just because it is not dead does not mean it a living, separate human entity. that's a deep philosophical question.
How do you distinguish a separate human entity?
An unborn child is a separate human entity until the mother decides to abort it. Then she views it as a "zygote." If a woman wants the child, then she views it as "her baby."
It's funny how a pregnant woman's perceptions can so easily change the child's state of nature.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
where do you stand on frozen fertilized embryos that are used for invitro? Should we pass laws the prevent them from being thrown away when not needed and force people to use them?
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
But that's because you consider the unborn child human life from the moment of conception. And no one's forcing you to get an abortion. But there are those who don't consider the unborn child to be ahuman life until some way into the pregnancy, and you would force them not to get an abortion. For someone who protects your own individual rights so much, you sure are quick to get involved in others' individual rights.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
An unborn child is a separate human entity until the mother decides to abort it. Then she views it as a "zygote." If a woman wants the child, then she views it as "her baby."
It's funny how a pregnant woman's perceptions can so easily change the child's state of nature.
But that's it: it is just perceptions. Not facts. If the woman is going to keep the child, of course she views it as her baby, because, save for miscarriage, the zygote will eventually be her baby. If she decides to abort it, it won't reach that stage.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
where do you stand on frozen fertilized embryos that are used for invitro? Should we pass laws the prevent them from being thrown away when not needed and force people to use them?
Don't throw them away but don't force people to use them, obviously.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
But that's it: it is just perceptions. Not facts. If the woman is going to keep the child, of course she views it as her baby, because, save for miscarriage, the zygote will eventually be her baby. If she decides to abort it, it won't reach that stage.
I was pointing out the inconsistency of that moral judgment.
The woman's perceptions do not change what the child is. Her perceptions can change, but the baby remains the same. I conclude that the baby is a human being worthy of life. You don't, clearly.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
But that's because you consider the unborn child human life from the moment of conception. And no one's forcing you to get an abortion. But there are those who don't consider the unborn child to be ahuman life until some way into the pregnancy, and you would force them not to get an abortion. For someone who protects your own individual rights so much, you sure are quick to get involved in others' individual rights.
I support individual rights very much, including the individual rights of the unborn. I was unborn once and had my mother not respected my rights, I wouldn't be here. An aborted fetus could have grown up just like me but it was cut short because society does not respect its rights.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
I was pointing out the inconsistency of that moral judgment.
The woman's perceptions do not change what the child is. Her perceptions can change, but the baby remains the same. I conclude that the baby is a human being worthy of life. You don't, clearly.
Babies are human beings worthy of life. Of course they are. We don't disagree on that. We disagree on when the zygote should be considered a human being.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
Babies are human beings worthy of life. Of course they are. We don't disagree on that. We disagree on when the zygote should be considered a human being.
What else could the zygote be? An ape?
It's a human.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
It's only the potential for human life up to a certain point, in many people's opinions. Just like sperm is the potential for human life. But a lot of that gets... used... without thinking about the potential lives we're killing with that tissue...
Oh dear.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
It's only the potential for human life up to a certain point, in many people's opinions. Just like sperm is the potential for human life. But a lot of that gets... used... without thinking about the potential lives we're killing with that tissue...
Oh dear.
Left alone, sperm cells will not separate or turn into a human being.
Left alone, a fertilized egg cell will separate and turn into a human being.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
that's the million dollar question chief. i don't have the answer.
the troubling extension of your views is that it could potentially make mothers slaves of the state. should we jail mothers who smoke or drink? fine the ones that don't go to regular doctor's visits? place them on lockdown in case they walk around too much and endanger the baby's life? should they have to leave their jobs once the state deems they are too pregnant and endangering the child's welfare? there are a lot of things we could label child abuse... if she has sex too late in the pregnancy is the man now labelled a pedophilic sex offender for exposing himself to a minor? should women who have miscarriages be charged for negligent homicide or manslaughter. after all, if they'd taken better care, perhaps the baby would still be alive.
on the flipside, i find the line between fetus and living baby to be weirdly arbitrary and unconvincing. in this sense, i don't see how you can say "now it's a baby, now it isnt." it's why im basically on the fence about the abortion. there are hard questions and serious implications that neither side considers. in the end, i don't think there's really an answer to any of these questions. which is why i think it should be decided locally to reflect the values and beliefs of the people of that locale.
that's the million dollar question chief. i don't have the answer.
Luckily science has helped separate woman and child earlier and earlier in the pregnancy, proving that the child CAN live independent of its mother. Makes you wonder just how far they'll go? Should abortion really be legal if the child can live independent of its mother? If that is possible, what does that say about the cruelty of abortion? A lot.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
Luckily science has helped separate woman and child earlier and earlier in the pregnancy, proving that the child CAN live independent of its mother. Makes you wonder just how far they'll go? Should abortion really be legal if the child can live independent of its mother? If that is possible, what does that say about the cruelty of abortion? A lot.
Well... I'm one of those people who is Pro-Choice...
Note: CHOICE, not abortion.
I believe it is the person's CHOICE to make... not mine, not yours and not our government to make for them. I don't like abortion and would hope that she... **Note: SHE** makes the choice to go an alternate path.
As long as abortion remains a legal option open to her... the choice is HERS to make.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Well... I'm one of those people who is Pro-Choice...
Note: CHOICE, not abortion.
I believe it is the person's CHOICE to make... not mine, not yours and not our government to make for them. I don't like abortion and would hope that she... **Note: SHE** makes the choice to go an alternate path.
As long as abortion remains a legal option open to her... the choice is HERS to make.
I know this is the way you feel but this doesn't address anything about ethical subjectivism. It just states it, which doesn't say much because ethical subjectivism is already proven as a lousy way to make ethical judgments.
The rightness of her decision has nothing to do with the fact that she is making it. This is your central problem.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
I know this is the way you feel but this doesn't address anything about ethical subjectivism. It just states it, which doesn't say much because ethical subjectivism is already proven as a lousy way to make ethical judgments.
You keep saying "proven lousy/false" but I have yet to see you prove anything. Well, other than you penchant for absolutes - of which there are very few, comparatively.
I know this is the way you feel but this doesn't address anything about ethical subjectivism. It just states it, which doesn't say much because ethical subjectivism is already proven as a lousy way to make ethical judgments.
The rightness of her decision has nothing to do with the fact that she is making it. This is your central problem.
...
Why is it MY problem? Unless I was the one who got her pregnant... what makes it MY business?
SHE is left with a tough decision. If I were her, I would hope that I would CHOOSE adoption or something other than abortion. In that case, I would be left with an Ethical Decision to make. And that decision would be MINE to make, not yours. I would be the one to decise the legal options open to me.
Just because I do not believe abortion is the best choice for her to make... it does not mean I have any power to force her (or anyone else) to do as I believe.
How does HER predicament... affect MY ethics?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
It doesn't affect your ethics, it affects the unborn child's life.
...
And my decision to force her to abide by my choosing affects her already born life.
...
I don't want other people who believe their ethics are better than mine to limit my choice of legal options. Like, I reallly don't care for gambling or chain smoking or lame ass colored Martinis... but, there's no way I'm expecting others to abide by my direction. Those choices are theirs to make.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
...
And my decision to force her to abide by my choosing affects her already born life.
...
I don't want other people who believe their ethics are better than mine to limit my choice of legal options. Like, I reallly don't care for gambling or chain smoking or lame ass colored Martinis... but, there's no way I'm expecting others to abide by my direction. Those choices are theirs to make.
The vast majority of the time, the woman won't die if she chooses to have the child. The only thing it affects is her pocketbook.
Apparently the woman's pocketbook matters more to you.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
The vast majority of the time, the woman won't die if she chooses to have the child. The only thing it affects is her pocketbook.
Apparently the woman's pocketbook matters more to you.
...
You need to get off of that track.
I am not saying she SHOULD get an abortion. I'm saying it is NOT my decision to make. Actually, if I were the one who makes all of the choices for everyone... i would make them all choose the alternative to getting pregnant in the first place... and I would also hold the MEN responsible for their part.
I'm not and have NEVER advocated abortion. I advocate CHOICE. Abortion is currently a legal option that is open to her. She has to make the tough ethical decision. She doesn't need me screaming into her ear through a bullhorn to tell her which choice to make.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
The vast majority of the time, the woman won't die if she chooses to have the child. The only thing it affects is her pocketbook.
Apparently the woman's pocketbook matters more to you.
Where did he say anything about preferring the woman have an abortion the vast majority of the time? He said he'd prefer it if the woman had the child - the outlook shared by most pro-choice people, I think - but doesn't think he's within his rights to impose his personal beliefs on anyone else.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
By what objective truth is the Nazi killing of a Jew immoral?
Don't flame me with libelous "anti-semite" horseshit.
You made the point already. The difference is ideology which is subjective and hence morality is subjective. There are objective correlates to morality within the human and animal brains, however these typically only work with in-group members. So unless we embrace the world and all life as our own in-group, we will always morally justify the killing of another.
But I'm sure you can think of many reasons not to include Nazis and Hitler as your in-group and thus justify killing them.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
By what objective truth is the Nazi killing of a Jew immoral?
Don't flame me with libelous "anti-semite" horseshit.
You made the point already. The difference is ideology which is subjective and hence morality is subjective. There are objective correlates to morality within the human and animal brains, however these typically only work with in-group members. So unless we embrace the world and all life as our own in-group, we will always morally justify the killing of another.
But I'm sure you can think of many reasons not to include Nazis and Hitler as your in-group and thus justify killing them.
...
Add: Would it be moral for a Jew to kill a Nazi?
...
The whole 'morality' thing comes into play with how the Nazi, the Jew and the American view killing. The object in the analogy is the act of killing.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
By what objective truth is the Nazi killing of a Jew immoral?
Don't flame me with libelous "anti-semite" horseshit.
You made the point already. The difference is ideology which is subjective and hence morality is subjective. There are objective correlates to morality within the human and animal brains, however these typically only work with in-group members. So unless we embrace the world and all life as our own in-group, we will always morally justify the killing of another.
But I'm sure you can think of many reasons not to include Nazis and Hitler as your in-group and thus justify killing them.
The fact that you need to delve that deeply into the example means your ethical beliefs are pathetically shallow.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
The fact that you need to delve that deeply into the example means your ethical beliefs are pathetically shallow.
Deeply shallow?
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
...
Add: Would it be moral for a Jew to kill a Nazi?
...
The whole 'morality' thing comes into play with how the Nazi, the Jew and the American view killing. The object in the analogy is the act of killing.
I had that thought "Would it be moral for a Jew to kill a Nazi?" I think many would answer "Yes".
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Comments
...except the unborn child.
But no one cares about him or her.
-Enoch Powell
How do you distinguish a separate human entity?
An unborn child is a separate human entity until the mother decides to abort it. Then she views it as a "zygote." If a woman wants the child, then she views it as "her baby."
It's funny how a pregnant woman's perceptions can so easily change the child's state of nature.
-Enoch Powell
where do you stand on frozen fertilized embryos that are used for invitro? Should we pass laws the prevent them from being thrown away when not needed and force people to use them?
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
But that's because you consider the unborn child human life from the moment of conception. And no one's forcing you to get an abortion. But there are those who don't consider the unborn child to be ahuman life until some way into the pregnancy, and you would force them not to get an abortion. For someone who protects your own individual rights so much, you sure are quick to get involved in others' individual rights.
But that's it: it is just perceptions. Not facts. If the woman is going to keep the child, of course she views it as her baby, because, save for miscarriage, the zygote will eventually be her baby. If she decides to abort it, it won't reach that stage.
Don't throw them away but don't force people to use them, obviously.
-Enoch Powell
I was pointing out the inconsistency of that moral judgment.
The woman's perceptions do not change what the child is. Her perceptions can change, but the baby remains the same. I conclude that the baby is a human being worthy of life. You don't, clearly.
-Enoch Powell
I support individual rights very much, including the individual rights of the unborn. I was unborn once and had my mother not respected my rights, I wouldn't be here. An aborted fetus could have grown up just like me but it was cut short because society does not respect its rights.
-Enoch Powell
Babies are human beings worthy of life. Of course they are. We don't disagree on that. We disagree on when the zygote should be considered a human being.
What else could the zygote be? An ape?
It's a human.
-Enoch Powell
It's only the potential for human life up to a certain point, in many people's opinions. Just like sperm is the potential for human life. But a lot of that gets... used... without thinking about the potential lives we're killing with that tissue...
Oh dear.
Left alone, sperm cells will not separate or turn into a human being.
Left alone, a fertilized egg cell will separate and turn into a human being.
-Enoch Powell
that's the million dollar question chief. i don't have the answer.
the troubling extension of your views is that it could potentially make mothers slaves of the state. should we jail mothers who smoke or drink? fine the ones that don't go to regular doctor's visits? place them on lockdown in case they walk around too much and endanger the baby's life? should they have to leave their jobs once the state deems they are too pregnant and endangering the child's welfare? there are a lot of things we could label child abuse... if she has sex too late in the pregnancy is the man now labelled a pedophilic sex offender for exposing himself to a minor? should women who have miscarriages be charged for negligent homicide or manslaughter. after all, if they'd taken better care, perhaps the baby would still be alive.
on the flipside, i find the line between fetus and living baby to be weirdly arbitrary and unconvincing. in this sense, i don't see how you can say "now it's a baby, now it isnt." it's why im basically on the fence about the abortion. there are hard questions and serious implications that neither side considers. in the end, i don't think there's really an answer to any of these questions. which is why i think it should be decided locally to reflect the values and beliefs of the people of that locale.
Luckily science has helped separate woman and child earlier and earlier in the pregnancy, proving that the child CAN live independent of its mother. Makes you wonder just how far they'll go? Should abortion really be legal if the child can live independent of its mother? If that is possible, what does that say about the cruelty of abortion? A lot.
-Enoch Powell
i take it you didnt read the rest of my post.
Note: CHOICE, not abortion.
I believe it is the person's CHOICE to make... not mine, not yours and not our government to make for them. I don't like abortion and would hope that she... **Note: SHE** makes the choice to go an alternate path.
As long as abortion remains a legal option open to her... the choice is HERS to make.
Hail, Hail!!!
I know this is the way you feel but this doesn't address anything about ethical subjectivism. It just states it, which doesn't say much because ethical subjectivism is already proven as a lousy way to make ethical judgments.
The rightness of her decision has nothing to do with the fact that she is making it. This is your central problem.
-Enoch Powell
Why is it MY problem? Unless I was the one who got her pregnant... what makes it MY business?
SHE is left with a tough decision. If I were her, I would hope that I would CHOOSE adoption or something other than abortion. In that case, I would be left with an Ethical Decision to make. And that decision would be MINE to make, not yours. I would be the one to decise the legal options open to me.
Just because I do not believe abortion is the best choice for her to make... it does not mean I have any power to force her (or anyone else) to do as I believe.
How does HER predicament... affect MY ethics?
Hail, Hail!!!
It doesn't affect your ethics, it affects the unborn child's life.
-Enoch Powell
And my decision to force her to abide by my choosing affects her already born life.
...
I don't want other people who believe their ethics are better than mine to limit my choice of legal options. Like, I reallly don't care for gambling or chain smoking or lame ass colored Martinis... but, there's no way I'm expecting others to abide by my direction. Those choices are theirs to make.
Hail, Hail!!!
The vast majority of the time, the woman won't die if she chooses to have the child. The only thing it affects is her pocketbook.
Apparently the woman's pocketbook matters more to you.
-Enoch Powell
You need to get off of that track.
I am not saying she SHOULD get an abortion. I'm saying it is NOT my decision to make. Actually, if I were the one who makes all of the choices for everyone... i would make them all choose the alternative to getting pregnant in the first place... and I would also hold the MEN responsible for their part.
I'm not and have NEVER advocated abortion. I advocate CHOICE. Abortion is currently a legal option that is open to her. She has to make the tough ethical decision. She doesn't need me screaming into her ear through a bullhorn to tell her which choice to make.
Hail, Hail!!!
Where did he say anything about preferring the woman have an abortion the vast majority of the time? He said he'd prefer it if the woman had the child - the outlook shared by most pro-choice people, I think - but doesn't think he's within his rights to impose his personal beliefs on anyone else.
Don't flame me with libelous "anti-semite" horseshit.
You made the point already. The difference is ideology which is subjective and hence morality is subjective. There are objective correlates to morality within the human and animal brains, however these typically only work with in-group members. So unless we embrace the world and all life as our own in-group, we will always morally justify the killing of another.
But I'm sure you can think of many reasons not to include Nazis and Hitler as your in-group and thus justify killing them.
Add: Would it be moral for a Jew to kill a Nazi?
...
The whole 'morality' thing comes into play with how the Nazi, the Jew and the American view killing. The object in the analogy is the act of killing.
Hail, Hail!!!
The fact that you need to delve that deeply into the example means your ethical beliefs are pathetically shallow.
-Enoch Powell
Deeply shallow?
I had that thought "Would it be moral for a Jew to kill a Nazi?" I think many would answer "Yes".