|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on May 16, 2018 13:43:52 GMT
FilmFlaneur Then based on that definition what the nazis did to six million Jews during World War II wasn’t murder neither I guess huh? That's a very good point; first off, in an literal way it would depend on whether the Final Solution was ever formally made part of Germany's wider laws and statutes. I am not historian enough to confirm either way, but doubt it. The infamous policy of deliberate and systematic genocide starting across German-occupied Europe was formulated in procedural and geo-political terms by Nazi leadership in January 1942 at the Wannsee Conference near Berlin. But, apparently most historians agree that the Final Solution cannot be attributed to a single decision made at one particular point in time. i.e. not through a specific moment of legalisation and repeal. Instead, it is generally accepted the decision-making process was prolonged and incremental. So it seems this Nazi policy was not at all the same as 'legalising extermination', or the justifying it through amending or rewriting German civic law. Meantime it would certainly be reasonable to argue that the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular nation or ethnic group was always going to be against the law both national and international. But here the comparison with abortion is not a fair one btw,, since a newly-fertilised egg is not 'a person' and imho equating state terror and extreme wide persecution to an internationally legalised action is just a hyperbolic trope by lifers, one not born out by a reasonable grasp of the definition. (For one thing, abortion is not the result of an action of hatred against a group based on their identity, but a single termination, and for non-malignant reasons) I hope that helps.
And now, citing Godwin's law, I ought to let you know that I may drop this discussion and thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on May 16, 2018 13:47:30 GMT
Yes, kinda like how it's justified to "kill" a weed growing in your backyard. A weed isn’t human. |
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on May 16, 2018 13:49:36 GMT
Yes, kinda like how it's justified to "kill" a weed growing in your backyard. A weed isn’t human. Neither is a fetus |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2018 13:55:18 GMT
Only if the pregnancy is threatening the life of the mother.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2018 13:58:41 GMT
It's carrying a baby to term that I find unjustified.  |
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
 
|
Post by Lugh on May 16, 2018 13:59:16 GMT
Another silly semantics debate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on May 16, 2018 14:39:48 GMT
Then by that logic, dividavi , butchering a brain dead person on life support machine should not be classified as murder? Also where’s your cutoff point? Because abortions are legal up to 24 weeks of pregnancy yet we know brain activity starts in fetus’ after week 5 to 6. In other words they’re not ‘brain dead’ after that period yet it’s still legal for the mother to terminate them. |
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on May 16, 2018 14:45:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on May 16, 2018 15:36:42 GMT
It's a "human" in the same way a tadpole is a frog. |
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on May 16, 2018 15:57:46 GMT
Depends on the definition of "justified".
|
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on May 16, 2018 19:04:47 GMT
FilmFlaneur Then based on that definition what the nazis did to six million Jews during World War II wasn’t murder neither I guess huh? How so, there was no codified law that allowed the killing of Jews (or anyone). The holocaust was illegal killing as far as Nazi Germany's laws are concerned, why do you think it was kept a secret? |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on May 16, 2018 19:06:41 GMT
FilmFlaneur Then based on that definition what the nazis did to six million Jews during World War II wasn’t murder neither I guess huh? That's a very good point; first off, in an literal way it would depend on whether the Final Solution was ever formally made part of Germany's wider laws and statutes. I am not historian enough to confirm either way, but doubt it. The infamous policy of deliberate and systematic genocide starting across German-occupied Europe was formulated in procedural and geo-political terms by Nazi leadership in January 1942 at the Wannsee Conference near Berlin. But, apparently most historians agree that the Final Solution cannot be attributed to a single decision made at one particular point in time. i.e. not through a specific moment of legalisation and repeal. Instead, it is generally accepted the decision-making process was prolonged and incremental. So it seems this Nazi policy was not at all the same as 'legalising extermination', or the justifying it through amending or rewriting German civic law. Meantime it would certainly be reasonable to argue that the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular nation or ethnic group was always going to be against the law both national and international. But here the comparison with abortion is not a fair one btw,, since a newly-fertilised egg is not 'a person' and imho equating state terror and extreme wide persecution to an internationally legalised action is just a hyperbolic trope by lifers, one not born out by a reasonable grasp of the definition. (For one thing, abortion is not the result of an action of hatred against a group based on their identity, but a single termination, and for non-malignant reasons) I hope that helps.
And now, citing Godwin's law, I ought to let you know that I may drop this discussion and thread.
There wasn't. The Nuremburg laws codified removing the rights of Jews and expelling them from society, but (of course) there was never a law enacted (or revoked for the Jews specifically) that would qualify the killings as legal. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on May 16, 2018 19:17:01 GMT
Justified.
All questions should be this easy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on May 16, 2018 19:18:05 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on May 16, 2018 19:26:28 GMT
I suppose a fetus isn't a human is what I meant to say. |
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on May 16, 2018 20:01:00 GMT
The human body is a collective resource. Its fruits belong to all
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on May 16, 2018 20:02:34 GMT
The human body is a collective resource. Itd fruits belong to all I have a drinking problem, dibs on your liver |
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on May 16, 2018 20:04:12 GMT
The human body is a collective resource. Itd fruits belong to all I have a drinking problem, dibs on your liver Collective resource ≠ You get whatever you want. Everybody's interests have to be considered obviously. |
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on May 16, 2018 20:11:57 GMT
FilmFlaneur Then based on that definition what the nazis did to six million Jews during World War II wasn’t murder neither I guess huh? How so, there was no codified law that allowed the killing of Jews (or anyone). The holocaust was illegal killing as far as Nazi Germany's laws are concerned, why do you think it was kept a secret? As well as the holocaust you have the Cambodian genocide perpetrated by the Khmer Rouge regime that murdered up to 3 million. It was legal once upon a time in Russia to have someone killed for you. You couldn’t do it yourself, but you could have someone do it for you. In the U.S it used to be legal for a slavemaster to execute his slave. Local governments used to even offer rewards for the killing or capture of native Americans. I think you you get the point. Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right or morally acceptable. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on May 16, 2018 20:14:26 GMT
How so, there was no codified law that allowed the killing of Jews (or anyone). The holocaust was illegal killing as far as Nazi Germany's laws are concerned, why do you think it was kept a secret? As well as the holocaust you have the Cambodian genocide perpetrated by the Khmer Rouge regime that murdered up to 3 million. It was legal once upon a time in Russia to have someone killed for you. You couldn’t do it yourself, but you could have someone do it for you. In the U.S it used to be legal for a slavemaster to execute his slave. Local governments used to even offer rewards for the killing or capture of native Americans. I think you you get the point. Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right or morally acceptable. And I think you dodged the point, you claimed that it must have been ok to kill Jews because it was not illegal and therefore not murder. You were wrong. |
|
