|
Post by Terrapin Station on May 17, 2018 14:35:56 GMT
how people can casually believe the decision to terminate an innocent(literally the most innocent) human life can ever be justified, like it’s nothing, is beyond me.Exactly. Hence why this thread is so long already.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on May 17, 2018 14:42:18 GMT
Do you think abortion is justified in the case of a woman engaging in a promiscuous lifestyle leading to unprotected sex resulting in pregnancy yet is simply unwilling to deal the consequences? In such a case getting an abortion IS dealing with the consequences. It's just not doing so in a way that suits you. No, that’s not dealing with the consequences. That’s shirking responsibility, in the most inhuman way possible.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on May 17, 2018 14:45:26 GMT
In such a case getting an abortion IS dealing with the consequences. It's just not doing so in a way that suits you. No, that’s not dealing with the consequences. That’s shirking responsibility, in the most inhuman way possible. "Inhuman" there means "something that humans do that I don't like."
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on May 17, 2018 14:48:25 GMT
how people can casually believe the decision to terminate an innocent(literally the most innocent) human life can ever be justified, like it’s nothing, is beyond me.Exactly. Hence why this thread is so long already. No one has been able to put up a reasonable case that taking an innocent human life can be fair. Best they can muster is, “well it’s legal so technically it cannot be murder” or “a fetus isn’t a human” neglecting the fact that a fetus is human and history is full of examples of evil shit that were once legal. Another one is “it’s her body, her right”. Yeah she can do whatever the fuck she wants with her body, providing it doesn’t harm anyone else!
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on May 17, 2018 14:53:30 GMT
No, that’s not dealing with the consequences. That’s shirking responsibility, in the most inhuman way possible. "Inhuman" there means "something that humans do that I don't like." inhuman adjective 1. lacking human qualities of compassion and mercy; cruel and barbaric. Yes killing preborn babies is one of the most uncompassionate, unmerciful, cruel and barbaric acts humans can ever commit.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on May 17, 2018 15:12:41 GMT
Exactly. Hence why this thread is so long already. No one has been able to put up a reasonable case that taking an innocent human life can be fair. The problem here is that you don't understand that morality is subjective. It's simply a matter of individuals feeling that some interpersonal behavior or other is either acceptable or not acceptable. No one is going to be able to say anything to you that's going to change your personal feeling that abortion isn't acceptable behavior.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2018 15:13:10 GMT
Doesn't matter what you wanna call it, I call it legal... a quality not likely to change in your lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on May 17, 2018 15:13:59 GMT
"Inhuman" there means "something that humans do that I don't like." inhuman adjective 1. lacking human qualities of compassion and mercy; cruel and barbaric. Yes killing preborn babies is one of the most uncompassionate, unmerciful, cruel and barbaric acts humans can ever commit. Can humans really lack human qualities? Or are human qualities defined by what humans do, whatever they happen to do?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2018 15:17:21 GMT
In such a case getting an abortion IS dealing with the consequences. It's just not doing so in a way that suits you. No, that’s not dealing with the consequences. That’s shirking responsibility, in the most inhuman way possible. If I spill a bottle of milk, leaving it there and taking the attitude that since I spilled it I just have to live in a house with milk all over the floor now, is not dealing with the consequences. Wiping it up and getting rid of it is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2018 15:18:55 GMT
Exactly. Hence why this thread is so long already. No one has been able to put up a reasonable case that taking an innocent human life can be fair. Sure they have. I find this criticism ironic, considering that the only contribution I've ever seen you make to this discussion in this or any other thread is to call everyone who disagrees with you a murderer and then act like the discussion is now over.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on May 17, 2018 15:45:22 GMT
No, that’s not dealing with the consequences. That’s shirking responsibility, in the most inhuman way possible. If I spill a bottle of milk, leaving it there and taking the attitude that since I spilled it I just have to live in a house with milk all over the floor now, is not dealing with the consequences. Wiping it up and getting rid of it is. There you go with your ridiculous comparisons again. Milk is not a sentient life form. Honestly dismissively equating a preborn living human to spilt milk..wtf is the matter with you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2018 15:57:31 GMT
If I spill a bottle of milk, leaving it there and taking the attitude that since I spilled it I just have to live in a house with milk all over the floor now, is not dealing with the consequences. Wiping it up and getting rid of it is. There you go with your ridiculous comparisons again. Milk is not a sentient life form. Honestly dismissively equating a preborn living human to spilt milk..wtf is the matter with you? I just knew you would go there. Avoid the point, focus on the irrelevance. I did not claim milk is a sentient life form. I did not equate a "preborn living human" to milk. This is just stuff that you invented. I pointed out that when a problem occurs, cleaning up the problem is a way of taking responsibility for having created it in the first place. Your claim that having abortions is ducking the problem is, therefore, nonsense. But as usual, your only response to any reasoned point is an emotional outburst and an insult. So to answer your question - what's "wrong" with me is that I think about things instead of emoting about them.
|
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on May 17, 2018 16:04:33 GMT
" I disagree with your take on John Austin, given the secrecy and euphemisms around the final solution it seems apparent that the order was never given explicitly," You dont think Hitler gave the explicit command to start the holocaust? How else do you think he communicated with those under his command? Did he give them secret signs through body language? Did he play pictionary with them? "I also tend to think that the outcome of the nuremburg trials are a fair indication that there was a crime commited, I suppose you could argue that it was not murder they were tried with though." Under international law (no matter your definition of law) the holocaust was illegal. Under German law however it depends on how you define law. There are different kinds of legal systems after all. Reading your link on John Austin, the implication I come to is that it is a public decree, Hitler took great pains to communicate his wishes in euphemistic phrases and without committing them to paper or written orders, in actual fact the origin of the decision to begin killing jews is not documented, it is merely supposed (with very good evidence) that Hitler was the orignator. taking your link: In this case Hitler Where is that declared wish? There is no indication that Hitler gave any explicit order. To be fair there is a claim that a scribbled note by Himmler is evidence of a direct order, but that is still pretty fringe 20 years after its exposition. With regards your pictionary comment, haha, and yes I see your argument, but great pains were taken to distance Hitler from the final solution, he was supposed to come out of the war clean. Not sure why you're dwelling on Austin so much. "Reading your link on John Austin, the implication I come to is that it is a public decree, Hitler took great pains to communicate his wishes in euphemistic phrases and without committing them to paper or written orders, in actual fact the origin of the decision to begin killing jews is not documented, it is merely supposed (with very good evidence) that Hitler was the orignator." Fair enough. "Where is that declared wish? There is no indication that Hitler gave any explicit order. " Well obviously the go-ahead for the holocaust would have to been given by someone in power, which we can assume was Hitler, after all he was the Fuhrer. He probably gave a coded message in written form or just spoke to Himmler or whoever.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on May 17, 2018 16:05:18 GMT
If I spill a bottle of milk, leaving it there and taking the attitude that since I spilled it I just have to live in a house with milk all over the floor now, is not dealing with the consequences. Wiping it up and getting rid of it is. There you go with your ridiculous comparisons again. Milk is not a sentient life form. And neither is an embryo. And a fetus is not more sentient than a grown pig or cow. Are you a vegetarian?
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on May 17, 2018 16:29:39 GMT
I used to be more 'pro-choice'.
However, now I'm starting to think people should be held accountable for their behavior.
How about this.. for every abortion you get and you weren't raped they cut off one finger from you and the irresponsible male who got you pregnant.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on May 17, 2018 16:53:54 GMT
There you go with your ridiculous comparisons again. Milk is not a sentient life form. Honestly dismissively equating a preborn living human to spilt milk..wtf is the matter with you? I just knew you would go there. Avoid the point, focus on the irrelevance. I did not claim milk is a sentient life form. I did not equate a "preborn living human" to milk. This is just stuff that you invented. I pointed out that when a problem occurs, cleaning up the problem is a way of taking responsibility for having created it in the first place. Your claim that having abortions is ducking the problem is, therefore, nonsense. But as usual, your only response to any reasoned point is an emotional outburst and an insult. So to answer your question - what's "wrong" with me is that I think about things instead of emoting about them. The problem with your stupid simplistic point is that one of the scenarios is a complete unintentional accident(spilt milk) the other(pregnancy) is the result of a deliberate sexual communion between a man and a woman. When you spill milk it’s unhealthy to just leave it laying around. Thats why we clean it up. Because that’s the natural thing to do. When a woman falls pregnant the natural order is to allow the living fetus to develop in the womb until labour. The natural thing is not to execute it like some parasite that’s attached itself to her body without consent.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on May 17, 2018 17:17:48 GMT
rizdekPlenty of women, including secularists, are pro-life.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2018 17:36:55 GMT
I just knew you would go there. Avoid the point, focus on the irrelevance. I did not claim milk is a sentient life form. I did not equate a "preborn living human" to milk. This is just stuff that you invented. I pointed out that when a problem occurs, cleaning up the problem is a way of taking responsibility for having created it in the first place. Your claim that having abortions is ducking the problem is, therefore, nonsense. But as usual, your only response to any reasoned point is an emotional outburst and an insult. So to answer your question - what's "wrong" with me is that I think about things instead of emoting about them. The problem with your stupid simplistic point is that one of the scenarios is a complete unintentional accident(spilt milk) the other(pregnancy) is the result of a deliberate sexual communion between a man and a woman. Sorry, wrong. The sex is intentional (sometimes) but the pregnancy is not. Just as picking up the jug is intentional, but spilling it is not. And unwanted children are a bad thing to have around too. Hell, there is a thesis that the lack of them after Roe v Wade is why the crime rate has been collapsing over the last couple of decades.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on May 17, 2018 17:43:44 GMT
It would be far easier to convince me that we should allow infanticide in some cases (especially a la Peter Singer's views, say) than it would be to convince me that restricting abortion is a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on May 17, 2018 17:45:06 GMT
rizdek Plenty of women, including secularists, are pro-life. So? They are the ones I am perfectly happy to have that position. I am personally pro-life, but not politically.
|
|