Abortion - My own thoughts - such as they are

[jimboston]

With infanticide you have not said a parent/mother would need a "reason".

You said only infanticide would be fine.

So the reason is "because I feel like it"???

There could be a variety of reasons. I imagine that the vast majority of parents who kill their offspring do not do so on a whim just because there was nothing on TV that day.

In any case, the reason is not relevant. What is relevant is the outcome. What is the effect of killing the child? That is the question we need to answer.

NO. The reason is the only relevant question. The outcome is really impossible to determine. The child could grow up to be the next Hitler, or she could grow up to find the cure for cancer. There's no way to can determine the long term outcome. The short term outcome can vary. What if the mother wants to kill the baby, but the father wants to keep it? What about vice versa? What if both parents want to kill the baby, but there's line of couples ready to adopt the baby?

If you argue the effect is all that matters... what is the effect of killing some 16yo? Not much of one. Kids are killed every day and life goes on, the world still turns, and there's no real effect from the "State's" point of view. Does it matter if the 16yo was a well educated, high IQ individual... versus an uneducated drug addict? By your math it would likely be OK to kill an uneducated drug addict, as that person is likely to continue to be a "burden" on society; whereas a well educated 16yo with good prospects is likely to go on to college and be a "contributing" member of society.

So again... by your math... it's OK to kill some 16yo's. So you must disagree completely with the whole "Black Lives Matter" movement.

[jgordon1111]

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

[thegreekdog]

This is one you ignored where I have given you a "substantive reason" why it's not OK to terminate a baby.

If you can terminate post birt... you can terminate whenever.

By the time someone is 18 the state has invested a significant amount in raising and educating them. They are also (at that point) a much more valuable asset within the labor market, they have the capacity to earn and consume, and so on. Killing them represents the destruction of a much more significant asset and investment than killing a 1 month-old.

As a society and race we have the generally accepted view that killing is wrong.

No society subscribes to that as a blanket rule. Your society, for example, allows for the execution of certain people who break the law, allows for killing in self-defense, and then of course there is the military. The debate is not whether killing is right or wrong, full stop, the debate is where killing should be allowed and where killing should be prohibited.

I feel like I already made that point within the last page or two, but I may have been talking to someone else and not you at that point.

What if the state did not invest a significant amount in the child? Would you change your argument to apply to "society" (or perhaps, as a smaller unit, the family)?

Does increased population, on its own, result in an increased benefit to the state (or society or the family)? For example, I suspect in medieval Europe (and depending on the hereditary rules), there was an effort to make more offspring rather than less.

Separate question - I don't live in China and have been there for a total of 10 days in my life, so I don't want to say something I'm unqualified to say, but did the Chinese government or Chinese people put a premium on male children?

Does increased population among the wealthy (or intelligent or learned or physically superior) result in an increased benefit to the state? Could the state provide disincentives for the poor (or stupid or physically inferior) to reproduce or provide incentives for the wealth (etc.) to reproduce?

[tzor]

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

Isn't that the problem? I mean it's neither the government's or the mother's life at stake here. It the yet to be born person's life at stake here. Doesn't he or she have the "right to choose?"

[jimboston]

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

Only for mrswdk.

The rest of us believe that all lives matter.

[MagnusGreeol]

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

Only for mrswdk.

The rest of us believe that all lives matter.

- JimBoston' s last comment here should just about wrap this up, It seems a crazy train is going a hundred miles an hour but getting nowhere? Hundred miles an hour standing still, that is what it's like trying to talk sense here.

- Besides killing very evil bad people, or accidentally killing in self defense, Or abortions for whatever reason from 2- 3 1/2 months (rape, incest, too young blah blah),,,,, KILLING OTHERWISE IS USUALLY NEVER A GREAT THING LOOKED HIGHLY UPON BY NORMAL PEOPLE!

\MGM/ ♎ Last post 4sure!

[Army of GOD]

what if I support the killing of babies?

[jimboston]

what if I support the killing of babies?

Then you are as fucked up as mrdwk.

I don't believe you are though.

[Army of GOD]

what if I support the killing of babies?

Then you are as fucked up as mrdwk.

I don't believe you are though.

what if it was the anti-christ?

[jimboston]

what if I support the killing of babies?

Then you are as fucked up as mrdwk.

I don't believe you are though.

what if it was the anti-christ?

You only wish.

[Metsfanmax]

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

Only for mrswdk.

The rest of us believe that all lives matter.

How was the hamburger you had for lunch?

[MagnusGreeol]

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

Only for mrswdk.

The rest of us believe that all lives matter.

How was the hamburger you had for lunch?

Dvs. compararea alimentare cu uciderea de copii- Tõrgo Nudho,

[jimboston]

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

Only for mrswdk.

The rest of us believe that all lives matter.

How was the hamburger you had for lunch?

That cow's life mattered a great deal to me.
If it never lived, it would not have been able to provide me so much joy when I ate it.

[jimboston]

Dvs. compararea alimentare cu uciderea de copii- Tõrgo Nudho,

I'm too lazy.

English please?

[Symmetry]

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

Isn't that the problem? I mean it's neither the government's or the mother's life at stake here. It the yet to be born person's life at stake here. Doesn't he or she have the "right to choose?"

The law is pretty clear that bunches of cells don't have legal standing, but I assume you're being facetious.

[thegreekdog]

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

Isn't that the problem? I mean it's neither the government's or the mother's life at stake here. It the yet to be born person's life at stake here. Doesn't he or she have the "right to choose?"

The law is pretty clear that bunches of cells don't have legal standing, but I assume you're being facetious.

That's why you only see abortion cases when the person seeking an abortion sues the state (which has passed laws restricting abortion).

[PLAYER57832]

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

Isn't that the problem? I mean it's neither the government's or the mother's life at stake here. It the yet to be born person's life at stake here. Doesn't he or she have the "right to choose?"

Actually, you both ignore the real player.. medical science. You wave around the idea of "decision" as if it only works one way. The truth is we "decide" all the time whether people will live or die, but because it is a decision to use sometimes advanced and complicated medicine to keep people alive who might otherwise have died, somehow that is not considered by many to be a real "decision". Except.. it is. And, way too often, what medical science considers "saving a life" is, to the people involved, much more like "making death that much longer".

In this, it is not some abstract agency you like to term "the government" making these decisions, it is doctors, patients, families, clergy and ethics advisers. The government, remember, is nothing more than a set of laws and people. Decisions like this are just too complicated, involve way too many parameters and issues to allow ANY outside agency to make these decisions. No church, no legislator, no group of outsiders can possible know all that is involved. Strangers... in no way can.

The real problem here is that there are too many people feeling that having a small amount of information somehow gives them the right to make decisions for others. That is bad in and of itself, but when it is done without bothering to actually discover the whole truth, it becomes tragedy and creates further tragedy.

[PLAYER57832]

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

Isn't that the problem? I mean it's neither the government's or the mother's life at stake here. It the yet to be born person's life at stake here. Doesn't he or she have the "right to choose?"

The law is pretty clear that bunches of cells don't have legal standing, but I assume you're being facetious.

That's why you only see abortion cases when the person seeking an abortion sues the state (which has passed laws restricting abortion).

Not actually true. There have been cases of fathers and parents suing to halt an abortion as well as well-meaning advocates for the disabled who have either intervened or attempted to intervene.

[thegreekdog]

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

Isn't that the problem? I mean it's neither the government's or the mother's life at stake here. It the yet to be born person's life at stake here. Doesn't he or she have the "right to choose?"

The law is pretty clear that bunches of cells don't have legal standing, but I assume you're being facetious.

That's why you only see abortion cases when the person seeking an abortion sues the state (which has passed laws restricting abortion).

Not actually true. There have been cases of fathers and parents suing to halt an abortion as well as well-meaning advocates for the disabled who have either intervened or attempted to intervene.

Yes, you are correct. Apologies.

[Symmetry]

Apology accepted here.

[thegreekdog]

Apology accepted here.

The apology was not directed at you. My post was supporting your post indicating that the unborn don't have standing. I know, I know, you automatically assume that as soon as I post I'm taking aim at you; that's because you're self-absorbed.

[Symmetry]

Apology accepted here.

The apology was not directed at you. My post was supporting your post indicating that the unborn don't have standing. I know, I know, you automatically assume that as soon as I post I'm taking aim at you; that's because you're self-absorbed.

It was an apology for a response you made to my post, I know you don't like apologising to me directly. Ego te absolvo.

[PLAYER57832]

That's why you only see abortion cases when the person seeking an abortion sues the state (which has passed laws restricting abortion).

Not actually true. There have been cases of fathers and parents suing to halt an abortion as well as well-meaning advocates for the disabled who have either intervened or attempted to intervene.

Yes, you are correct. Apologies.

No apology was really necessary. I was just offering a minor fact correction. I thought your post was sort of tongue in cheek, that you really did know it was not 100% accurate. If anything, I guess I poked a hole in the joke, so maybe I should apologize

[MagnusGreeol]

Dvs. compararea alimentare cu uciderea de copii- Tõrgo Nudho,

I'm too lazy.

English please?

All lives matter, but on this topic, it has become about choices and who has the right to choose, the gov't or the mother?

Only for mrswdk.

The rest of us believe that all lives matter.

How was the hamburger you had for lunch?

- Sorry JB, That comment was directed to Grey Worm (Tõrgo Nudho), It says " Your comparing food to human life"?

\MGM/♎

[jimboston]

- Sorry JB, That comment was directed to Grey Worm (Tõrgo Nudho), It says " Your comparing food to human life"?

\MGM/♎

I didn't think it was directed at me... I just wanted to know what it meant.