Brett Kavanaugh, great justice or greatest justice?

[Elok]

If you want "great justice," you have to "move all zig." Zero Wing taught me that.

[Broken_Erika]

For Great Injustice!

[Proteus_MST]

Depends on the circumstances. Ectopic pregnancy? Sure. Nothing we can do at this point to save the child. Past 24 weeks? Do a C-section and save the life of both. Cancer is probably the only situation that this would come up, where chemo during pregnancy has an inherent risk to both mother and child. I don't believe that the mother is required to forgo chemotherapy, even if that results in a greater risk of killing the child. Same for all the rest.



I'd say the legal option would be for a legal citizen to marry the lady and sponsor her. As for asylum in general, this would not qualify for asylum. Disparities in medical care aren't a sufficient clause, and the disparities are not that stark between different countries in the world. You could just as easily argue that because one country has a specific cancer treatment that anybody in the world is entitled to access this care through asylum proceedings. Another moral option would be for care to be provided through other services like MSF and the like. This is part of why they exist.



Neither high crimes or unsafe medical conditions would be sufficient from a legal standpoint to claim asylum. The Christian question is a different one. We're called to respect the laws of our particular countries and my experiences with this system as a legal immigrant is that we have an obligation to respect the laws of the country at hand. There does not seem to be am imminent danger, so the best answer is to apply for legal immigration through the proper channels and not asylum.

Thanks for the answers.

Well, regarding 1-3:
Lets assume the probabilities I gavce for the gene defect (to kill the woman) are for killing he before a time that a C-section would be an option.
Also lets assume that in all cases that the woman isn't killed, she successfully gives birth (i.e. probabilities for the woman surviving and giving birth to a living child in case 1: 80%, in case 2: 40%, in case 3: 20%)

Regarding 4 and 5:
Of course I am speaking of legal means ... for example protesting the decision to deny asylum to said pregnant woman (or the couple).

Also I refer to other means of influence:
Lets assume that we have one GOP senate candidate and one Democratic senate candidate. Both candidates stance on Roe vs. Wade is the same ... but the democratic candidate would be for letting more asylum seekers (like the pregnant woman or the couple) into the country, why the GOP candidate would be for a harsh asylum policy, denying more people than ever before asylum in this country.
Would it then be a christian duty to vote for the democratic candidate?



Addendum regarding "We're called to respect the laws of our particular countries":
In Nazi germany this would have meant that a christians duty would be to refrain from hiding jews (or enabling them to flee from Nazi territory), as this would have been illegal according to the laws of the land.
It would also mean that any civilian resistance (like sabotage actions or even simply spying on german troop movements and transmitting them to the allies) would be forbidden for catholics as well, as this, of course, also would be illegal)

(on the other hand I have to say that the catholic church didn't exactly cover itself in glory with regards to their relationship with the Nazi government, so I guess that yes, by and large they have acted according to the principle you mentioned)

[Ming]

The Christian question is a different one. We're called to respect the laws of our particular countries and my experiences with this system as a legal immigrant is that we have an obligation to respect the laws of the country at hand.

BS... A woman's right to control her own body is THE LAW OF THE LAND...
So what you really mean is that you only respect the laws of the particular country when it suits your opinion.

[Giancarlo]

Ben thinks women shouldn't have a right to their own body and that the state should legislate religion into law. He truly is full of it.

Glad to see in Ireland they did two slaps to Ben's face in recent years. Same sex marriage and prochoice, prowomen amendments passed by the voters!

[Ben Kenobi]

Lets assume that we have one GOP senate candidate and one Democratic senate candidate. Both candidates stance on Roe vs. Wade is the same ... but the democratic candidate would be for letting more asylum seekers (like the pregnant woman or the couple) into the country, why the GOP candidate would be for a harsh asylum policy, denying more people than ever before asylum in this country.

Would it then be a christian duty to vote for the democratic candidate?

Would depend on where the candidate stood on other issues. Does the candidate believe that the Church should be forced into performing homosexual marriage? Many Democrats believe that. There's also the prudential issue. If the democrat is pro life, but the party vote is for pro abortion, does voting for a democrat help? There have actually been primers put out saying that because of the party's stance for supporting abortion that anyone voting democrat is committing a serious sin.

Lets assume the probabilities I gavce for the gene defect (to kill the woman) are for killing he before a time that a C-section would be an option.

There isn't any. There's the doctrine of double effect. We can't take direct actions to dismember the unborn. Even in an ectopic pregnancy, they section out the fallopian tubes. Craniatomy is specifically forbidden.

In Nazi germany this would have meant that a christians duty would be to refrain from hiding jews (or enabling them to flee from Nazi territory), as this would have been illegal according to the laws of the land.

No, because the causes in the cases you cited aren't sufficient. The purpose of asylum is to provide shelter for those who's lives and livelihood are being threatened by others. This would apply to Syrian Christian refugees threatened by ISIS, and Jews from Nazi Germany. This is why I don't see disparity in health care as a sufficient clause to justify the claim of asylum.

The Christian duty would be to provide shelter where possible.

that the catholic church didn't exactly cover itself in glory with regards to their relationship with the Nazi government,

Read Mit Brennender Sorge and get back to me.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ming, if you believe that then it was also wrong for abolitionists to oppose slavery. We follow laws that are just and immigration is one of them. States have the right to control those whom enter the country.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ben thinks women shouldn't have a right to their own body and that the state should legislate religion into law. He truly is full of it.

No, I believe that they have the right to their own body but they don't have the right to kill other people. There's a difference. If you sincerely believe there's only one body involved, why can they do surgery on unborn children?

[Ben Kenobi]

Also, can you NPCs come up with some new material? I mean seriously. Ming and Gian are both reciting off the same playbook I've heard a thousand times.

[Kidlicious]

Also, can you NPCs come up with some new material? I mean seriously. Ming and Gian are both reciting off the same playbook I've heard a thousand times.

It's like the superhero meme with the two buttons ...

Button 1) Control women's bodies

Button 2) Murder unborn babies

except liberals don't get it. Also they don't get memes.

[Giancarlo]

No, I believe that they have the right to their own body but they don't have the right to kill other people. There's a difference. If you sincerely believe there's only one body involved, why can they do surgery on unborn children?

You have no clue about any subject you try to discuss. You don't have a right over their own body. A fetus isn't a living baby. You are mindless and a completely unscientific tool. Just like kidiot.

[Ming]

Ming, if you believe that then it was also wrong for abolitionists to oppose slavery. We follow laws that are just and immigration is one of them. States have the right to control those whom enter the country.

I said no such thing... YOU were the one that said "we (Catholics) are called to respect the laws of the land, with no qualifier. And now you say you only support laws that support your opinion. Thanks for proving my point.

Also, can you NPCs come up with some new material? I mean seriously. Ming and Gian are both reciting off the same playbook I've heard a thousand times.

There is a reason why you have heard it a thousand times... and will continue to. Because women have the right to control their own body, and you have no right to tell them they don't. Maybe at some point, you will actually understand.
Again, if you are against abortion, nobody is telling your wife or partner that they have to get one. You are welcome to follow your religious teachings... but you have no right to cram your religious beliefs down everybody throats.

[Kidlicious]

I said no such thing... YOU were the one that said "we (Catholics) are called to respect the laws of the land, with no qualifier. And now you say you only support laws that support your opinion. Thanks for proving my point.



There is a reason why you have heard it a thousand times... and will continue to. Because women have the right to control their own body, and you have no right to tell them they don't. Maybe at some point, you will actually understand.
Again, if you are against abortion, nobody is telling your wife or partner that they have to get one. You are welcome to follow your religious teachings... but you have no right to cram your religious beliefs down everybody throats.

Women have no right to kill their baby. You're making up a right.

The question isn't whether or not we have a right to stop a woman from killing her baby. The question is whether or not we have the duty to stop her or not.

[Ming]

Blah Blah Blah... as usual, you want to tell women what they should do...

[Kidlicious]

Blah Blah Blah... as usual, you want to tell women what they should do...

And so do you. You just have a problem with me telling them the particular thing not to do (don't kill your baby.)

[Giancarlo]

Women have no right to kill their baby. You're making up a right.

The question isn't whether or not we have a right to stop a woman from killing her baby. The question is whether or not we have the duty to stop her or not.

A fetus is not a living baby.

You are trying to dictate what women should or shouldn't do. It is their body, you ****ing dolt. You never did recover from that divorce. It doesn't surprise me she left you. You are insufferable, obnoxious and oblivious to everything around you.