On legality of Infanticide

[Jeffster]

Until it can survive on its own outside the womb, it's in mom as a parasite.

Ugh. I hate that mentality so much.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Ugh. I hate that mentality so much.

Not the right feel for you my good sir eh?

 

[Jack Flak]

You know the feeling you get in your guts when you notice a less-intelligent-than-yourself-haughty-pseudo-intellectual condescend to someone? *that*

 

[Jeffster]

Not the right feel for you my good sir eh?

Yep.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

You know the feeling you get in your guts when you notice a less-intelligent-than-yourself-haughty-pseudo-intellectual condescend to someone? *that*

No, kid seriously. You're in the wrong thread.

Consider the Fluff Zone for your posting convenience.

 

[Jack Flak]

No, kid seriously. You're in the wrong thread.

Consider the Fluff Zone for your posting convenience.

*congratulates self for riledom*

 

[Enyo]

At a level of basic intellectual cognition. For example, having a describable idea of the external physical environment. Being able to speak in full sentences. In short, basic intellectual functioning that are necessary to distinguish one from an animal and underline one's psychological status as that of a human being which is necessary for proclamation of human rights.

Y'know, the human brain isn't actually fully developed until around 20. Using your argument, any life should be allowed to be terminated if it's mentally ill, under twenty, senile, or any form of impaired.

Also, by your logic, since children are property, then there's no reason why daddy should go to jail for diddling the baby. After all, it's only property.

This argument actually reminds me of Jonathon Swift's _A Modest Proposal_. But it's not funny. It strikes me as pseudo-philosophy attempting to be profound, and failing immensely.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Y'know, the human brain isn't actually fully developed until around 20. Using your argument, any life should be allowed to be terminated if it's mentally ill, under twenty, senile, or any form of impaired.

Also, by your logic, since children are property, then there's no reason why daddy should go to jail for diddling the baby. After all, it's only property.

This argument actually reminds me of Jonathon Swift's _A Modest Proposal_. But it's not funny. It strikes me as pseudo-philosophy attempting to be profound, and failing immensely.

I never said it ought to be fully developed. Only to a certain degree. Normal development at age 2 is far enough. So far you made no argument.

 

[Enyo]

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.

When this happened, abortion was not readily available. Birth control did not exist in the varieties in which it is now available. Therefore, these unwanted pregnancies should never even come to term if the parents are not willing to birth the child for someone else to raise.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

When this happened, abortion was not readily available. Birth control did not exist in the varieties in which it is now available. Therefore, these unwanted pregnancies should never even come to term if the parents are not willing to birth the child for someone else to raise.

Why shouldnt daddy go to jail for killing the 1 month old baby? What reasons can you give for this other than your vulgar prejudice?

 

[Enyo]

Ugh. I hate that mentality so much.

I should clarify that I am a parent. And you're right, parasite isn't the best word.

Maybe a symbiont? But then, that's too gentle of a word. *shrugs* Something that requires certain things of your body in order to continue its own existence. For example, if mom doesn't get enough calcium, baby can leech it from her. That seems rather... parasitic.

 

[Enyo]

You know the feeling you get in your guts when you notice a less-intelligent-than-yourself-haughty-pseudo-intellectual condescend to someone? *that*

I think that says it all.

 

[Enyo]

I never said it ought to be fully developed. Only to a certain degree. Normal development at age 2 is far enough. So far you made no argument.

It's an arbitrary determination.

You're determining what degree is sufficient. Why not go whole hog and insist that it be fully developed?

After all, you had previously said:

Is your premise with regard to demarcation between human agents and non-human agents different from mine? If so, what is it?

So I offered you one.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

It's an arbitrary determination.

You're determining what degree is sufficient. Why not go whole hog and insist that it be fully developed?

After all, you had previously said:



So I offered you one.

It is not artbitrary because there are objective methods of determing one's cognitive ability. There is a difference between seeing the world analytical, or from an intellectual standpoint, and merely acting on impulse. One becomes human whenever he begins to clearly achieve the former. Likely at 2 years old. This is when children are able to speak in full sentences and memorize the basic entities of their observations.

 

[Enyo]

Why shouldnt daddy go to jail for killing the 1 month old baby? What reasons can you give for this other than your vulgar prejudice?

Read what is written. I had said "diddling". As in "molesting". What reasons can you give for not reading what was there, rather than your own desire to see someone argue with you so that you can pretend to be superior?

You're so in love with your own words that anyone who disagrees with your premise is "emotional" or "vulgar". It reminds me of one of those children who aren't human under your premise, stomping their feet and saying "BUT I WANT IT!"

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Read what is written. I had said "diddling". As in "molesting". What reasons can you give for not reading what was there, rather than your own desire to see someone argue with you so that you can pretend to be superior?

You're so in love with your own words that anyone who disagrees with your premise is "emotional" or "vulgar". It reminds me of one of those children who aren't human under your premise, stomping their feet and saying "BUT I WANT IT!"

So, why should the father go to jail for molesting, killing, mutilating, whatever, his 1 month old baby? Its really petty detail which of these he does as the bottom line question is whether or not he has the right to harm that entity in a significant way. (All of which represent this).

Any reasons?

It reminds me of one of those children who aren't human under your premise, stomping their feet and saying "BUT I WANT IT!"

But lets face it here.. !

I am giving rational explanations for my views and you're just throwing a tantrum in response like a child.

 

[Lateralus]

It's an arbitrary determination.

I keep telling him that...

 

[SolitaryWalker]

I keep telling him that...

With only vulgar prejudice to back that up.

 

[Lateralus]

It is not artbitrary because there are objective methods of determing one's cognitive ability. There is a difference between seeing the world analytical, or from an intellectual standpoint, and merely acting on impulse. One becomes human whenever he begins to clearly achieve the former. Likely at 2 years old. This is when children are able to speak in full sentences and memorize the basic entities of their observations.

Do you ever actually listen to what you say?

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Do you ever actually listen to what you say?

You're a one smart cookie my illustrious sir! :steam:

I want you to know that I have always admired your perceptive abilities and analytical rigor that you pierce right through problems with!

Keep up the good work.

Humbly yours,

BW.