for those against abortion

[ajblaise]

None, but that doesnt change the fact that im not against it. Whats yours? Does your lack secure you in your opinion that its wrong?

Morals aside, decriminalizing murder would be a disaster. That's not how modern societies are set up to function.

 

[Hexis]

I also believe modern society was a mistake, yeah weve made great advances but at what price?

And murders objective.

 

[ajblaise]

I also believe modern society was a mistake, yeah weve made great advances but at what price?

And murders objective.

What do you mean what price? We're living easy now, especially compared to the hardship earlier civilizations had to endure just in daily life. Do you want to go back to a cave?

 

[Hexis]

The advance of society and culture has literally fucked up things. Whos to say man was meant be the dominant one on earth? Doing the things we do? Theirs suppose to be a natural order, man went so far as to say hes better than that order and might even know a better order.

Not saying I want to go with "back to a cave", but hunter gatherer civilizations had it right. They took only what they needed, used all of it and never more than that. Cause if they did they knew it would start a chain reaction of devastation.

Trying looking into this. Ishmael (novel) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Like im not trying to argue with you either, so I hope it doesn't come off that way. Im just saying theirs a bigger picture a lot of people dont even take into account. I didnt even think about these kind of things till about a year ago. The book above is a great read, you may enjoy it.

 

[ajblaise]

Whos to say man was meant be the dominant one on earth? Doing the things we do?

Large frontal lobes and opposable thumbs.

 

[Risen]

I dont see whats wrong with killing.

I believe even Darwin would have to admit that this is the reason why intuitives are NOT the majority among the human race. Such very independent forms of logic, when fully realized, are self destructive and weeded out of existence in favor of the constructive continuation and development of the species. There's a fine line between morality and destructive thinking (thinking begets action, but action is not always born). You'd best find which side of that line you're treading.

Seriously, I find some people on this forum to be absolutely ridiculous in ways I could never before fathom. People who nonchalantly tell me, "Killing 70 million people isn't that big a deal," or, "I don't see what's wrong with killing." Just wtf...

babylon, that's why I said that once the fetus has/is developing a brain, it should be considered a life with present or potential sentience on some level. The brainwave argument is poor because we cannot use brainwaves as the sole defining aspect of neurologically produced consciousness, and consciousness itself is an ambiguous concept, with much that we do not fully understand. Rather, what we do know about the brain/central nervous system is that it is necessary for the body to function and for any manner of consciousness. Thus, it is better to say that once the brain is present, that would be the defining point for human life. Either way, there are all manner of other implications that go along with it, including the extreme that i didn't imagine I'd have to mention, that being that the normalizing of such behavior (abortion) makes it easier for people to participate in further devaluing human life (Hexis) as a whole, and that never goes to a good place. I usually don't like making the "slippery slope" argument, but this forum is often a testament...

What's really funny is how I was just watching a history documentary on communism, and crossed the part where it details how Marxist and other communists at the end of the 19th century heavily borrowed from Darwinism as support for their own social philosophy, and especially Lenin who used such ideas as justification to completely denegrade the value of human beings. He even went so far as to approach PAVLOV asking him if he could replicate the sort of classical conditioning he had used on dog and apply it to the Russian population to "train" them. Then he went on to starve millions of people to death for the purpose of making them bow down to communism and abandon religion. That is the destructive thinking I speak of.

 

[Randomnity]

This debate will always happen until religion is no longer an issue in our society. So probably, it will always be around.

The problem is that neither side can budge. If you believe it's murder, you are outraged by people murdering "babies". Just like if you believe it's an undesired but necessary medical procedure in some cases, you would be outraged if young women were forced to have their lives ruined by having a child at age 15.

It's kinda like the PETA nuts. They aren't going to stop thinking meat is murder, but the rest of us are unlikely to stop eating meat, and neither is it likely to be outlawed.

So there's no point in discussing it. /thread

 

[run]

Seriously, I find some people on this forum to be absolutely ridiculous in ways I could never before fathom. People who nonchalantly tell me, "Killing 70 million people isn't that big a deal," or, "I don't see what's wrong with killing." Just wtf...

She was being facetious. She was illustrating the slippery slope of the negligence of human life.

No one has addressed my question yet.

 

[Phantonym]

No one has addressed my question yet.

Could you clarify what exactly is your question?

 

[run]

This debate will always happen until religion is no longer an issue in our society. So probably, it will always be around.

The problem is that neither side can budge. If you believe it's murder, you are outraged by people murdering "babies". Just like if you believe it's an undesired but necessary medical procedure in some cases, you would be outraged if young women were forced to have their lives ruined by having a child at age 15.

It's kinda like the PETA nuts. They aren't going to stop thinking meat is murder, but the rest of us are unlikely to stop eating meat, and neither is it likely to be outlawed.

So there's no point in discussing it. /thread

Does mere disagreement entail that there's no truth, or that we can never come to the truth?

In mathematics, some think there are 23 dimensions, some 11, some 10. Do they look at opposing arguments and give up? Opinions point at something. They need something at which they opine. You don't sit around heatedly debating which ice cream company is better do you?

 

[run]

Could you clarify what exactly is your question?

I'm trying to figure out why I feel like these people are killers. I want a pro-lifer, like the single person who posted on page 2 to answer it. If not, whatever.

 

[Laurie]

Moral relativism leaves no reason that anything should be wrong. At least hexis is being consistent.

 

[Randomnity]

Does mere disagreement entail that there's no truth, or that we can never come to the truth?

In mathematics, some think there are 23 dimensions, some 11, some 10. Do they look at opposing arguments and give up? Opinions point at something. They need something at which they opine. You don't sit around heatedly debating which ice cream company is better do you?

Morals and truth are absolutely not the same thing, nor can they be compared.

That was my whole point.

 

[Laurie]

I'm trying to figure out why I feel like these people are killers. I want a pro-lifer, like the single person who posted on page 2 to answer it. If not, whatever.

Well, in your view they are. They have convinced themselves they aren't. You need to deal with it the way we deal with anything that is crazy. We just go on. People do awful things all the time, you get used to it.

Focus on what you can do to make it better, not on hating people. That's where you are going to get messed up, going down that path. If this really is a problem for you, or you are being influenced by people who are on the "hate" side feel free to PM me.

 

[ajblaise]

Moral relativism leaves no reason that anything should be wrong. At least hexis is being consistent.

That's not exactly how it works. Moral relativism just suggests that morals come from and depend on variables such as culture, society, history, and individual preferences. That's reality.

Moral absolutism, the belief in absolute or God-determined right and wrong devoid of context, can be more dangerous.

 

[ergophobe]

Less disagreement, I would imagine(hope) in the following circumstances:
1. The health of the mother is endangered by carrying the baby. A choice to abort is necessary to ensure the health of the mother.
2. The baby is the result of non-consensual sex (rape) and particularly where an underage girl is involved.

Arguments for abortion to be legalized and for every woman to be able to make a choice for herself center on:
1. A woman's right to her own body. Ultimately it is a woman, a conscious adult deciding what she should do for herself. The greatest physical and emotional effects are for the mother. The person undergoing these effects is best able to decide if this is an appropriate decision. Conversely, making abortion illegal or difficult is impinging on the right of a woman to control her own body.
2. A fetus is considered a live, conscious entity who should be protected as an individual once it is able to physically sustain itself separate from the body of the mother. This is only possible once the child is born.

P.S. Not interested in rehashing the debate over the issue. Just stating the views frequently expressed by the groups favoring legalization.

 

[Laurie]

That's not exactly how it works. Moral relativism just suggests that morals come from and depend on variables such as culture, society, history, and individual preferences. That's reality.

Moral absolutism, the belief in absolute or God-determined right and wrong devoid of context, can be more dangerous.

I didn't make any judgements on it. Did I call it dangerous?

 

[ayoitsStepho]

May I ask, who are we to judge when a fetus is ok to be killed? I think we all fail to realise that we're all here because we WERE'NT aborted, or the abortion failed. We all had a chance at life...so why do we choose who lives and who doesnt?

I may also make a comment on the statement that its about survival of the fittest. Look, how are we to know if such a fetus was the fittest if we went and there and killed it? Even the 'fittest' fetus wont survive. I mean, any person can kill. Doesn't make them the fittest. It's defenseless. So of coarse if you try to get ride of it, you'll more than likely succeed. It doesn't have to do with whether or not it was the weakest or fittest.

Also, the whole Roe versus Wade deal. The woman, Norma Micorvey, didn't she lie about being rapped? If this is true, the legalization of abortion is all set up on a lie. The insident wasn't even portrayed truthfully.

 

[Totenkindly]

I'm trying to figure out why I feel like these people are killers. I want a pro-lifer, like the single person who posted on page 2 to answer it. If not, whatever.

Hmm. That's why I asked for the clarification after the original post, but it seems people took it differently... it sounded like you wanted another pro-lifer to answer.

I really hate abortion, it really bothers me; and the only reason I accept it at all is because I'm also a realist... I'm capable of seeing that in some situations, there are competing goods -- it's not "good" vs "bad" -- and so it makes sense to permit something that personally offends me because it's the only fair thing to do in the situation, there are other evils at play that I consider very bad as well.

So, in the end, I have to rationally call myself "pro-choice"... but I'm definitely at the end that believes abortion should be rare and avoided if at all possible. I don't like it on a personal level... and I mean, I really -don't- like it.

As far as attaching personal values to people who might abort or might support abortion rights, I tend to make personal judgments of others based on their motivations (as best I can determine them) and not necessarily their decision.

If someone willfully got abortions and seemed to not care in the least, I'd probably feel like they were "evil."

If someone got abortions out of ignorance and immaturity, I would feel like they were immature and grieve over the decision but not that they were necessarily "evil."

If someone agonized over an abortion and got one after a long-thought-out decision process, there would be little stigma I would automatically attach to them even if I would grieve over their decision while thinking it makes sense and I would be extremely supportive of them.

That's just me; while intellectually there's a lot of ambiguity over "beginning of life" and a lot of the distinctions were make seems irrational, there's also just the emotional part that sees abortion as a violating process, an abrupt break in the natural unfolding of life that could have often been handled in other ways; and since the unborn baby is recognizably human, emotionally I read it as human as a born child even if a case can be made for that status being ambiguous; and having three children of my own, I've watched that whole process unfold and see and love the results and thus see the great loss of potential life and value.

I guess the difference here is that I do not attach hatred to people who get abortions or support abortion rights if I see that their position is based on trying to do the overall "best thing" in the situation and it's merely a difference of opinion, NOT that they're trying to be evil and selfish and destructive.

 

[Haphazard]

I'm trying to figure out why I feel like these people are killers. I want a pro-lifer, like the single person who posted on page 2 to answer it. If not, whatever.

Because you think you're killing potential.

Whether or not it's actual human life is inconsequential. However, when you're destroying it, it was something so close to having its own life, an independent mind, and even the possibility to do something good. And by destroying it you're destroying all of that along with it.

Then again, Hitler's mom wanted to abort him and her doctor talked her out of it, so I guess it goes both ways.