User Tag List

First 311121314152363 Last

Results 121 to 130 of 643

  1. #121
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grayscale View Post
    Agreed... but who needs defending here?
    I used that argument to show that the killing of human life alone does not qualify as murder.

    A self defense argument could be made also. The woman is acting to prevent a being from invading and using her body for 9 months. Even if the being was a full fledged person, does it have the rights to use her body without her consent?

    Even our judicial system makes distinctions in accountability, adults are tried differently than juveniles and children because they do not know better.
    The crux of the argument is that not everyone accept that a fetus is a child from day one. If it's nothing but a clump of cells, then destroying it has no moral implications.

  2. #122
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Risen View Post
    It is the manner of your "coexistence" that is determined by what is agreed upon, or not agreed upon. It is that order that creates the world we live in.
    Yes, but there is plenty of room for differing opinions before social cooperation becomes impossible.

  3. #123
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grayscale View Post
    along these lines the vast majority of adolescents would not fall into this definition of human life.


    Your understanding of what I said was very, very, VERY poor.

    Do I need to define "drawing directly on biological resources of another human being?"

    Fine, I will. My definition of THAT, would be:

    Being unable to survive outside of literally drawing nutrients straight from the other person's body.

    Adolescents are not physically hooked into their parent's bodies, last time I checked. Their dependence is INDIRECT, because they are dependent on the parent working to provide them food and shelter, but anyone could provide them food and shelter at this point, and they would still survive.

    It's unfair to demand that someone host another person in their bodies against their will. I believe you actually have the right to shoot someone if they trespass on your property and take things that belong to you, so...

  4. #124
    Senior Member Grayscale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    istp
    Posts
    1,962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    I used that argument to show that the killing of human life alone does not qualify as murder.

    A self defense argument could be made also. The woman is acting to prevent a being from invading and using her body for 9 months. Even if the being was a full fledged person, does it have the rights to use her body without her consent?

    The crux of the argument is that not everyone accept that a fetus is a child from day one. If it's nothing but a clump of cells, then destroying it has no moral implications.
    It would not be self defense if you invited someone into your home and then beat them up for breaking and entering. Again, sex is usually consensual, so I am not seeing how the embryo is "invading" her.

    It is a clump of cells, but so is an adult, no? Again, we must consider the implications of the actions over time. Cancer... grows and eventually kills you. Gingivitis gives you cavities.

    Embryo eventually grows into a human. the only reason this is even debated is because people dont consider things in their essential form. Because we can't see the embryo, we arent inclined to recognize it as human like we would a child or adult that we can see face to face.

  5. #125
    Twerking & Lurking ayoitsStepho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w3 so/sx
    Posts
    4,836

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    There seems to be an element of injustice in this viewpoint that I just can't accept, though.

    It seems like you're admitting that there are definitely negative consequences for abortion. Which is one reason I think it should be an option, though not one to take lightly. Because honestly, it DOES have consequences. It seems unfair, somehow, to take it off the table completely despite all of what's involved in pregnancy.
    Well yes, there are negetive consequences to abortion. I guess what I'm trying to say is that, why should we be allowed to choose the fate of a potential child? I realise that people will say that if they dont abort the child, it'll grow up in a horrible place with horrible parents or some of the likes, but every person has a choice of how they want their life to be. You can choose to take the experiences and make them worth while. So yes, that child COULD grow up in a very not nice enviroment, but that child ultimatley has the choice to better themselves as they grow up.
    Heck, lots of people have taken the problems of their past and learned from them, learned from the problems their families had and made themselves better from it. My goodness, look at Oprah! She grew up in some screwed up crap and now she's a freakin star! You take your experiences and better yourself. That includes giving everyone the chance to make those choices. Hey, lets just give everyone a fair chance. Whats it going to hurt?
    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    ayoitsStepho is becoming someone else. Actually her true self, a rite of passage.

  6. #126
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post


    Your understanding of what I said was very, very, VERY poor.

    Do I need to define "drawing directly on biological resources of another human being?"

    Fine, I will. My definition of THAT, would be:

    Being unable to survive outside of literally drawing nutrients straight from the other person's body.
    Yeah but that not necessarily imply that the mother has the right to commit abortion, only the capacity to do so. As I said earlier, if anything this establishes a greater ethical duty on the part of the mother to keep the fetus alive, because it is so dependent on her for life.

  7. #127
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    Yeah but that not necessarily imply that the mother has the right to commit abortion, only the capacity to do so. As I said earlier, if anything this establishes a greater ethical duty on the part of the mother to keep the fetus alive, because it is so dependent on her for life.
    But that's not a fair duty to place. Perhaps you would place it on her, but that doesn't make your sense of ethics fair or reasonable.

    I'm sorry, I can't deal with this discussion anymore. I can't relate to your perspective at all, I can hardly believe we're capable of seeing the world in the same way. Please don't bother to respond to my previous post. Thank you.

    I think this just goes to show that our fundamental senses of ethics are too incompatible for us to reason with one another. Reason only works if we start from the same assumptions, and we aren't.

  8. #128
    Twerking & Lurking ayoitsStepho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w3 so/sx
    Posts
    4,836

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post

    A self defense argument could be made also. The woman is acting to prevent a being from invading and using her body for 9 months. Even if the being was a full fledged person, does it have the rights to use her body without her consent?
    What? It should be common sence that if you have sex that your going to possibley have a baby. So to say "oh, I didnt give it permission to grow there" doesn't make sence. Once you have sex, your permitting yourself to that chance that a baby will begin forming with in you.
    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    ayoitsStepho is becoming someone else. Actually her true self, a rite of passage.

  9. #129
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ayoitsStepho View Post
    I've never met a woman who was glad she got an abortion.
    I don't think it's accurate to say that most women who got abortions would choose pregnancy if they had to do it again. They might regret it, but they might have regretted pregnancy more.

  10. #130
    Senior Member Grayscale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    istp
    Posts
    1,962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    I used that argument to show that the killing of human life alone does not qualify as murder.

    A self defense argument could be made also. The woman is acting to prevent a being from invading and using her body for 9 months. Even if the being was a full fledged person, does it have the rights to use her body without her consent?

    The crux of the argument is that not everyone accept that a fetus is a child from day one. If it's nothing but a clump of cells, then destroying it has no moral implications.
    It would not be self defense if you invited someone into your home and then beat them up for breaking and entering. Again, sex is usually consensual, so I am not seeing how the embryo is "invading" her.

    It is a clump of cells, but so is an adult, no? Again, we must consider the implications of the actions over time. Cancer... grows and eventually kills you. Gingivitis gives you cavities.

    Embryo eventually grows into a human. the only reason this is even debated is because people dont consider things in their essential form. Because we can't see the embryo, we arent inclined to recognize it as human like we would a child or adult that we can see face to face.

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post


    Your understanding of what I said was very, very, VERY poor.
    Is it really?

    It is because of a father's biological and organic resources that he is able to work a job and put food on the table. You are right that any adult could do that, but what I think you are arguing here is dependency, whether that is on the child's biological parents or not.

    Think of it in terms of the opposite... neglect. Why does one of the parents in a divorce have to pay child support? Of course a child inconveniences their parents, but that doesn't justify neglecting them, why would it while the child is still an embryo? and we are back at what constitutes human life.

Similar Threads

  1. For those who believe in spirit/soul...
    By Little Linguist in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 08-16-2008, 09:17 AM
  2. For those who like Japanese animes...
    By Seether in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-12-2008, 05:09 PM
  3. For those with high cuteness thresholds...
    By anii in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-23-2007, 09:47 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-10-2007, 10:56 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-28-2007, 01:32 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO