User Tag List

First 5678917 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 177

  1. #61
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post

    I am completely confused.


    What's the difference between you saying "Yes." to me first, and then saying "completely the opposite"?
    When I said Yes to you , I agreed with you that people should put a grip on their passions and think things through.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  2. #62
    On a mission Usehername's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    3,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    When I said Yes to you , I agreed with you that people should put a grip on their passions and think things through.


    My xxxJness has drawn too quick a conclusion and bitten me in the ass, I do believe.
    *You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.
    *Faith is the art of holding on to things your reason once accepted, despite your changing moods.
    C.S. Lewis

  3. #63
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Why is this level so important? What benefit would this give society? You do realize that the (ideal) purpose of law is that it benefits society, right? That would be the litmus test, if you ask me.

    It is important because only people who are able to think on the intellectual level are able to come up with ideas for society, and to organize the current modus operandi within society. For this reason the human groups of people are far more advanced than the non-human animals.

    For the sake of efficiency of functioning in our society, it is desirable that only those who are able to think on an intellectual level should be allowed to make decisions. As those who are not able to do so are less likely to make sound decisions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post


    My xxxJness has drawn too quick a conclusion and bitten me in the ass, I do believe.

    Hyperactive N perhaps too. Conjuring conceptions about how things are without first having collected the adequate concrete (S) information of the external situation.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  4. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Infanticide or killing recently born children is considered a crime because such an entity is regarded as a human being.

    Abortion, however is not considered a crime because a fetus is not regarded as a human being.

    What is a human being? Quite obviously the psychological sense of self or the capacity for an intellectual conception of the world is the essence of man. An infant does not have a mind of a human. He is in closer affinity with most animals than humans for this reason.

    Because an infant is not a human, he ought not to be granted the right to life and is therefore the property of the state or his biological parents. It is up to one of the two to decide whether the infant should live or die.

    The fact that he has potential to become a human being is irrelevant because law by definition deals with entities that are and not entities that could be.

    A normal child may be dispensed with until he has reached the age of 2, or clear-cut psychological functioning. A child afflicted with mental retardation may be killed until he has reached the age of 5.

    Thus in summary, one should not be awarded the basic human rights until one becomes human or acquires a psychological sense of self, until then he is to be regarded as property of those who do have such a sense of self.
    I've been pondering about this too recently. Babies and Children have been dispensed out of necessity (the parents needed to get rid of it to survive, they couldn't keep it alive without endangering their own lives) for centuries without it being a crime but now for some reason we think we are above it. People now see that as brutal and immoral, but to those same people it is okay to kill someone because that person happened to murder someone else. Logical survival methods are deemed 'Bad', whilst illogical revenge instincts are rendered 'Good' (I shouldn't have to explain why revenging a death is illogical and worse than killing an infant.) However it should be noted that an unwanted child should primarily be set up for adoption over just killing it lol. And if it can't get adopted in a timely manner for some reason, then it should be killed in a humane manner.

    What really is the difference between an embryo/fetus compared to a baby that has been birthed? The baby is outside of the mother, woopty-doo. It is still equally dependent the mother, its brain is barely developed and its skull will have to harden with time, it cannot consciously control its movement, it has no discernable thought other than primal insticts (food, poop) and its attempts to express these needs can barely be distinguished from one another, it has no traits to distinguish it as an individual other than genetic phenotype and will continue being a bland organism until personality starts developing in toddlerhood.

    The only part I disagree with you on is the ages.

    If a child reaches the age of two it should be given up to an orphanage. Before then if the parents wish to get rid of it, an adoption agency is prefered, but if they want to go as far as 'putting it to sleep' in a humane fashion than that is their decision as the owners of the child.

    Retarded babies.. difficult. This is where there is a huge F-T divide so I don't want to say anything that gets me castrated.. What I'll say is that I disagree with age 5 for the time-span where it can be legally murdered, it should be up to age 2, same as a normal child, but it should be able to be dispensed of to an orphanage up to age 8.

  5. #65
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post

    I am completely confused.


    What's the difference between you saying "Yes." to me first, and then saying "completely the opposite"?
    He's stating that we need only pure logic to come to a suitable conclusion for all of this.

    If that were the only thing that society ever based things on, we'd work all backwards. To me, his statement is illogical, because I mix what I believe with how I think. and I believe that giving anyone the ability to kill anything just because it is incapable of thinking for itself (especially in a temporary timeframe like an infant) is ludacris. The laws we have protect those people until they can defend themselves or it is deemed that they are out of reach of modern society (like someone in a coma or whatever.. when they do give the parents or spouse the options to not try to save them, or pulling the plug if they are dying.. etc.). People do not think rationally as a whole.. to simply say "Here you go! Mom, do you want the baby dead or alive?" is silly to me, because I believe that someone ought to protect the baby.. in this case, the law. And I like it that way. and so does most of society.

  6. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    *remembers why he hates most other INTPs*

  7. #67
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    It's kind of wasteful to just kill them. Maybe we could use them for medical research that would improve the lot of the entire species. Society benefits and parents make a buck or two. What's not to like?
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  8. #68
    On a mission Usehername's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    3,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    He's stating that we need only pure logic to come to a suitable conclusion for all of this.

    If that were the only thing that society ever based things on, we'd work all backwards. To me, his statement is illogical, because I mix what I believe with how I think. and I believe that giving anyone the ability to kill anything just because it is incapable of thinking for itself (especially in a temporary timeframe like an infant) is ludacris. The laws we have protect those people until they can defend themselves or it is deemed that they are out of reach of modern society (like someone in a coma or whatever.. when they do give the parents or spouse the options to not try to save them, or pulling the plug if they are dying.. etc.). People do not think rationally as a whole.. to simply say "Here you go! Mom, do you want the baby dead or alive?" is silly to me, because I believe that someone ought to protect the baby.. in this case, the law. And I like it that way. and so does most of society.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    *remembers why he hates most other INTPs*
    Hmmm.

    Apologies for getting outrageously misdirected and you two (and others?) taking the brunt of it.
    *You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.
    *Faith is the art of holding on to things your reason once accepted, despite your changing moods.
    C.S. Lewis

  9. #69
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post
    if they want to go as far as 'putting it to sleep' in a humane fashion than that is their decision as the owners of the child.
    The parents are already given ample time to make that decision through abortion. It's apparent that you aren't going to go through 9 months of pregnancy just to put it down afterwards. That would be silly.

  10. #70
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post
    Hmmm.

    Apologies for getting outrageously misdirected and you two (and others?) taking the brunt of it.
    You had me at Hmmm.

Similar Threads

  1. Legality of Infanticide
    By Beorn in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 04-19-2015, 02:00 PM
  2. Type based on choice of historical quotes.
    By Jack Flak in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-25-2009, 08:41 PM
  3. on Philosophy of Education
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 11-20-2008, 06:12 PM
  4. [ENTP] On: Overassessment of entp savvy
    By entropie in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-27-2008, 08:56 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