Conquer Club

336 Million

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: 336 Million

Postby BigBallinStalin on Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:44 pm

Funkyterrance wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Regarding respecting human life, doesn't that stance cut both ways? You can either respect the life of a potential person or respect the life (i.e. future well-being) of the women and her spouse...

This seems more akin to convenience and relative comfort than future-well being in a literal sense. It's perceived as inconvenient/uncomfortable to have an unplanned baby so a lot of people opt to just have it aborted. Most of these pro-choice arguments are invented to justify this decision. Why can't we just call a spade a spade? People might consider the events leading up to the abortion more if we did.


I agree with crispybits that your painting of this decision is not taken so lightly by the many people you accuse.

I wonder: of the total pro-lifers, how many actually 'put their money where their mouth is' by (1) adopting unwanted kids, (2) arranging with pregnant women to adopt their kid so that the abortion is not conducted, (3) or at least donating to the relevant adoption organizations.

If none of the three are done, then we may have cause to doubt the sincerity of the pro-lifers' position.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: 336 Million

Postby Ray Rider on Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:51 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:I agree with crispybits that your painting of this decision is not taken so lightly by the many people you accuse.

I wonder: of the total pro-lifers, how many actually 'put their money where their mouth is' by (1) adopting unwanted kids, (2) arranging with pregnant women to adopt their kid so that the abortion is not conducted, (3) or at least donating to the relevant adoption organizations.

If none of the three are done, then we may have cause to doubt the sincerity of the pro-lifers' position.

Apologies for interjecting here, but I'm a pro-lifer and can list numerous pro-lifer friends by name who have done all three items you listed. Many have adopted unwanted children (especially from poverty-stricken countries overseas such as Haiti), others have made arrangements with local pregnant ladies with unwanted babies, and others donate to adoption agencies (although that is often taken for granted since it seems that governments often get involved in the funding).
Image
Image
Highest score: 2221
User avatar
Major Ray Rider
 
Posts: 413
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:21 pm
Location: In front of my computer, duh!
Medals: 7
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2)

Re: 336 Million

Postby Symmetry on Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:58 pm

Ray Rider wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:I agree with crispybits that your painting of this decision is not taken so lightly by the many people you accuse.

I wonder: of the total pro-lifers, how many actually 'put their money where their mouth is' by (1) adopting unwanted kids, (2) arranging with pregnant women to adopt their kid so that the abortion is not conducted, (3) or at least donating to the relevant adoption organizations.

If none of the three are done, then we may have cause to doubt the sincerity of the pro-lifers' position.

Apologies for interjecting here, but I'm a pro-lifer and can list numerous pro-lifer friends by name who have done all three items you listed. Many have adopted unwanted children (especially from poverty-stricken countries overseas such as Haiti), others have made arrangements with local pregnant ladies with unwanted babies, and others donate to adoption agencies (although that is often taken for granted since it seems that governments often get involved in the funding).


Aye, while I dislike the term "pro-lifer", that's admirable behavior. Thanks for grounding this.
the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
User avatar
Sergeant Symmetry
 
Posts: 6615
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:49 am
Medals: 4
Standard Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)

Re: 336 Million

Postby BigBallinStalin on Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:59 pm

@Ray
And good for them. They're sincere pro-lifers.

I'd imagine that not all fit that description.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: 336 Million

Postby Ray Rider on Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:03 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:@Ray
And good for them. They're sincere pro-lifers.

I'd imagine that not all fit that description.

As is true of any group. Take, for example, those who claim to be libertarians on this site. I think we've seen many times over that many claim it, but when the rubber hits the road, actions may not match the rhetoric. That doesn't change the validity of the belief, nor discredit the cause. That simply discredits the individual.
Image
Image
Highest score: 2221
User avatar
Major Ray Rider
 
Posts: 413
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:21 pm
Location: In front of my computer, duh!
Medals: 7
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2)

Re: 336 Million

Postby Funkyterrance on Wed Apr 03, 2013 4:05 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
I wonder: of the total pro-lifers, how many actually 'put their money where their mouth is' by (1) adopting unwanted kids, (2) arranging with pregnant women to adopt their kid so that the abortion is not conducted, (3) or at least donating to the relevant adoption organizations.

If none of the three are done, then we may have cause to doubt the sincerity of the pro-lifers' position.

Yeah but this could be perceived as enabling/condoning/furthering the person not taking responsibility for their actions. Most pro-lifers can make babies on their own so they don't need to be adopting the babies that are a result of irresponsible behavior by the mothers and fathers. The goal is create a little more respect for the ramifications involved in getting pregnant in the first place, not to just take all the unwanted babies that the world can produce.
What you're saying is like proposing that if people don't like litter on the highways they should all get together and clean up after the people who threw it there. How does that work?
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2442
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (3) General Contribution (1)

Re: 336 Million

Postby BigBallinStalin on Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:05 pm

Funkyterrance wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
I wonder: of the total pro-lifers, how many actually 'put their money where their mouth is' by (1) adopting unwanted kids, (2) arranging with pregnant women to adopt their kid so that the abortion is not conducted, (3) or at least donating to the relevant adoption organizations.

If none of the three are done, then we may have cause to doubt the sincerity of the pro-lifers' position.

Yeah but this could be perceived as enabling/condoning/furthering the person not taking responsibility for their actions. Most pro-lifers can make babies on their own so they don't need to be adopting the babies that are a result of irresponsible behavior by the mothers and fathers. The goal is create a little more respect for the ramifications involved in getting pregnant in the first place, not to just take all the unwanted babies that the world can produce.
What you're saying is like proposing that if people don't like litter on the highways they should all get together and clean up after the people who threw it there. How does that work?


Oh, people volunteer their labor or send funds, or they can complain to/lobby the politicians--which is currently being done for the abortion debate.

And the pro-lifers need not only adopt. They can also send funds for causes which support and implement their beliefs.

If the goal was to "create a little more respect for the ramifications involved in getting pregnant in the first place," then banning abortions doesn't achieve that goal. Marketing campaigns and education classes could better attain that. Sure, prohibition of abortions raises the price and subsequent consequences of having a kid, but the kid may be dumped at an orphanage--or worse killed or neglected, black market abortions could be used, etc.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: 336 Million

Postby Symmetry on Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:11 pm

Ray Rider wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:@Ray
And good for them. They're sincere pro-lifers.

I'd imagine that not all fit that description.

As is true of any group. Take, for example, those who claim to be libertarians on this site. I think we've seen many times over that many claim it, but when the rubber hits the road, actions may not match the rhetoric. That doesn't change the validity of the belief, nor discredit the cause. That simply discredits the individual.


bbs won't be happy.
the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
User avatar
Sergeant Symmetry
 
Posts: 6615
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:49 am
Medals: 4
Standard Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)

Re: 336 Million

Postby thegreekdog on Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:11 pm

Symmetry wrote:
Ray Rider wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:@Ray
And good for them. They're sincere pro-lifers.

I'd imagine that not all fit that description.

As is true of any group. Take, for example, those who claim to be libertarians on this site. I think we've seen many times over that many claim it, but when the rubber hits the road, actions may not match the rhetoric. That doesn't change the validity of the belief, nor discredit the cause. That simply discredits the individual.


bbs won't be happy.


I would be interested to find out who Ray is referring to actually.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant thegreekdog
 
Posts: 6751
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia
Medals: 38
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (1)
General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (2) General Contribution (2)

Re: 336 Million

Postby Symmetry on Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:27 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
Symmetry wrote:
Ray Rider wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:@Ray
And good for them. They're sincere pro-lifers.

I'd imagine that not all fit that description.

As is true of any group. Take, for example, those who claim to be libertarians on this site. I think we've seen many times over that many claim it, but when the rubber hits the road, actions may not match the rhetoric. That doesn't change the validity of the belief, nor discredit the cause. That simply discredits the individual.


bbs won't be happy.


I would be interested to find out who Ray is referring to actually.


Asking Ray for evidence... the man has no spine to back up his body.
the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
User avatar
Sergeant Symmetry
 
Posts: 6615
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:49 am
Medals: 4
Standard Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)

Re: 336 Million

Postby rishaed on Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:34 pm

I am quite sure that Ray's statement was a statement to declare the fallacy of generalization. Such as, I (obviously Pro-Life) am neither because of age and the results of such an action at my age (Pre-college) willing to do the first 2 actions because I have neither the money or way to support them. However I AM planning on adopting in the future. I'm not going to get into the third argument by BBS, which I could do, if i knew of a trustworthy organization that didn't require payment through a Credit Card. This does not mean that I am not sincere, but neither does it measure the sincerity of other Pro-Lifer's. Just as Obama's performance as the President does not effect how Lincoln performed as President.
aage wrote: Maybe you're right, but since we receive no handlebars from the mod I think we should get some ourselves.

Image
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class rishaed
 
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:54 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Foundry forums looking for whats going on!
Medals: 20
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (1) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (1) General Achievement (6) Challenge Achievement (1)

Re: 336 Million

Postby BigBallinStalin on Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:50 pm

Since the flak died down...

TGD, here's my brief response to your question:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=187995&start=270#p4121562

Westwind, looking forward to your defense of natural/whatever rights:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=187995&start=255#p4121425

and daddy1gringo is still a controller:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=187995&start=255#p4121417
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: 336 Million

Postby Ray Rider on Wed Apr 03, 2013 7:07 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
Symmetry wrote:
Ray Rider wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:@Ray
And good for them. They're sincere pro-lifers.

I'd imagine that not all fit that description.

As is true of any group. Take, for example, those who claim to be libertarians on this site. I think we've seen many times over that many claim it, but when the rubber hits the road, actions may not match the rhetoric. That doesn't change the validity of the belief, nor discredit the cause. That simply discredits the individual.


bbs won't be happy.


I would be interested to find out who Ray is referring to actually.

I wasn't thinking of a particular person...just thinking of the thread about the city of Nelson requiring everyone to own a weapon, and how easy it is to agree with legislation simply because it lines up with my particular view even though the basis of the law may be contrary to my general political philosophy (gun legislation vs. small government, etc.). Of course in that case the bylaw won't be enforced and I think the outcome will be positive, however the basis of the law is still questionable.

I guess my main point was that we all hold to various beliefs which we believe in principle, although when it comes right down to it, either we're hypocritical by not doing all we can to support that belief or maybe we're just too lazy. Another example would be global warming; I have strong environmentalist relatives who firmly believe anthropogenic GHG emissions are heating the planet beyond the point of no return and love to point fingers at "big oil," yet when it comes to visiting a friend, they have no qualms about flying 2,000 km to visit. At some level we're all hypocrites, unfortunately.

Symmetry wrote:Asking Ray for evidence... the man has no spine to back up his body.

lol still trolling even in a completely different thread, eh? If I didn't know better, I'd think you were trying to get a rise out of me.
Image
Image
Highest score: 2221
User avatar
Major Ray Rider
 
Posts: 413
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:21 pm
Location: In front of my computer, duh!
Medals: 7
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2)

Re: 336 Million

Postby Funkyterrance on Wed Apr 03, 2013 8:56 pm

crispybits wrote:I'm not saying that nobody ever just callously throws away a potential life like this, I'm sure there are examples of such. But the entire support system and counselling network that exists to help people faced with the decision and the consequences of the decision would indicate that for most people it's a decision taken very seriously indeed, and the fetus is definitely not thought of as just "a clump of cells". But it's also not a simple decision to let the pregnancies run their course. There are so many shades of grey at almost very level that the decision has to be left to the person themselves, there can be no cookie-cutter template to give a black and white answer to the question.

It makes me wonder how biased the "process" is towards considering the fetus a clump of cells or a "future person". If at the clinic a person were faced with the wording of "legally end a life" as opposed to "perform an abortion" would there be less abortions? Not knowing which of these terms is actually more accurate has got to be relevant in the issue yet this "not knowing for sure" aspect is severely downplayed by pro-choicers.

BigBallinStalin wrote:If the goal was to "create a little more respect for the ramifications involved in getting pregnant in the first place," then banning abortions doesn't achieve that goal. Marketing campaigns and education classes could better attain that. Sure, prohibition of abortions raises the price and subsequent consequences of having a kid, but the kid may be dumped at an orphanage--or worse killed or neglected, black market abortions could be used, etc.

Yeah but that's not my point. I'm not for banning abortions, I'm just for more accountability regarding the implications behind getting one. You got someone pregnant or got pregnant yourself and now you're going to eliminate this "little problem" by destroying it.
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2442
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (3) General Contribution (1)

Re: 336 Million

Postby Lootifer on Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:28 pm

Funkyterrance wrote:It makes me wonder how biased the "process" is towards considering the fetus a clump of cells or a "future person". If at the clinic a person were faced with the wording of "legally end a life" as opposed to "perform an abortion" would there be less abortions? Not knowing which of these terms is actually more accurate has got to be relevant in the issue yet this "not knowing for sure" aspect is severely downplayed by pro-choicers.

I dont know for sure, but I am pretty confident that, as Crispy mentions, 99% of these situations are faced with a lot of gravity and consideration; and therefore the link of "having an abortion" to "legally killing potential life" is fairly obvious (I would have thought anyway).
I go to the gym to justify my mockery of fat people.
User avatar
Lieutenant Lootifer
 
Posts: 1033
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:30 pm
Location: Competing
Medals: 15
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Contribution (1)

Re: 336 Million

Postby daddy1gringo on Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:59 pm

crispybits wrote:The anti-religious sentiment is not based on the way in which religions seem to exert control (although there is a strong argument that no religion should even attempt to exercise any control through secular law over anyone who is not an adherent to that religion), it's based on the way they get to the definition of personhood as mentioned above. Arguing for or against something on scriptural grounds leaves no room for changing your opinion or of being persuaded by reasonable argument of the truth of an alternative viewpoint.

I'm happy if I lose an argument, based on reason, logic and proven reality and facts. It means I've improved my viewpoint to be more in line with reality. I'm not so happy if someone shuts down an argument with 100% certainty that they are right and nothing will ever change that, there is nothng on Earth that could be said or done that could possibly ever do so, especially when to do so they cite a source that I don't believe and have never be shown definitely matches reality (and I have been shown that in many cases actually doesn't match reality).

chang50 wrote: I'm sorry if you think I clouded the issue,it wasn't my intention,and I do think you are genuine in your beliefs.Perhaps you can explain why you think a fetus is a person and at what point they became one?
Thanks for the reasonable answers. Rare on this subject from both sides. We may actually be getting somewhere.

Actually I am going to look for a post I made a year or so ago that even some of my opponents said had merit. It was entirely based on reason and it did not mention religion at all. I think it is the kind of argument you are asking for. If I can't find it, it may take a while to write it again; it was not some pat one-liner. Talk to you soon.
The right answer to the wrong question is still the wrong answer to the real question.
User avatar
Lieutenant daddy1gringo
 
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:47 am
Location: Connecticut yankee expatriated in Isabela, NW PR
Medals: 2
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1)

Re: 336 Million

Postby daddy1gringo on Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:21 am

Finally found it

daddy1gringo wrote:
Army of GOD wrote:
Lootifer wrote:I'm pretty sure most pro-abortion people (such as myself) are against late term abortions; if only because you've already had 5-6 months to decide and should have well and truly made up your mind by then.


That's an awful argument though. If abortion is legal, then they should be legal until the child is out of the mother, as PLAYER gave me a satisfying definition of a child (it's really the only point at which the "being" [watching my syntax] is discretely a child or just a potential child). I understand the probability of survival of a child increases probably exponentially at the end of the pregnancy, but choosing an arbitrary percentage and claiming that abortions past this point are immoral seems like a pretty ambiguous argument.
You bring up a good point, AoG. Both sides run up against a problem with the slippery-slope, or "beard" argument, in that their reasons and standards, taken alone, would end up justifying ridiculous things that even they don't support. The pro-abortion side's argument from ability to survive independently, taken to its extreme, could justify infanticide; as a matter of fact, how many of us would be safe, since in this computer age, how many could really survive without other people to run the plants that purify our water, and to kill the chickens and wrap them up in plastic for the supermarket? On the other hand, the anti-abortion side's arguments from "potential for life" could make it murder to choose not to have sex, or other similarly silly things.

Note that I have applied this to both sides.

So I agree with you that we have to pick a point at which we say that the fetus is a human being with the rights of a human being. That seems pretty clear. It also seems clear that whatever the point, it will seem "counter-intuitive" or arbitrary and silly in certain ways. Now you and Player have proposed "birth", but you yourselves had to fudge that and go back to the developmental and viability standards to see how long before birth is OK, since I think we all agree that the "being" (staying with your "syntax" {technically "semantics", but that's another subject}), ten seconds before she passes through the birth canal is not significantly different from ten seconds after. That puts us back in the "slippery beard", and that's a problem.

That is why I believe it has to be at conception. As someone posted earlier in the thread, at that point there is a being, an entity, that just did not exist before. This is the only point that is immune to the "slippery beard" to any degree. The courts, what do they use to determine an individual's identity? DNA. At this point, the being has her own complete DNA, her own identity, different from the mother or the father or anyone else in the world. (even an identical twin wouldn't exist yet.)

There are other arguments that I would give to someone who shares my cosmology, but I think this is pretty strong from a strictly logical and medical viewpoint.


At this point I’ll add once again that it is always going to seem silly in one way to say “One second before this it is not a person; one second after, she is”, but this is the only point between sexual attraction and old age at which that is to any degree not the case, and for very good reason.

The only difference between this being and the 30-year-old who unquestionably has a right to life, is time and environmental factors, for example, nutrition, parenting, experiences, etc. What, and who she essentially is, is already there in the DNA. Before conception, this was not true. That deals with the “What about skin cells” argument, the "part of the mother's body" argument, and the “Kleenex” joke.
The right answer to the wrong question is still the wrong answer to the real question.
User avatar
Lieutenant daddy1gringo
 
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:47 am
Location: Connecticut yankee expatriated in Isabela, NW PR
Medals: 2
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1)

Re: 336 Million

Postby Metsfanmax on Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:32 am

Choosing a dividing line may be hard, but that is no excuse for picking a bad one. The argument of the beard doesn't actually address any of the important ethical questions involved in determining whether abortion or infanticide can be justified. The important determination is not whether a new organism exists, but whether that organism has any of the qualities that deserve protection. Simply being a member of the species Homo sapiens is not qualification for ultimate ethical protection. This thought process is what has allowed us to mistreat non-human animals for so long, and similar reasoning has fueled events like the Holocaust -- dehumanize your opponents, and their lives are no longer worth protecting. We can solve these problems by making it not special to be human but special to be an organism that is self-aware.

Furthermore, part of the reason you appeal to the argument of the beard is because you assert without proof that it's bad that the pro-choice side logically leads to infanticide. But I hope I have demonstrated that not everyone on our side of the issue sees that as an absurd conclusion (in fact, it is a problem with the standard pro-choice argument). In particular, the argument from the beard does not apply when we're talking about personhood, because there is surely some period of time until significantly birth where an infant shares none of the qualities of a fully developed person. Even if we accept WestWind's standard of when the fetus can start to feel pain, that still justifies most of the abortions that take place today. I urge you not to skirt the real, ethical issue by choosing a standard that is convenient for you to think about. Serious issues require serious solutions.
Image
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6612
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: CA
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (2)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (9) Clan Achievement (2)
Challenge Achievement (1) General Contribution (11)

Re: 336 Million

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:35 am

Metsfanmax wrote:Choosing a dividing line may be hard, but that is no excuse for picking a bad one. The argument of the beard doesn't actually address any of the important ethical questions involved in determining whether abortion or infanticide can be justified. The important determination is not whether a new organism exists, but whether that organism has any of the qualities that deserve protection. Simply being a member of the species Homo sapiens is not qualification for ultimate ethical protection. This thought process is what has allowed us to mistreat non-human animals for so long, and similar reasoning has fueled events like the Holocaust -- dehumanize your opponents, and their lives are no longer worth protecting. We can solve these problems by making it not special to be human but special to be an organism that is self-aware.


I may be misunderstanding your example about the Holocaust, but isn't the personhood argument essentially dehumanizing a particular group of homo sapiens?
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: 336 Million

Postby Metsfanmax on Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:41 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:Choosing a dividing line may be hard, but that is no excuse for picking a bad one. The argument of the beard doesn't actually address any of the important ethical questions involved in determining whether abortion or infanticide can be justified. The important determination is not whether a new organism exists, but whether that organism has any of the qualities that deserve protection. Simply being a member of the species Homo sapiens is not qualification for ultimate ethical protection. This thought process is what has allowed us to mistreat non-human animals for so long, and similar reasoning has fueled events like the Holocaust -- dehumanize your opponents, and their lives are no longer worth protecting. We can solve these problems by making it not special to be human but special to be an organism that is self-aware.


I may be misunderstanding your example about the Holocaust, but isn't the personhood argument essentially dehumanizing a particular group of homo sapiens?


No, the personhood argument is saying that only organisms that are self-aware deserve something similar to the "right to life." Infant humans are not a group, but rather a developmental stage in the biological process. The same logic would apply to non-human animals; an infant pig does not deserve the same protections as an adult pig. The important part is that this is a scientifically demonstrable property that no one can reasonably object to once it has been properly established.

I'd prefer if we just removed the word "dehumanize" from our vocabularies. Humans are not unique, just slightly more advanced than the other creatures (though perhaps not dolphins).
Image
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6612
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: CA
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (2)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (9) Clan Achievement (2)
Challenge Achievement (1) General Contribution (11)

Re: 336 Million

Postby crispybits on Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:48 am

In the interests of positive discrimination, I would support a motion to replace the word "dehumanise" with "dedolphinise"
User avatar
Major crispybits
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:29 pm
Medals: 33
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (4) Clan Achievement (9)

Re: 336 Million

Postby chang50 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 9:01 am

Metsfanmax wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:Choosing a dividing line may be hard, but that is no excuse for picking a bad one. The argument of the beard doesn't actually address any of the important ethical questions involved in determining whether abortion or infanticide can be justified. The important determination is not whether a new organism exists, but whether that organism has any of the qualities that deserve protection. Simply being a member of the species Homo sapiens is not qualification for ultimate ethical protection. This thought process is what has allowed us to mistreat non-human animals for so long, and similar reasoning has fueled events like the Holocaust -- dehumanize your opponents, and their lives are no longer worth protecting. We can solve these problems by making it not special to be human but special to be an organism that is self-aware.


I may be misunderstanding your example about the Holocaust, but isn't the personhood argument essentially dehumanizing a particular group of homo sapiens?


No, the personhood argument is saying that only organisms that are self-aware deserve something similar to the "right to life." Infant humans are not a group, but rather a developmental stage in the biological process. The same logic would apply to non-human animals; an infant pig does not deserve the same protections as an adult pig. The important part is that this is a scientifically demonstrable property that no one can reasonably object to once it has been properly established.

I'd prefer if we just removed the word "dehumanize" from our vocabularies. Humans are not unique, just slightly more advanced than the other creatures (though perhaps not dolphins).


It's a strange word as commonly used.Since humans are the only species we know to be wantonly cruel and sadistic,to dehumanise could logically just as easily mean to make someone more kind,compassionate and loving.Seems like another example of humankind's high opinion of itself.
User avatar
Captain chang50
 
Posts: 658
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 4:54 am
Location: pattaya,thailand
Medals: 22
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Beta Map Achievement (2) Bot Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (2)

Re: 336 Million

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Apr 05, 2013 9:09 am

Metsfanmax wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:Choosing a dividing line may be hard, but that is no excuse for picking a bad one. The argument of the beard doesn't actually address any of the important ethical questions involved in determining whether abortion or infanticide can be justified. The important determination is not whether a new organism exists, but whether that organism has any of the qualities that deserve protection. Simply being a member of the species Homo sapiens is not qualification for ultimate ethical protection. This thought process is what has allowed us to mistreat non-human animals for so long, and similar reasoning has fueled events like the Holocaust -- dehumanize your opponents, and their lives are no longer worth protecting. We can solve these problems by making it not special to be human but special to be an organism that is self-aware.


I may be misunderstanding your example about the Holocaust, but isn't the personhood argument essentially dehumanizing a particular group of homo sapiens?


No, the personhood argument is saying that only organisms that are self-aware deserve something similar to the "right to life." Infant humans are not a group, but rather a developmental stage in the biological process. The same logic would apply to non-human animals; an infant pig does not deserve the same protections as an adult pig. The important part is that this is a scientifically demonstrable property that no one can reasonably object to once it has been properly established.

I'd prefer if we just removed the word "dehumanize" from our vocabularies. Humans are not unique, just slightly more advanced than the other creatures (though perhaps not dolphins).


Makes sense. But what then is 'homo sapien'? What is a 'human being'? (we're currently good on what a person is).

Although infant humans are a developmental stage in the biological process, and the fetus and what not are even earlier stages, are they still categorized as homo sapien? If so, are they still a 'human being'--or does 'human being' merely mean 'person'?

(just clarifying our meaning of words here).
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: 336 Million

Postby Metsfanmax on Fri Apr 05, 2013 9:54 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:Choosing a dividing line may be hard, but that is no excuse for picking a bad one. The argument of the beard doesn't actually address any of the important ethical questions involved in determining whether abortion or infanticide can be justified. The important determination is not whether a new organism exists, but whether that organism has any of the qualities that deserve protection. Simply being a member of the species Homo sapiens is not qualification for ultimate ethical protection. This thought process is what has allowed us to mistreat non-human animals for so long, and similar reasoning has fueled events like the Holocaust -- dehumanize your opponents, and their lives are no longer worth protecting. We can solve these problems by making it not special to be human but special to be an organism that is self-aware.


I may be misunderstanding your example about the Holocaust, but isn't the personhood argument essentially dehumanizing a particular group of homo sapiens?


No, the personhood argument is saying that only organisms that are self-aware deserve something similar to the "right to life." Infant humans are not a group, but rather a developmental stage in the biological process. The same logic would apply to non-human animals; an infant pig does not deserve the same protections as an adult pig. The important part is that this is a scientifically demonstrable property that no one can reasonably object to once it has been properly established.

I'd prefer if we just removed the word "dehumanize" from our vocabularies. Humans are not unique, just slightly more advanced than the other creatures (though perhaps not dolphins).


Makes sense. But what then is 'homo sapien'? What is a 'human being'? (we're currently good on what a person is).

Although infant humans are a developmental stage in the biological process, and the fetus and what not are even earlier stages, are they still categorized as homo sapien? If so, are they still a 'human being'--or does 'human being' merely mean 'person'?

(just clarifying our meaning of words here).


No! Human being is not synonymous with person. That is the crucial point. I am using "human" and "member of the species Homo sapiens" interchangeably here, though. Biologically speaking, yes, at any point after conception it is legitimate to describe the embryo, fetus, etc. as human.
Image
User avatar
Lieutenant Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6612
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm
Location: CA
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (2)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (9) Clan Achievement (2)
Challenge Achievement (1) General Contribution (11)

Re: 336 Million

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Apr 05, 2013 10:53 am

Metsfanmax wrote:
No! Human being is not synonymous with person. That is the crucial point. I am using "human" and "member of the species Homo sapiens" interchangeably here, though. Biologically speaking, yes, at any point after conception it is legitimate to describe the embryo, fetus, etc. as human.


So far so good. (the following questions are intertwined).

But why treat a person differently from a human being? Is this really just a novel approach in justifying the killing of 'human beings'?

I recall you saying:

"Simply being a member of the species Homo sapiens is not qualification for ultimate ethical protection."

Why not?
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

PreviousNext

Return to I Didn't Like Cats

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bernie Sanders