The Pseudo-Logic of Heartbeat Bills

[Rationalist]

As long as you ignore miscarriages at 24 weeks and stillbirths after, sure.

If only a small percentage of miscarriages happen after 24 weeks, then few investigations are needed. That's certainly more manageable than going with the conception precedent.

Stillbirths are much smaller in number compared to miscarriages overall. They're also harder to induce without making it obvious that they were intentional.

Inducing a miscarriage early is very easy and not even likely to be noticed by others if someone wants to hide it. A stillbirth is very noticeable, for obvious reasons.

[Chris]

If only a small percentage of miscarriages happen after 24 weeks, then few investigations are needed. That's certainly more manageable than going with the conception precedent.

Stillbirths are much smaller in number compared to miscarriages overall. They're also harder to induce without making it obvious that they were intentional.

Inducing a miscarriage early is very easy and not even likely to be noticed by others if someone wants to hide it. A stillbirth is very noticeable, for obvious reasons.

If the conception argument is not a valid legal argument because miscarriages happen after then so too is the viability argument not a valid argument because miscarriages happen after. Valid arguments are determined by logic, not by count and statistics.

BTW, I think you use "legal" when you really mean "practical." Roe wasn't a legal decision so much as a practical one is your argument. When we look at the legality of Roe we must dismiss it because judges are not granted the power to make law, only legislatures. The logic of Roe is also logically flawed in its gobbledegook invention of rights found in emanations from penumbras.

[Captdon]

I'm not sure what you mean. Whether it's a miscarriage or a stillbirth, there are ways to intentionally cause them. That proves problematic if the legal argument is that life begins at conception.

Admittedly, my stance on abortion has less to do with morality and more to do with practicality. There are various arguments of how to define when life should be considered legally protected, but regardless of which argument you select, the practical realities are relatively constant in nature.

When looking at it from a practical perspective, you have to decide how much you want government involved in personal life. I draw the line at the current compromise of Roe v. Wade. With viability being what it currently is, induced miscarriages aren't a significant issue. If the legal precedent was set for life starting at conception, then you'd have a lot of potential induced miscarriages to investigate.

We investigate a lot of laws. If a doctor has a lot of miscarriages in his practice or a "clinic" does an abortion it just isn't that hard to find out.

Murdering babies isn't anyone's personal life.

[Rationalist]

If the conception argument is not a valid legal argument because miscarriages happen after then so too is the viability argument not a valid argument because miscarriages happen after. Valid arguments are determined by logic, not by count and statistics.

BTW, I think you use "legal" when you really mean "practical." Roe wasn't a legal decision so much as a practical one is your argument. When we look at the legality of Roe we must dismiss it because judges are not granted the power to make law, only legislatures. The logic of Roe is also logically flawed in its gobbledegook invention of rights found in emanations from penumbras.

I didn't say conception wasn't a valid argument. I just believe it's not practical, at least if you plan on consistently enforcing it. And I did employ logic in my argument as well, although this is beginning to devolve into semantics.

I'm not a fan of courts legislating from the bench, but when the Supreme Court makes a ruling, it is enforced. There are plenty of logical flaws with the approach that was taken, but it is literally part of law now.

[Rationalist]

We investigate a lot of laws. If a doctor has a lot of miscarriages in his practice or a "clinic" does an abortion it just isn't that hard to find out.

Murdering babies isn't anyone's personal life.

Most miscarriages don't happen at a doctor's office. Most abortifacients are easy to acquire or create, if the inducement is done early in development.

Pennyroyal tea is a good example of an ancient abortifacient that is easy to make and works quite reliably during early pregnancy stages.

[Chris]

I didn't say conception wasn't a valid argument. I just believe it's not practical, at least if you plan on consistently enforcing it. And I did employ logic in my argument as well, although this is beginning to devolve into semantics.

I'm not a fan of courts legislating from the bench, but when the Supreme Court makes a ruling, it is enforced. There are plenty of logical flaws with the approach that was taken, but it is literally part of law now.

And the point of all this is to undo what the court should never have done to begin with. It had no business doing it, no right, no power, other than it tool the power, as governments are wont to do.

[Captdon]

Most miscarriages don't happen at a doctor's office. Most abortifacients are easy to acquire or create, if the inducement is done early in development.

Pennyroyal tea is a good example of an ancient abortifacient that is easy to make and works quite reliably during early pregnancy stages.

Pretty piss poor excuse for abortions.

[Captdon]

https://www.amazon.com/Brethren-Insi.../dp/0743274024

It's by Woodward and shows how the abortion issue was really decide.

[Rationalist]

Pretty piss poor excuse for abortions.

It's not an excuse. I'm just saying that actual enforcement of an all-out abortion ban would be rather futile in the long run.

[Sergeant Gleed]

It's not an excuse. I'm just saying that actual enforcement of an all-out abortion ban would be rather futile in the long run.

So is actual enforcement of an all-out murder ban.

Or an all-out ban on property theft.

Or an all-out ban on illegal aliens voting for Democrats.

There's a reason laws include penalties.