User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 56

  1. #31
    redundant descriptor netzealot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    231

    Default

    If requiring oxygen and nutrients makes one a non-autonomous entity, and being a non-autonomous entity validates your execution, then I would be justified in finding this guy and running him over with a car, would I not?

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    xxTP
    Posts
    1,261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    This summarizes all the points I generally raise regarding abortion. Anyone who finds this scary has an overly simplistic perspective on life. We don't have to prove an unborn child is not human, not independent, not viable, or anything else in order to acknowledge the greater right of the woman carrying it to self-determination. If someone really wants to consider a religious perspective, let them consider that "God" placed the responsibility for gestation with women; we humans should leave it in their hands.
    Well if, as your argument basically states, the only morality is power, then society can also have the "power" to force a woman to give birth, as God gave us the mental faculty to create laws and courts.

    An appeal to power as justification is always self-defeating, because if I can take power then you have no other argument.

    It is fine to discourage abortion, and even better to make it unnecessary through contraception and eliminating all sexual coercion.
    What "sexual coercion"? Last time I checked we don't live in Afghanistan.

  3. #33
    redundant descriptor netzealot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    231

    Default

    The notion that a mortal person can become completely independent is, of course, false, and anyone who believes that is clinging to an empty pursuit with such desperation that they are not aware of it.

  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    xxTP
    Posts
    1,261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LevelZeroHero View Post
    The notion that a mortal person can become completely independent is, of course, false, and anyone who believes that is clinging to an empty pursuit with such desperation that they are not aware of it.
    Perhaps the guy is logically consistent, and believes that born humans should also be "aborted" to the extent that a.) it is in someone's interest to do so and b.) they are sufficiently "dependent" to be unable to avoid it.

    I'm reminded of an old quote by a South American General (General Iberico Saint Jean)

    "First we will kill all the subversives, then we will kill their collaborators, then their sympathisers, next those who remain indifferent, and finally, we will kill those who are timid"

  5. #35
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    Both of these comments scare me.

    Our whole criminal justice system is based on morality not on science. There's nothing scientific about determining intent or basing culpability on intent. I don't think you two realize what sort of cold and calculating system you're advocating here. If we're merely going to be scientific when it comes to crime then we won't make distinctions between negligent homicide and first degree. If morality isn't taken into consideration then I'm not sure you wouldn't hold someone accountable for even a pure accident that caused death. After all if they make such mistake why keep a faulty human around?

    Moreover, the reality is that in assisting to determine certain facts science has actually made the the pro-life position more tenable as we know for certain that an unborn child is both alive and human.

    Edit: Actually, I should add that it really doesn't make any sense that one view is scientific and the other is not. Both views attribute value to human life and there's nothing scientific about that. The fact is that one side makes the scientific determination of certain standards of autonomy as a means of attributing value and the other makes the scientific determination that there must be a human life to attribute such value. So in the broader sense they both utilize morality and science. One isn't inherently more scientific than the other. We can argue about which is more moral.
    Science is not just potions and lab rats.. There's science in many aspects of life. Our 'moralities' stem from our need to survive (and arguably how we thrive) on numbers vs being in solitude. All life on this planet has a way to survive.. the higher our thinking and more we expand, the more we change the science of our survival. We cannot sustain a lifestyle like the one we have currently. It isn't a mere belief that we need others and we need to get along in order to survive.. it is a clear methodical process we create. It's a science. There are people who don't agree with it, and *believe* solitude is the way to go.. those are few and far between and the majority of us do not subscribe to that sentiment.

    You're also equating abortions to a crime. To which, I disagree. We're incapable of completely taking out the human aspect to the way we do things. It's impossible. We're human. So no, I'm not suggesting we have some huge computer tell us our fate and create a skynet world or something crazy like that. You're sort of blowing this up much bigger than it needs to be with the whole criminal thing.

    Even if we did go your route and say that beliefs are what is most important.. why is it that my belief that abortions are not inherently wrong and evil has less weight than yours? If it's a valid belief, then it ought to be catered to according to you. And yet, beliefs alone are impossible to use. Are you willing to stop believing that abortions should be completely banned? No. Neither am I going to be believe that they're no longer acceptable. No one makes any *progress* when you base it on beliefs. No one wants to change their mind. So what do you have left when that happens? Just keep trying to convince the majority? Tell the minorities to fuck off? I think we tried doing that already and it made a society that's still pretty torn up about it.

    Now.. When you add in the science that statistically speaking women are safer, abortion rates actually go down, and privacy is a value that the state upholds legally when abortions are readily available in safe, medically-trained centers ... well. Then it's very easy to make a determination regardless of what anyone believes.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  6. #36
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Il Morto Che Parla View Post
    Well if, as your argument basically states, the only morality is power, then society can also have the "power" to force a woman to give birth, as God gave us the mental faculty to create laws and courts.

    An appeal to power as justification is always self-defeating, because if I can take power then you have no other argument.

    What "sexual coercion"? Last time I checked we don't live in Afghanistan.
    I do not favor the argument of divinely assigned responsibility, as public law should be based on broader considerations. I just find it ironic that so many people who broadly oppose legal abortion do so on religious grounds, but are quite willing to override the design of the creator they claim to worship. I see the situation instead as a matter of retaining control over one's personal body. Both regulations that prohibit abortion as well as those that require it (e.g. China's one-child policy) interfere with this fundamental idea of self-determination.

    The most obvious form of sexual coercion is rape, including date rape. You do not have to live in Afghanistan, however, to be raised to believe that women must be dependent on men, and give in to their demands, sexual and otherwise. There are still women in the U.S. even who find it difficult to refuse their husbands/bfs, and will consent to sex, even sex without contraception, if they think refusing would risk their relationship, and sometimes by extension their livelihood. Yes, this is a situation that needs to change so all women are comfortable saying "no" when they mean it, using available birth control, and have the wherewithal to weather the consequences that result from their choices.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  7. #37
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    Even if we did go your route and say that beliefs are what is most important.. why is it that my belief that abortions are not inherently wrong and evil has less weight than yours? If it's a valid belief, then it ought to be catered to according to you. And yet, beliefs alone are impossible to use. Are you willing to stop believing that abortions should be completely banned? No. Neither am I going to be believe that they're no longer acceptable. No one makes any *progress* when you base it on beliefs. No one wants to change their mind. So what do you have left when that happens? Just keep trying to convince the majority? Tell the minorities to fuck off? I think we tried doing that already and it made a society that's still pretty torn up about it.

    Now.. When you add in the science that statistically speaking women are safer, abortion rates actually go down, and privacy is a value that the state upholds legally when abortions are readily available in safe, medically-trained centers ... well. Then it's very easy to make a determination regardless of what anyone believes.
    This is the crux of the matter, and why people who oppose any abortion are the ones usually shooting themselves in the foot. They would rather try to prove to everyone else that their position is the only correct one, though they will never succeed, than to implement the concrete measures that have been proven to reduce the number of abortions actually performed. I suppose this is just another example of an all-or-nothing strategy.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  8. #38
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    I wouldn't argue on biblical grounds, even if I am Pro-Life. In fact, I'm unapologetically confident that I am a better (not different.. better) person than most people in the bible. I wouldn't use their stories as a model for my behavior (I do however admire a select few in it). I've yet to stone a random stranger for adultery or stormed in a country that isn't mine and kill men, women, and children because it was my "promised land", etc.. I don't even have it in me to circumcise an infant. Another retarded and unnecessary, violent act on children, as far as I'm concerned. If I accept that, I might as well give them piercings and tattoos on their scrotums, while I'm at it. Maybe later, I'll step up to abortion too.

  9. #39
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    Where does that right come from?

    Also, please don't make ridiculous claims that one view is simplistic and the other isn't, like that matters. We're both just trying to protect rights here.
    The right to bodily self-determination comes from the same place as our other rights, our basic humanity. But rights are not absolute, perfect good can rarely if ever be achieved, and tradeoffs are often necessary. I call the opposing viewpoints simplistic because they are; comfortable to entertain in theory, but unworkable in reality.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  10. #40
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    Even if we did go your route and say that beliefs are what is most important.. why is it that my belief that abortions are not inherently wrong and evil has less weight than yours?
    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I see the situation instead as a matter of retaining control over one's personal body.
    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    They would rather try to prove to everyone else that their position is the only correct one, though they will never succeed, than to implement the concrete measures that have been proven to reduce the number of abortions actually performed.
    These are my contentions, too. I'm surprised that my viewpoint "scares" anyone - the fact that it is my body at stake makes this a very scary issue for me. The men arguing this issue don't have nearly as much to lose as I do!

    Quote Originally Posted by LevelZeroHero
    The notion that a mortal person can become completely independent is, of course, false, and anyone who believes that is clinging to an empty pursuit with such desperation that they are not aware of it.
    The point is that legislating against abortion means that I could be personally forced to support another individual against my will. It's not that the child's dependence makes it unworthy of life - this is not about the child.

    The issue is entirely about the mother's right to make decisions about her own body to protect her own personal wellbeing. In anti-abortion legislation, freedom of choice is entirely taken away from the mother. She is forced to undergo extensive changes for 9 months, which can include very high physical, emotional, and financial costs.

    It's simply a weighing of two things - is it worth forcing an individuated life against its wellbeing to preserve new life? Keep in mind that there must be some significant costs to the mother's wellbeing for her to even consider abortion. It is not a natural choice. It is a choice made only in the face of significant deterrents to the mother's health and happiness.

    Is pre-developed life more important than developed life?

Similar Threads

  1. Electoral College in the US Pros and Cons for Keeping?
    By Anew Leaf in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 11-12-2012, 12:43 AM
  2. [ISTJ] ISTJs are they all in the can for Mc Cain?
    By hermeticdancer in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 11-12-2008, 01:54 AM
  3. Who/What is to blame for McCain's decline in the polls?
    By ajblaise in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 10-28-2008, 07:16 PM
  4. [Other] New group in the Triangle (NC) for NFs
    By proudphoenix in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-23-2008, 06:52 PM

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