actually, the correct answer to the first question is no.
culture: the quality in a person or society that arises from a concern for what is regarded as excellent in arts, letters, manners, scholarly pursuits, etc.
last i checked, fetuses (feti?) as a group are not exactly making distinct contributions to the arts or scholarship and are not bonded by common beliefs, or behaviors.
Indeed, best kill them all.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
nah, they aren't bothering me so i've got no vendetta against them. but to the moms they are bothering, have at it as i have no reason to give a damn about them either.
Get real folks: during the greatest oppression of slavery and segregation, white folks never voted and sanctioned as many killings of blacks as have occurred in 30 years since Roe v. Wade.
40 million unborn babies since Roe v. Wade. 12 million total died in the Holocaust. 25 million under Stalin.
Call it genocide, call it what you want. If you can the defend the murder of 40 million babies, the blood is on your hands.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
'the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group'
Are unwanted unborn children a distinct cultural group? yes
Are they being systematically exterminated? yes
I think that covers it.
Sperm and eggs are then also unborn children.....so don't you shoot a load or let any of your eggs go unfertilized...cause your killing children as well.
At time of conception its an egg and a sperm..nothing more..not a child..not a person..etc.
Also how is one form of life more important than another life....humans are causing genocide to millions of creatures everyday.
Humans are the plague to this planet.....and surely god isn't too happy with this one creature stripping this planet dry. A few less can't be a bad thing...guess once one realizes we aren't "special" it gets sorted out pretty quick...oh oh oh..I got it...just think that all those poor fetus's are Muslims...then it will be okay to kill them. Yea I'm laughing as I write this....
Get real folks: during the greatest oppression of slavery and segregation, white folks never voted and sanctioned as many killings of blacks as have occurred in 30 years since Roe v. Wade.
40 million unborn babies since Roe v. Wade. 12 million total died in the Holocaust. 25 million under Stalin.
Call it genocide, call it what you want. If you can the defend the murder of 40 million babies, the blood is on your hands.
Sperm and egg do not a baby make.....good stretch though....
Sperm and eggs are then also unborn children.....so don't you shoot a load or let any of your eggs go unfertilized...cause your killing children as well.
Wooks wike thomeone need to go back to thex ed kwass. It appears you do not know how a baby is made.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
its' been said again and again and again and again....ad nauseum. clearly, consisely...by oh so many posters here. therein lies the issue. i respect YOU right to choose as you see fit...but why oh why do others feel they have the right to dictate to others what they think they 'should' do? oh right, b/c those 90% of abortions performed on embryos under 12 weeks are thinking feeling human beings! oh wait...they're not....hmmmmm...so why exactly? b/c someone ELE's morals dictate it, because 'they said so.'
I don't get it. Is it not okay with you that I think catefrances was more clear and concise than the rest of the posters ?
Get real folks: during the greatest oppression of slavery and segregation, white folks never voted and sanctioned as many killings of blacks as have occurred in 30 years since Roe v. Wade.
40 million unborn babies since Roe v. Wade. 12 million total died in the Holocaust. 25 million under Stalin.
Call it genocide, call it what you want. If you can the defend the murder of 40 million babies, the blood is on your hands.
Neither the fact that you have heard this argument before, nor the fact that you, like medicatedgenius, think it is 'ridiculous', get you out of answering it. If there is a true principle here, that life can be legitimately killed if it is dependant on another person, it should be able to be legitimately applied to other circumstances.
There is only one difference between the circumstance of abortion, and the other examples I have cited - one you can see the bloodshed-and one you cannot, because it is hidden away out of sight. With abortion you can kid yourself that it is not a true human being, or that the act is not violent. we can invent a whole new terminology to hide away from the truth, we can call it an embryo instead of a baby, we can call it a 'termination' instead of a 'killing' but this is self delusion. It does not change what is really happening.
i already stated that i believe the embryo to be human. it is not a legitimate argument to hold a toddler in front of me and say that because it is dependent upon others for its survival that tis the same as aborting an embryo. a toddler is a fully formed independent organism. an embryo is not.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
If you are going to have a real philosophical justification for abortion , it must pass the test that all philosophical principles have to pass, it must be able to be applied to other situations. the problem is that if you try this for dependance it does not work, as I have pointed out. You have offered two more: the ability to percieve, and the ability to feel pain. Ok, lets do the test, are there other humans who lack the ability to percieve and to feel pain, well yes. A number of severly handicapped people fall into this category. Is it ok to kill them then? hmmm, I doubt you will say yes. Again the ONLY difference here between the two cases is: one you can see the killing - one you cannot.
What severly handicapped people have (lack of) sensory perception equivalent to that of an embryo?
If you're refering to people with brain injuries sufficient to cause them to be "vegetables" (or even if you're not refering to these people, I am), many, many people agree that it's morally acceptable to remove their life support.
And that's what an abortion does really - remove life support from the embryo or vice versa. (Although I don't really care to be involved in the debate about dependence, I suspect that this comes into play in part because of this distinction between passive and active "killing".)
Also, although I see your point about people having less of a problem with "killing" they don't have to see, I actually think that if more people really saw abortions we as a society would have LESS of a problem with it because the distinction between an embryo and a fully human person would become more clear. (I can't help but wonder if the growing use of the abortion pill will have any impact on this at all, since women who use it - and their partners, if they want - actually see the results of the abortion.)
btw - VERY pooor analogy. if EVERY unborn child were systematically exterminated that might be csomething...but satill a stretch. many, many women get pregnant, the chiuld is intitially unwanted and unborn...but many, many women decide to continue on with the pregnancy as is their individual right and choice to make. so yes, sorry...thanks for playing...but incorrect. if you had some direct correlation that EVERY nitially unwanted child was aborted, you might have a case...but since that is NOT the case.....just doesn't hold water. thanks for playing though.
you have not addressed the point, you have missed it entirely. If the justification for killing an 'embryo' is solely that it is totally dependant on the mother to survive, why can we not extend this thinking to other circumstances where someone is completely dependant on an individual to survive. saying that such a question is 'ridiculous' does not get you out of this, it just shows that you cannot answer it. if you are going to justify abortion you need a philosophical principle to base it on which must be tested by applying it to other situations. this is how philosophy works.
I never once said that because an embryo is dependent on its mother then the termination of it is justified. I responded to someone else's post that the embryo is INDEPENDENT of its mother. I didn't try to base this on philosophical principle, merely scientific fact. Are you following here? The only justification for termination of pregnancy, is that the woman decides it is in her best interest, and possibly a potential baby's best interest, not to continue with it.
As for trying to get out of this. if I consider something to be ridiculous, I have every right to say so, and I will. I think comparing the termination of an unwanted pregnancy, with terminating the life of a disabled patient, is ridiculous. There is no comparison. An embryo is not a complete human, it is a cluster of cells and primitive tissue, that eventually will become a complete person. Again, this isn't philosophy, this is scientific fact.
Neither the fact that you have heard this argument before, nor the fact that you, like medicatedgenius, think it is 'ridiculous', get you out of answering it. If there is a true principle here, that life can be legitimately killed if it is dependant on another person, it should be able to be legitimately applied to other circumstances.
There is only one difference between the circumstance of abortion, and the other examples I have cited - one you can see the bloodshed-and one you cannot, because it is hidden away out of sight. With abortion you can kid yourself that it is not a true human being, or that the act is not violent. we can invent a whole new terminology to hide away from the truth, we can call it an embryo instead of a baby, we can call it a 'termination' instead of a 'killing' but this is self delusion. It does not change what is really happening.
You yourself are using linguistics to try and prove your point. Using emotive words like baby and killing ensure that you remain against abortion. Whatever floats yer boat mate. The fact remains, a woman has a legal right to do whatever she chooses with her body. If she does not wish to subject herself to pregnancy, or motherhood, for whatever reason, she can...... regardless of what you think or feel about it, and regardless of what you call it.
As for a complete person being totally dependent on others to survive, my family know, if I am ever in that position, to switch me off. In that instance, it is legitimately applied to other circumstances. A person on life support, with no chance of ever coming off, can legally be switched off. In fact, it happens all the time.
well angelica in a discussion there are sides. there is what 'i' believe and then there is what 'you' believe. there is of course middle ground or compromise, but thats hardly definable as a side. as for dimensions, there is what is real and what isn't. see..? again 'sides'.
in this discussion either you are prochoice or you believe abortion is murder and a pregnant woman MUST carrry her baby to term without compassion. which opinion do you hold?
and there is only one 'pro' as far as i can see when it comes to abortion and thats that a pregnant woman is no longer under the stress of an unwanted pregnancy. and quite frankly thats the only 'pro' that matters. all the rest is bullshit plain and simple.
I seek to appreciate where others are coming from always, in order to understand what is. And when I don't, I own that.
My own view is not either/or. It's based on myriad combinations given the myriad contexts.
I'm not going to spell it out, due to the climate of this thread. People seem intolerant of the holistic view, and seem to not understand beyond black/white, and therefore get argumentative with a difference approach. I'm just not interested in that.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Yes. And perhaps the worst kind in history as it is the biggest genocide in history and committed against the most innocent, most helpless of human beings - our own children!
This is the key. This is the underlying issue. When we're at a phase where we turn on ourselves and our family, there is something very wrong, evolutionarily speaking.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I seek to appreciate where others are coming from always, in order to understand what is. And when I don't, I own that.
My own view is not either/or. It's based on myriad combinations given the myriad contexts.
I'm not going to spell it out, due to the climate of this thread. People seem intolerance of the holistic view, and seem to not understand beyond black/white, and therefore get argumentative with a difference approach. I'm just not interested in that.
and therein lies the difference between us angelica. my appreciation only goes so far. if what someone is saying is nonsensical and takes no stand then i dismiss them on whatever it is were discussing in that instance. my view is one of either/or in this particular discussion. its so simple when you get down to it. i dont understand why you have such trouble sharing you view. cant you substantiate your claim. not that you necessarily have to, which is great for you btw. basically what youre saying is you have an opinion but you wont share it with us cause were too mean. :rolleyes: you cant possibly hide behind the 'intolerant' climate of this thread. i mean no ones actually called anyone a babykiller yet. no one else seems to have a problem voicing their stance.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
and therein lies the difference between us angelica. my appreciation only goes so far. if what someone is saying is nonsensical and takes no stand then i dismiss them on whatever it is were discussing in that instance. my view is one of either/or in this particular discussion. its so simple when you get down to it. i dont understand why you have such trouble sharing you view. cant you substantiate your claim. you cant possibly hide behind the 'intolerant' climate of this thread. no one else seems to have a problem voicing their stance.
My view has many many aspects to it. People can't handle that, seemingly. they find it flaky because they do not appreciate a holistic view, and the underlying principles of the paradigm. They attempt to understand it logically, which cannot be done. It can be broken down and expressed logically, but the logic is a mere map to give one an idea of it. It's a very small minority who operate in a holistic way(less than 1% of the population), and I totally accept it's not widely accepted or understood.
Talking about a holistic view with people caught up in linear patriarchal views reminds me of when I point at the moon, and people look at my finger and say there's nothing special about that at all.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
My view has many many aspects to it. People can't handle that, seemingly. they find it flaky because they do not appreciate a holistic view, and the underlying principles of the paradigm. They attempt to understand it logically, which cannot be done. It can be broken down and expressed logically, but the logic is a mere map to give one an idea of it. It's a very small minority who operate in a holistic way(less than 1% of the population), and I totally accept it's not widely accepted or understood.
Talking about a holistic view with people caught up in linear patriarchal views reminds me of when I point at the moon, and people look at my finger and say there's nothing special about that at all.
caught up in their linear patriarchal views. LMFAO!! that cant be me you speak of, that much i know. damn right i find you flaky sometimes, but if you have an opinion angelica help us understand it. dont hide behind the apparent lack of appreciation of your way of thinking. you talk a lot angelica but sometimes you dont actually say anything. thats what we have the trouble with. youre so caught up in your holistic views that you forget not all of us think the way you do. and if you want understanding then you need to keep it simple sometimes, you know? youve got this huge understanding? then take our hand and guide us through it. dont tell us we wouldnt understand or are closed to the notion.
btw whilst youre pointing at the moon, im standing on its surface.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
caught up in their linear patriarchal views. LMFAO!! that cant be me you speak of, that much i know. damn right i find you flaky sometimes, but if you have an opinion angelica help us understand it. dont hide behind the apparent lack of appreciation of your way of thinking. you talk a lot angelica but sometimes you dont actually say anything. thats what we have the trouble with. youre so caught up in your holistic views that you forget not all of us think the way you do. and if you want understanding then you need to keep it simple sometimes, you know? youve got this huge understanding? then take our hand and guide us through it. dont tell us we wouldnt understand or are closed to the notion.
btw whilst youre pointing at the moon, im standing on its surface.
Or I can be who I am...and express my opinion/view as is. I'm okay with that. I'm personally more than okay with tapping into the few I connect well with, and who understand me. People will only hear what they are ready to hear. I accept that. If people get hooked into what I'm saying in an argumentative way, I appreciate that on a deeper unconscious level, they are getting something from it.
In other formats, like the book I'm writing, I speak in a very different voice meant to reach many. Here I speak as myself, unadulterated, and make no apology.
I totally accept if people don't get me. If I felt comfortable in the conversations, and if respect was mutually practised, I may be willing to clarify. I do often in threads, happily.
If I have to bend over backwards to clarify, and feel discomfort and slings and arrows, it's not worth it.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
caught up in their linear patriarchal views. LMFAO!! that cant be me you speak of, that much i know.
For the record, black/white, right/wrong thinking is linear. Where two opposing views cannot be accepted as valid side by side.....where one is accepted, another rejected...and 98% of the population practises this view, and takes it to be accurate and the truth
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Or I can be who I am...and express my opinion/view as is. I'm okay with that. I'm personally more than okay with tapping into the few I connect well with, and who understand me. People will only hear what they are ready to hear. I accept that. If people get hooked into what I'm saying in an argumentative way, I appreciate that on a deeper unconscious level, they are getting something from it.
In other formats, like the book I'm writing, I speak in a very different voice meant to reach many. Here I speak as myself, unadulterated, and make no apology.
I totally accept if people don't get me. If I felt comfortable in the conversations, and if respect was mutually practised, I may be willing to clarify. I do often in threads, happily.
If I have to bend over backwards to clarify, and feel discomfort and slings and arrows, it's not worth it.
so what youre saying is here in this format you dont want to reach the many? youll save that for the medium of hard copy print where you speak with a very different voice?? and these two voices are both still who you are?
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
so what youre saying is here in this format you dont want to reach the many? youll save that for the medium of hard copy print where you speak with a very different voice?? and these two voices are both still who you are?
I often come here to work out my own view. I'm not interested in argument. Period. I reach who I am meant to here, by natural selection. It works like magic. All that is required is that I be myself, and do what I feel I need to.
Writing a book is different. I put my view out there. People like it or not, resonate to it or not. There is no argument. I have had a natural draw to universal appeal my whole life, and I use what I've uncovered in that avenue, as a tool for getting the purpose I've been given out to as many as possible.
Of course different aspects of me in different contexts, given my different purposes, is me from multiple-dimensions.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I often come here to work out my own view. I'm not interested in argument. Period. I reach who I am meant to here, by natural selection. It works like magic. All that is required is that I be myself, and do what I feel I need to.
Writing a book is different. I put my view out there. People like it or not, resonate to it or not. There is no argument. I have had a natural draw to universal appeal my whole life, and I use what I've uncovered in that avenue, as a tool for getting the purpose I've been given out to as many as possible.
Of course different aspects of me in different contexts, given my different purposes, is me from multi-dimensions.
magic?? ..is an illusion. you just lost me angelica.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
btw - VERY pooor analogy. if EVERY unborn child were systematically exterminated that might be csomething...but satill a stretch. many, many women get pregnant, the chiuld is intitially unwanted and unborn...but many, many women decide to continue on with the pregnancy as is their individual right and choice to make. so yes, sorry...thanks for playing...but incorrect. if you had some direct correlation that EVERY nitially unwanted child was aborted, you might have a case...but since that is NOT the case.....just doesn't hold water. thanks for playing though.
Was EVERY European Jew killed in the Holocaust? No
Was the Holocaust still a genocide? Yes
you talk a lot angelica but sometimes you dont actually say anything.
this is the only participation i'm going to be doing in this thread. i've read the entire thread and i agree with this. no offense to angelica at all, but whenever i read your posts, the majority of it i couldn't understand what you were saying, almost as if you're trying to use big words to act smart, but end up not saying anything at all. and apparently i wasn't the only one who thought this! there have been quite a few people on this thread that couldn't understand what you were saying and i thought i was the only one who didn't! i think you just need to just organize your thoughts more clearly again, no offense or anything..
Comments
Indeed, best kill them all.
-Enoch Powell
nah, they aren't bothering me so i've got no vendetta against them. but to the moms they are bothering, have at it as i have no reason to give a damn about them either.
40 million unborn babies since Roe v. Wade. 12 million total died in the Holocaust. 25 million under Stalin.
Call it genocide, call it what you want. If you can the defend the murder of 40 million babies, the blood is on your hands.
-Enoch Powell
At time of conception its an egg and a sperm..nothing more..not a child..not a person..etc.
Also how is one form of life more important than another life....humans are causing genocide to millions of creatures everyday.
Humans are the plague to this planet.....and surely god isn't too happy with this one creature stripping this planet dry. A few less can't be a bad thing...guess once one realizes we aren't "special" it gets sorted out pretty quick...oh oh oh..I got it...just think that all those poor fetus's are Muslims...then it will be okay to kill them. Yea I'm laughing as I write this....
Sperm and egg do not a baby make.....good stretch though....
Wooks wike thomeone need to go back to thex ed kwass. It appears you do not know how a baby is made.
-Enoch Powell
I don't get it. Is it not okay with you that I think catefrances was more clear and concise than the rest of the posters ?
"Chirp"
no need to defend anything if it isn't murder.
i already stated that i believe the embryo to be human. it is not a legitimate argument to hold a toddler in front of me and say that because it is dependent upon others for its survival that tis the same as aborting an embryo. a toddler is a fully formed independent organism. an embryo is not.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
What severly handicapped people have (lack of) sensory perception equivalent to that of an embryo?
If you're refering to people with brain injuries sufficient to cause them to be "vegetables" (or even if you're not refering to these people, I am), many, many people agree that it's morally acceptable to remove their life support.
And that's what an abortion does really - remove life support from the embryo or vice versa. (Although I don't really care to be involved in the debate about dependence, I suspect that this comes into play in part because of this distinction between passive and active "killing".)
Also, although I see your point about people having less of a problem with "killing" they don't have to see, I actually think that if more people really saw abortions we as a society would have LESS of a problem with it because the distinction between an embryo and a fully human person would become more clear. (I can't help but wonder if the growing use of the abortion pill will have any impact on this at all, since women who use it - and their partners, if they want - actually see the results of the abortion.)
I think she makes a very good point.
I never once said that because an embryo is dependent on its mother then the termination of it is justified. I responded to someone else's post that the embryo is INDEPENDENT of its mother. I didn't try to base this on philosophical principle, merely scientific fact. Are you following here? The only justification for termination of pregnancy, is that the woman decides it is in her best interest, and possibly a potential baby's best interest, not to continue with it.
As for trying to get out of this. if I consider something to be ridiculous, I have every right to say so, and I will. I think comparing the termination of an unwanted pregnancy, with terminating the life of a disabled patient, is ridiculous. There is no comparison. An embryo is not a complete human, it is a cluster of cells and primitive tissue, that eventually will become a complete person. Again, this isn't philosophy, this is scientific fact.
You yourself are using linguistics to try and prove your point. Using emotive words like baby and killing ensure that you remain against abortion. Whatever floats yer boat mate. The fact remains, a woman has a legal right to do whatever she chooses with her body. If she does not wish to subject herself to pregnancy, or motherhood, for whatever reason, she can...... regardless of what you think or feel about it, and regardless of what you call it.
As for a complete person being totally dependent on others to survive, my family know, if I am ever in that position, to switch me off. In that instance, it is legitimately applied to other circumstances. A person on life support, with no chance of ever coming off, can legally be switched off. In fact, it happens all the time.
You have always been soooo much nicer to me!
edit: ALWAYS!! Even when we've disagreed!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Condoms work better though. Much less mess.
My own view is not either/or. It's based on myriad combinations given the myriad contexts.
I'm not going to spell it out, due to the climate of this thread. People seem intolerant of the holistic view, and seem to not understand beyond black/white, and therefore get argumentative with a difference approach. I'm just not interested in that.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
and therein lies the difference between us angelica. my appreciation only goes so far. if what someone is saying is nonsensical and takes no stand then i dismiss them on whatever it is were discussing in that instance. my view is one of either/or in this particular discussion. its so simple when you get down to it. i dont understand why you have such trouble sharing you view. cant you substantiate your claim. not that you necessarily have to, which is great for you btw. basically what youre saying is you have an opinion but you wont share it with us cause were too mean. :rolleyes: you cant possibly hide behind the 'intolerant' climate of this thread. i mean no ones actually called anyone a babykiller yet. no one else seems to have a problem voicing their stance.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Talking about a holistic view with people caught up in linear patriarchal views reminds me of when I point at the moon, and people look at my finger and say there's nothing special about that at all.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
caught up in their linear patriarchal views. LMFAO!! that cant be me you speak of, that much i know.
btw whilst youre pointing at the moon, im standing on its surface.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
In other formats, like the book I'm writing, I speak in a very different voice meant to reach many. Here I speak as myself, unadulterated, and make no apology.
I totally accept if people don't get me. If I felt comfortable in the conversations, and if respect was mutually practised, I may be willing to clarify. I do often in threads, happily.
If I have to bend over backwards to clarify, and feel discomfort and slings and arrows, it's not worth it.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
so what youre saying is here in this format you dont want to reach the many? youll save that for the medium of hard copy print where you speak with a very different voice?? and these two voices are both still who you are?
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Writing a book is different. I put my view out there. People like it or not, resonate to it or not. There is no argument. I have had a natural draw to universal appeal my whole life, and I use what I've uncovered in that avenue, as a tool for getting the purpose I've been given out to as many as possible.
Of course different aspects of me in different contexts, given my different purposes, is me from multiple-dimensions.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
magic?? ..is an illusion. you just lost me angelica.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Was EVERY European Jew killed in the Holocaust? No
Was the Holocaust still a genocide? Yes
I think that covers it
eV: 8/4/08, 8/5/08, 6/21/11
SG: 10/4/08<-- MET STONE!!!