Quote:
Originally Posted by Diuretic
Difficult innit? It's too easy to allow emotion, religious beliefs, personal backgrounds, etc to get in the way. I'm not suggesting that of you Dilettante, I was referring to the decision-makers.
The US Supreme Court has sufficient fundie whack jobs to get the job done. They are not going to make their decisions based on fair interpretation of the constutition on this. Those fundies have made up their minds that abortion is going to be illegal in the States. They'll wipe out Roe v Wade and they'll do it with their considerable legal knowledge and expertise. Whackos they are, stupid they ain't. On what basis will they do this? Because God doesn't like it and the Bible says so. Somewhere in the Bible there is a stricture against abortion. And that's good enough for them.
Some of your federal legislators are whacko fundies. You have flat-earthers and fundie creationists in those chambers. Just goes to show, any loon can get elected. In the land of the dumbarses, the half-brain is King*. So flat-earthers and creationists will get elected because a significant number of Americans in various electorates think that the Earth is flat, was made in seven days by god and is a few thousand years old and we descended from Adam and Eve. So some dumbarse from dumbarse-ville is going to stand up and say abortion should be illegal because god loves life and although god is happy to see someone cop a lethal injection based only on the probability of his or her guilt, god doesn't want abortions. And that's that. No further correspondence will be entered into.
That's what's wrong.
Now please attack my views because I need to sharpen them up.
*This is not a general attack, it's for those areas of the US that specialise in returning fundies to Congress.
|
I'm not quite sure what views you were expressing here, so I'm unsure of how to go about attacking. This seems to be a rant against some members of the US Supreme Court, certain US legislators, and their constituents. But the issues at hand (partial-birth abortion, abortion and general, and this bill) weren't really addressed.
On the more general sharpening front however, I offer you the following to accept or reject as you please:
I would advise against making claims about the motivations of judges or voters unless they themselves specify them. This isn't becuase your claims about their motivations are necessarily wrong, but because 1) They are necessarily subjective assumptions and 2) In the end it really doesn't matter; demonstrating that a given policy originates from a bad source does nothing to prove that the policy itself is a bad one.
In this case, attacking the "fundies", as you call them, is nothing but a
ad hominem attack against the originator of policy; it tells us nothing about the policy itself or whether it could justified on other, more acceptable, grounds.
Also, the term "flat-earther" and its associated references only damages your argument. Since, whatever other beliefs they might have, no one actually believes the earth is flat, saying that they do only demonstrates that you're willing to use false exageration in making your points. That leads one to question if any of your other statements are also false exagerations and encourages people to take your arguments less seriously.