultures.[1][2] The maxim may appear as either a positive or negative injunction governing conduct:
> 
> 
> One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself (positive or directive form).
> One should _not_ treat others in ways that one would _not_ like to be treated (negative or prohibitive form).[1]
> What you wish upon others, you wish upon yourself (empathic or responsive form).[1]
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

When one gives a link to one's site, one would think that said site would be expected to work......wouldn't one think so?


----------



## Monk-Eye

*" Incident Report Double Owe One "*

** On Call Technical Support **



Meister said:


> When one gives a link to one's site, one would think that said site would be expected to work......wouldn't one think so?


That is a plausible request .

If there is an anomaly at a link , please feel free to point to it and an effort will be made to correct it or provide an explanation .

One explanation regarding a single quotation used to initiate the thread is that it is from another political debate forum and it is courtesy if not a rule to not post links to them .


----------



## Monk-Eye

*" Treachery Of Psychopathy "*

** Administrators See **



Meister said:


> When one gives a link to one's site, one would think that said site would be expected to work......wouldn't one think so?


What has happened to this thread ?
http://www.usmessageboard.com/threa...ion-violate-non-aggression-principles.695871/

** Addendum Of Discovery **

According to my alerts , the thread was deleted as a duplicate . 

The thread deleted addressed a completely different question from the two which were actual duplicates .

The thread deleted was more compelling that leads one to suspicion that the purpose for deleting the particular thread was politically motivated .


----------



## Monk-Eye

*" Den Of Disingenuous Sub Intelligent Lost Causes "*

** Back Woods Hay Straw **

*What does a " human right to live " have to do with concerns of a state according to us constitution , as a state is concerned with wright to life of citizens ?*

Where is an answer to the question from the bunch of clown car participants ?


----------



## Jonathan McCreevey

Abortion is similar to a pre-emptive war


----------

