abortion discussion

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

abortion discussion

Post by Mountaineer » Thu Nov 13, 2014 5:47 am

MachineGhost wrote:
Mountaineer wrote: You certainly seem to have the self-justified, self-righteous "happy face" I mentioned.  May God have mercy on you; there is still time (unless you have croaked overnight)  :'(
Only in your reality bubba, not mine. ;)
MG,

This probably belongs in the religion thread but it would lose the context if I posted there so, here is my response to you; I'll keep it short.  I know that what you are telling me is not true.  I know that you know there is a God so I'm not going to argue with you.  I'm really sorry that you are angry with God.  So, I have a message from God for you.  I have good news to tell you.  The God that you are suppressing in your unrighteousness loves you.  He has unilaterally acted in your behalf to die for your sins and He is calling for you to repent, believe in Him and be forgiven.  I know that you are angry with Him right now but He wants you to believe and live.

... Mountaineer
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: abortion discussion

Post by MachineGhost » Thu Nov 13, 2014 9:53 am

Xan wrote: I don't know what makes you think I'm not American; I am.  And I specifically said "guarantees", not "grants", because I agree with you that the rights were pre-existent and not generated by the Constitution/government.

But there is no natural right to commit murder.
I thought you were in Singapore?

Murder by definition is taking a sentient being's life involuntarily against its will.  A clump of cells or zygote isn't sentient nor has will -- where are you going to draw the line since all life forms from the quadrillions of microbes to the Great Apes have consciousness?  Under the Common Law, abortion was socially-acceptable up until the third month of pregnancy and 95% of abortions nowadays are still done within that time-frame within a statutory legal framework.  So I really don't know what the problem is other than wishing reality weren't so.  Nothing has really changed under Roe vs Wade other than to affirm the natural property rights of a woman in regard to her symbiont.  Outlawing abortion would be a public health disaster, for both women getting underground abortions and unwanted orphan children.  If you can't see that, then you're just blinded by religious mysticism rather than any critical thinking.  I challenge every anti-abortionist to cough up the funds and open up their homes for the deluge of unwanted orphan children that will follow.  Not holding my breath if history is any indication.  Go check out how well all those unwanted orphan children in Romania have faired.  Cognitive dissonance is a P.C. word for hypocrites.

Tell you what.  I'll entertain outlawing abortion when getting pregnant is opt in (through birth control in the water supply or a similar public policy that spares no one) rather than opt out.
Last edited by MachineGhost on Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8864
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: abortion discussion

Post by Pointedstick » Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:01 am

In the end, abortion always comes down to the definition of "human life." If it's a human life, then destroying it is murder; if it's not, then it's fine. So each side is right within the bounds of their own definition. Someone who believes that fertilized eggs and blastocysts and zygotes and fetuses are human life is correctly intuiting that the prohibition on murder morally overrides the woman's right to control her own body. And a person who sees the developing thing as no more than a clump of cells is correct that destroying this thing has no real moral overtones, so prohibiting it amounts to violating a woman's right to control her own body.

So the question is, when does "human life" begin?

Unfortunately, no agreement seems possible. That's probably why the supreme court, when they invented a right to abortion, set an arbitrary line.
Last edited by Pointedstick on Tue Nov 18, 2014 1:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: abortion discussion

Post by MachineGhost » Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:12 am

Pointedstick wrote: So the question is, when does "human life" begin?

Unfortunately, no agreement seems possible. That's probably why the supreme court, when they invented a right to abortion, set an arbitrary line.
That's the diplomatic approach.  But it really doesn't matter when "human life" begins because the religious mystics won't change their tune.  After all, they pay no heed to scientific evidence!  So once it is scientifically determined that "human life" in terms of sentience beings at xth day or nth month, they will just reframe their narrow bubble-reality to "potential human life", etc. while conveniently ignoring the murder of millions of wasted sperm and aborted egg cells.  They won't change and will just die off as younger generations grow up with a more correct, scientific viewpoint.  I'm sure there will always be a small core of Neo-Luddites like the Amish or Mennonites that chose to live in a bubble-reality.

I've never understood why religious mystics are so anti-abortion when their mysticism is all about their kooky afterlife.  They ought to be in a hurry to escape what they perceive as a Hell on Earth not perpetuate everyone's suffering. ::)

And BTW, in terms of cost benefit ratio analysis, unwanted orphan children is orders of magnitude more expensive and incurs more human suffering than aborting a bunch of non-sentient cells.  Sheer misplaced priorities.
Last edited by MachineGhost on Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: abortion discussion

Post by Xan » Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:33 am

I'm sorry, but it's the pro-aborts who are ignoring science.  Clearly, scientifically, a new human life begins at the moment of conception.  As for when "sentience" begins, that truly is an arbitrary line with no definition.  It's not legal to murder a retarded person no matter how low his IQ.

Also, in the Roman world at the time Christianity began, infanticide was common.  It was fine to take your baby, up to a year old (IIRC), out into the woods and leave him there.  It was the Christians who took this abominable "common law socially acceptable" practice and convinced society that it was terrible.
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: abortion discussion

Post by MachineGhost » Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:48 am

Xan wrote: I'm sorry, but it's the pro-aborts who are ignoring science.  Clearly, scientifically, a new human life begins at the moment of conception.  As for when "sentience" begins, that truly is an arbitrary line with no definition.  It's not legal to murder a retarded person no matter how low his IQ.

Also, in the Roman world at the time Christianity began, infanticide was common.  It was fine to take your baby, up to a year old (IIRC), out into the woods and leave him there.  It was the Christians who took this abominable "common law socially acceptable" practice and convinced society that it was terrible.
As I mentioned before, you might want to take a genetics course so you can see exactly what goes in great, fine-level detail from fertilization to whatever moment you believe sentience occurs.  If "sentience" seems arbitrarily vague to you, then so is declaring "human life" at the moment of fertilization.  Sentience is an emergent physical property (hardware) coming only at a certain point in time and space from non-sentient cells following DNA programming (software).  There is a cascade effect and until that point in time and space is sucessfully reach and surpassed, there's no hope for sustainability and no possibiliy of being a sentient and volitional, non-symbiont Homo spaiens.

Well, no argument from me on infanticide on sentients, but doing a good social deed a couple of thousand years ago doesn't automatically make any religious dogma correct on anything else.  It's also a tactic that hucksters always use for social proof and validity.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: abortion discussion

Post by Xan » Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:04 am

Oh, so now "non-symbiont"-ness is a problem?  I have a nine-month old and he's probably 20 years from being a non-symbiant.
User avatar
l82start
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:51 pm

Re: abortion discussion

Post by l82start » Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:10 am

split from voter ID thread
-Government 2020+ - a BANANA REPUBLIC - if you can keep it

-Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of existence
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: abortion discussion

Post by Mountaineer » Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:24 am

Words of wisdom from an old West Virginia proverb:  You can't win a pissing contest with a skunk.  Seemed applicable.  ;)

... Mountaineer
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
stuper1
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1365
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:18 pm

Re: abortion discussion

Post by stuper1 » Thu Nov 13, 2014 12:07 pm

Those who want abortion legal call themselves pro-choice.  The choice ought to come prior to impregnation.  Act responsibly and you won't have to worry about abortion.  In other words, wait for marriage to have sex, and even then use birth control until you're ready for kids.  Today's society wants everything right now, but they don't want to live with the consequences.  Oh well, they're missing out on great blessings, and will miss out further in the future, except those few who are humble enough to repent.
Lowe
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 7:54 am

Re: abortion discussion

Post by Lowe » Thu Nov 13, 2014 5:37 pm

Look, man, you can't abort babies.  God needs them to be born, so they he can tell his people to dash them against rocks.  Word.
Lowe
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 7:54 am

Re: abortion discussion

Post by Lowe » Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:33 pm

That's right, man.  Your morality has no basis, and Desert knows that because he gets his morality from a powerful spirit who drowns people to death when they don't do what he prefers.  Take it from the expert.
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8864
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: abortion discussion

Post by Pointedstick » Thu Nov 13, 2014 9:05 pm

This terror of morality being relative is something I have real difficulty understanding. What's so horribly frightening about the concept that right and wrong is defined largely by culture, especially in controversial or ambiguous situations?

Why is it so scary that what you think is absolutely morally right might seem wrong to someone else, or vice versa?
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: abortion discussion

Post by MachineGhost » Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:17 pm

Xan wrote: Oh, so now "non-symbiont"-ness is a problem?  I have a nine-month old and he's probably 20 years from being a non-symbiant.
I was being kind and not using "parasite" since that bothers people around here.  Bottom line is in a society where private property rights are numero uno for its basis of social organization, you'd have to make an exceptionally strong, airtight and rational case that a clump of non-sentient cells is not a symbiont and would be an act of premeditated murder in lieu of violating a woman's property rights.
Last edited by MachineGhost on Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: abortion discussion

Post by MachineGhost » Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:20 pm

Desert wrote: I believe everyone that disagrees with me is non sentient, and thus deserving of death should I find it necessary.  My proof of their non sentient status is equal to your proof of a fetus's non sentient status.
Who are you and are you a member of ISIS?
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8864
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: abortion discussion

Post by Pointedstick » Sat Nov 15, 2014 11:25 pm

Why is it off-limits to see joy in life but also disbelieve extrinsic morality? So what if everything exists by chance and we're just a bunch of critters with brains that got a bit too big for our own good, and now we're wandering through the soup of life? Why is the corollary to those views that we should get out as painlessly as possible, that reproduction is something to be avoided?

Serious questions! I don't understand the causative chain there.
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7680
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: abortion discussion

Post by moda0306 » Sun Nov 16, 2014 6:04 am

Desert wrote:
Pointedstick wrote: This terror of morality being relative is something I have real difficulty understanding. What's so horribly frightening about the concept that right and wrong is defined largely by culture, especially in controversial or ambiguous situations?

Why is it so scary that what you think is absolutely morally right might seem wrong to someone else, or vice versa?
Who is terrified of moral relativism?  It's nothing new, it's been around for thousands of years.  I don't think it's frightening.  I think it's reality, for the majority of humans throughout time.  But it's important to be honest with what we're left with, if one really believes in relativism.  The naturalistic philosophy that's based on the idea that everything exists by chance, and that all perceptions of morality are permissible if accepted by some minimum segment of beings ... it really ends with no morality at all.  I think we can all see that, right?  Or at least an ever-changing, unpredictable morality that is so baseless that it hardly deserves to be dignified with the term "morality."  We're just a bunch of critters with brains that got a bit too big for our own good, and now we're wandering through the soup of life, trying to make sense of it all.  Of course no sense exists, in that worldview.  No morality that is meaningful.  Just make the best of it, and get out as painlessly as possible.  And for goodness sake, don't reproduce; that would be cruel, in such a meaningless existence.  Seriously, I'm not creating a strawman here, this is what a naturalist should do.  I know, because I used to be one, and I couldn't believe people were reproducing in this reality. 

Now of course all the above is NOT reality.  We have a fascinating and historical record of the existence of God, a beautifully complex universe explainable only by an intelligent designer, and the gift of God's son that wants a relationship with us.  Things couldn't be better.
The vast majority of human beings in history have NOT been moral relativists, IMO.

Most people are pretty darn confident that their individual morality is correct... Regardless of whether it was created by a God.
"Men did not make the earth. It is the value of the improvements only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property. Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds."

- Thomas Paine
pp4me3
Associate Member
Associate Member
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 6:33 pm

Re: abortion discussion

Post by pp4me3 » Sun Nov 16, 2014 8:56 am

I saw an article recently about how the mortality rate from nearly all causes has been going down in recent times except for the rate of suicide which has been going up. This did not surprise me very much as I would suspect there to be some kind of correlation between suicide and abortion rates. I've heard that for most people who commit suicide it isn't a fleeting act of passion as one might expect but a very rational decision. I guess one simply concludes that life is totally meaningless and there is no reason to continue it.

Abortion looks like the same kind of reasoning to me except that it is applied to another human being. It can be argued whether or not it is a human being at some given point but I don't think it can be argued that it is a potential human being that is not going to be given the opportunity to decide for itself whether life is meaningless or not. I've always seen this as a very great evil whether one factors in religious belief or not (I once was religious but now not very).

And please spare me the "Jesus died for your sins" antidote for the meaninglessness of life. Another study I read showed that suicide rates among the religious are higher than those among atheists, with Protestant suicides ranking highest, followed by Catholics, and then Jews. It didn't surprise me that Protestants would outrank the Catholics as the latter are more insistent that suicide is a one-way ticket to hell whereas some Protestants will allow admission to heaven in some cases. My best friend was a very devout Protestant who blew his brains out BTW.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: abortion discussion

Post by dualstow » Sun Nov 16, 2014 10:27 am

pp4me3 wrote: I've heard that for most people who commit suicide it isn't a fleeting act of passion as one might expect but a very rational decision.
I think you've heard wrong. At least, the stats in 'Suicide' by Geo Stone indicate that it is usually an impulsive act of passion. That's not to say that the person has not thought about suicide and perhaps attempted it half-heartedly over the years before succeeding. But if the cause is not a painful terminal illness, it is most often "psych-ache" and could be overcome if the person had chosen to live.
I guess one simply concludes that life is totally meaningless and there is no reason to continue it.

Abortion looks like the same kind of reasoning to me except that it is applied to another human being.
I don't see that. If a mother chooses to abort a baby but goes on living, how does that equate to a belief that life is totally meaningless?
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8864
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: abortion discussion

Post by Pointedstick » Sun Nov 16, 2014 10:51 am

dualstow wrote: I don't see that. If a mother chooses to abort a baby but goes on living, how does that equate to a belief that life is totally meaningless?
Most of the women I have known who got abortions did it because they didn't feel like they were capable of adequately raising a child at that point in their lives, because they were poor, unmarried, in a dangerous part of the world, without a stable place to live, etc. A few did it because they found out that their unborn children would be born with severe birth defects or brain damage. One--a devout Catholic, no less--did it with great mental anguish because her unborn child had a very severe, possibly terminal condition that could only be cured by in-vitro administration of drugs that had a known dangerous complication with the medication she was taking to cure Giardia, which she had a very severe case of and might kill her if left untreated.

None of them did it flippantly or because they thought life is meaningless or anything like that.
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8864
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: abortion discussion

Post by Pointedstick » Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:14 pm

So it's not the women who love killing babies but rather the doctors? You're sure that they aren't just trying to provide what they view as important medical services to women in need?
Last edited by Pointedstick on Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: abortion discussion

Post by MachineGhost » Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:16 pm

Desert wrote: Lots of really interesting comments here.  Just to be clear, I'm not out to demonize women who have had abortions.  I know several myself, and they're not Manson-style murderers.  Except... well, except they are, and so am I.  Let him who is without sin throw the first stone.  I think it's the relentless marketing of abortion by the people who should know better that is the central cause of the problem.  Abortion doctors in particular are in the best position to know what's really happening, but they continue with their barbarous acts.  I personally see little difference between an abortion "doctor" and an ISIS murderer.  Both addicted to death, both motivated by the darkest forces this world has to offer.
It may interest you to know that the Roe of Roe vs Wade fame was sort of a rubber stamp used for the case; she later become an anti-abortionist due to that exploitation along with the gruesome stuff she witnessed in the operating room from being a nurse in an abortion clinic.

But why blame the doctors or nurses when they are only responding to demand?  What excuse does ISIS have?  Comparing the two doesn't seem even remotely on the same level.  ISIS is forcing you to comply or will hack off your head, your family's head, etc.; no one forces you to get an abortion.
Last edited by MachineGhost on Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: abortion discussion

Post by Mountaineer » Tue Nov 18, 2014 4:51 am

Desert wrote:
Pointedstick wrote: So it's not the women who love killing babies but rather the doctors? You're sure that they aren't just trying to provide what they view as important medical services to women in need?
I'm guessing most doctors don't like it much either; probably like the Germans running the gas chambers in WWII.  But the doctors are the ones with the best vision of what's actually occurring in the abortion room.  Their motivations for pursuing the career path may have been to help women, but they were sadly mistaken and perhaps misled.  There is a certain momentum and group-think required for evil like this to take hold.  It requires some propaganda, fear, and even well-meaning people.  But in the end, it's a holocaust.
I would also add, based on looking at the data of who the victims are, abortion is one of the more blatant forms of racism ** that exists in this country today; truly a wolf in sheeps clothing and an example of the emperor has no clothes phenomenona.  The idea of "women's choice" has been presented by masters of marketing, dare I say similar to that of the 2008 Greek temple event, or those who call homicide bombers "suicide bombers".  Sell me another bottle of snake oil please.  :(

**  http://www.abort73.com/abortion/abortion_and_race/

... Mountaineer
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: abortion discussion

Post by dualstow » Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:24 am

Desert wrote: I personally see little difference between an abortion "doctor" and an ISIS murderer.  Both addicted to death, both motivated by the darkest forces this world has to offer.
Where do you stand on people who murder abortion providers?
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
Jan Van
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 717
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:42 am
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: abortion discussion

Post by Jan Van » Tue Nov 18, 2014 11:43 am

Desert wrote: Uh ... tell that to the unborn baby. 
Baby, fetus or embryo?
"Well, if you're gonna sin you might as well be original" -- Mike "The Cool-Person"
"Yeah, well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man" -- The Dude
Post Reply