Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted June 7, 2018 Author Share Posted June 7, 2018 5 hours ago, ants said: I think this shows how your arguments are pretty fundamentally flawed. You seem to be conflating ethics with practicality. On an ethical basis, there is an absolute justification to ban abortions. If you perceive the unborn child as a live human being, there is a pretty strong ethical argument against most abortions. Of course, it is totally subjective to say when life begins, so this isn't an issue that can be "won" by either group. No, not really, since you can't actually ban abortions, just make them way less safe, and the people that want to ban abortions almost always want to enact policies that lead to more unplanned pregnancies, thus logically leading to more unsafe abortions. This isn't hard to understand unless you actively don't want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted June 7, 2018 Author Share Posted June 7, 2018 57 minutes ago, Pony Empress Jace said: It's a feature not a bug So give your racist god king a big ol hug He won't tell the truth Never tells a lie Right wing authority will never die Nazis on the left God is on the right Hitler wasn't that bad Put up a good fight Oooh don't ya just love your alternative facts Getting new realities from old ass hacks But make sure to keep your ass in check Touch another dude's and we'll hang you by the neck! But bitches be needing to give up all three holes Don't worry bout 'no' cause that's just a lie Never been a bitch who didn't need a guy To tell her where to go and just what to think If she talks back just hit her head on the sink Oooh it's a feature not a bug Show any females your impressive slug She really wants it don't ask for advice Even lookin' at her is really nice And just remember if she's a tough old hag Find one you deserve with titties that don't sag I dedicate this song to Mrs. Trump. Get Schwifty! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ants Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 8 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: No, not really, since you can't actually ban abortions, just make them way less safe, and the people that want to ban abortions almost always want to enact policies that lead to more unplanned pregnancies, thus logically leading to more unsafe abortions. This isn't hard to understand unless you actively don't want to. You can’t stop theft, graffiti or murders, so by your logic since they happen anyway they shouldn’t be criminalised so it’s safer for those doing it. I’m pro-choice, but that has to be the stupidest argument ever. And what else those who want to ban abortions also push legislatively has no bearing on if there is an ethical argument against legalising them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted June 7, 2018 Author Share Posted June 7, 2018 11 minutes ago, ants said: You can’t stop theft, graffiti or murders, so by your logic since they happen anyway they shouldn’t be criminalised so it’s safer for those doing it. I’m pro-choice, but that has to be the stupidest argument ever. And what else those who want to ban abortions also push legislatively has no bearing on if there is an ethical argument against legalising them. Wow, lol….. Let’s take it even further. You can’t prevent genocides, so why should international courts make them illegal? War crimes, can’t stop them either. So why bother? Comparing abortion to universally recognized crimes is silly and intellectually lazy. And yes, policies are connected. You have to factor in how they affect one another. If you want to ban abortions and push policies that will dramatically increase unwanted pregnancies, and then further foster a culture that shames women who get pregnant out of wedlock, what’s going to happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 Who Is Puerto Rico’s Recovery For? Naomi Klein discusses her new book—and the politicians, “disaster capitalists,” and cryptocurrency obsessives who want to remake the U.S. territory. https://slate.com/technology/2018/06/an-interview-with-naomi-klein-about-puerto-ricos-recovery-and-the-disaster-capitalists-who-want-to-control-it.html Quote This mechanism was already very much in play using Puerto Rico’s debt crisis before Maria hit, and this had been going on for well over a decade of exploiting the debt crisis to push a plan to privatize the island’s infrastructure, to radically downsize its public education system and privatize it, huge layoffs in the public sector, huge deregulation, big giveaways to corporations and the ultrarich to encourage them to relocate to Puerto Rico. Then Maria hits, and the whole thing goes into hyperdrive. The fact is, Maria hadn’t even made landfall before you started to see speculation in the business press that this was going to be the opportunity to privatize the electricity system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mankytoes Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 2 hours ago, ants said: You can’t stop theft, graffiti or murders, so by your logic since they happen anyway they shouldn’t be criminalised so it’s safer for those doing it. I’m pro-choice, but that has to be the stupidest argument ever. And what else those who want to ban abortions also push legislatively has no bearing on if there is an ethical argument against legalising them. Well we use that argument in the UK, because abortion law is, now more than ever, almost completely ineffective. You've got abortion as illegal in Northern Ireland, but legal in the Republic of Ireland and the UK (and it's legal for Northern Irish people to travel to these place to get abortions), so there's no way of stopping anyone who wants an abortion traveling the short distances to those places. Nowhere in Northern Ireland can be much more than an hour from a legal abortion. The only people who could be effected are the most vulnerable (hooray!). A law you can't enforce (well, they could take steps to enforce it, but that's unpalatable even to the right wing) is essentially a virtue signal. You can't outright stop graffiti or murder, but you can take significant steps to reduce them. I think maybe Americans are getting a bit mixed up and adopting this argument where it isn't relevant. If abortion was illegal in all states, it would be quite an effort for a lot of women to get one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Queen Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 2 hours ago, Martell Spy said: Who Is Puerto Rico’s Recovery For? Naomi Klein discusses her new book—and the politicians, “disaster capitalists,” and cryptocurrency obsessives who want to remake the U.S. territory. https://slate.com/technology/2018/06/an-interview-with-naomi-klein-about-puerto-ricos-recovery-and-the-disaster-capitalists-who-want-to-control-it.html I thought Naomi Klein was slightly off her rocker when I first read Shock Doctrine. Now, I think she was bang on the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mlle. Zabzie Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 3 minutes ago, mankytoes said: Well we use that argument in the UK, because abortion law is, now more than ever, almost completely ineffective. You've got abortion as illegal in Northern Ireland, but legal in the Republic of Ireland and the UK (and it's legal for Northern Irish people to travel to these place to get abortions), so there's no way of stopping anyone who wants an abortion traveling the short distances to those places. Nowhere in Northern Ireland can be much more than an hour from a legal abortion. The only people who could be effected are the most vulnerable (hooray!). A law you can't enforce (well, they could take steps to enforce it, but that's unpalatable even to the right wing) is essentially a virtue signal. You can't outright stop graffiti or murder, but you can take significant steps to reduce them. I think maybe Americans are getting a bit mixed up and adopting this argument where it isn't relevant. If abortion was illegal in all states, it would be quite an effort for a lot of women to get one. It actually already is in several states (particularly large ones). There are some states that have only one licensed clinic. And OMG it's not like the ethical questions are EASY here. It's a complete rabbit hole, so I'm not going there, but there is a rich and nuanced ethical discussion to be had about reproductive rights generally. Unfortunately, the discussion always ends in shouting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 There's nothing difficult or debatable about it. If a woman wants a parasite removed from where it is feeding off her body, it is medically possible to do so. Anything else is projecting fantasy into concerned woman's ailment. Ethics are not involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 The U.S. is for all intent and purpases, an occupied government, at least in the Executive branch, where we are seeing current and former intel experts, one after another, label this regime and its head the Orange blob, nothing other than a Putin worshiping, compromised stool, under Kremlin control. We are an occupied nation. Some may consider themselves honor bound to support resistance. To support this administration should be viewed as aiding and abetting an adversary to the American people, High Treason! Your either with Putin (Trump) or your with America, you can not possible be for both at this point. https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/805add13-950f-3627-b56c-5c294c0f4a7d/ss_retired-us-army-colonel.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamMe90 Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 4 hours ago, Tywin et al. said: Wow, lol….. Let’s take it even further. You can’t prevent genocides, so why should international courts make them illegal? War crimes, can’t stop them either. So why bother? Comparing abortion to universally recognized crimes is silly and intellectually lazy. Dude, you're making his point for him, lol. He's using the exact logic you just used to support why we should not ban abortions even if they were a crime, and using reductio ad absurdum to show why it is bad logic. You just continued to demonstrate the badness of your logic by coming up with even more obscene scenarios that your logic would lead to if adopted. You disagree fundamentally with the assertion that abortion is a crime or that it is unethical, and so you don't think there is a purpose to a ban on them, and this is compounded further by the fact that a ban will have adverse affects on people that need abortions. That's fine. But if someone thinks that abortion is, in fact, the killing of infants, then they absolutely have an ethical argument for banning the practice. That is just completely obvious on its face, since killing infants is obviously morally wrong. People who advocate for drug legalization make the same error in logic (and to be clear, I am radically pro legalization, moreso probably than most people making this error). They say that because the war on drugs is ineffective, it should be stopped. But that's just a deflection for the real core issue, which is that drug use own its own is not inherently unethical. Some people really think that using drugs is morally wrong, and you will never convince them that we should altogether stop trying to suppress their usage because attempts to do so are ineffective. The only way you will win that war is to gradually shift the paradigm/cultural view on the morality of drug use. The same goes for abortion. 2 hours ago, Pony Empress Jace said: There's nothing difficult or debatable about it. If a woman wants a parasite removed from where it is feeding off her body, it is medically possible to do so. Anything else is projecting fantasy into concerned woman's ailment. Ethics are not involved. Scoring hot take right there. ETA: I shouldn't have to explicitly state this, but just in case, I am 100% pro choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 12 minutes ago, IamMe90 said: But if someone thinks that abortion is, in fact, the killing of infants, then they absolutely have an ethical argument for banning the practice. That is just completely obvious on its face, since killing infants is obviously morally wrong. You'd [edit: One would] need to refer to the parasite* as somewhere between a ball of cells and a fetus -- an infant is defined post-birth irregardless of opinion on abortion. *thank you PEJ @Pony Empress Jace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamMe90 Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 Just now, Week said: You'd need to refer to the parasite* as somewhere between a ball of cells and a fetus -- an infant is post-birth *thank you PEJ @Pony Empress Jace Bro, I said IF someone thinks that abortion is the killing of infants. I do not think that, as I am pro choice and I do not think abortion is unethical. Someone can have an ethical argument that is wrong, or with which you disagree, but that doesn't mean that they don't have an ethical argument, or that ethics are not involved in the discussion. Which is what Tywin and Jace seem to be contending, and which is a terribly un-nuanced (and also just wrong) view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 Just now, IamMe90 said: Bro, I said IF someone thinks that abortion is the killing of infants. I do not think that, as I am pro choice and I do not think abortion is unethical. Someone can have an ethical argument that is wrong, or with which you disagree, but that doesn't mean that they don't have an ethical argument, or that ethics are not involved in the discussion. Which is what Tywin and Jace seem to be contending, and which is a terribly un-nuanced (and also just wrong) view. S'all good -- I meant the broader "you" as in "one". Not directed @ you. My only point (read: nitpick) was that using infant within the argument would be fallacious even before considering whether the remainder of the argument is sound or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 I wonder, has anyone ever told a woman who had a miscarriage that it's good her body rid itself of the parasite. Yeah, I thought not. It's one thing to support legal abortion, as I do, but valorizing it as something to be happy/proud of, is disturbing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 Just now, Cas Stark said: I wonder, has anyone ever told a woman who had a miscarriage that it's good her body rid itself of the parasite. Yeah, I thought not. It's one thing to support legal abortion, as I do, but valorizing it as something to be happy/proud of, is disturbing. #Hottake addressing a comment that was not made. "Parasite: An organism that lives on or in another organism, deriving benefit from living on or in that other organism, while not contributing towards that other organism sufficiently to cover the cost to that other organism." Not wrong and nobody is valorizing it. Completely reasonable to choose to care/support a parasite until it is able to live on its own -- as most women choose to do. Or they could choose not to. That is their choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 3 minutes ago, Week said: #Hottake addressing a comment that was not made. "Parasite: An organism that lives on or in another organism, deriving benefit from living on or in that other organism, while not contributing towards that other organism sufficiently to cover the cost to that other organism." Not wrong and nobody is valorizing it. Completely reasonable to choose to care/support a parasite until it is able to live on its own -- as most women choose to do. Or they could choose not to. That is their choice. whatever. please, by all means, continue to advance the pro choice argument by referring to the fetus as a parasite. carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frog Eater Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 Can you all please take your self congratulatory discussion of infanticide to another thread? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 8 minutes ago, Cas Stark said: whatever. please, by all means, continue to advance the pro choice argument by referring to the fetus as a parasite. carry on. Again, not what's being done but thanks for playing. Pearl-clutching can stand down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 Muses that the people who call fetuses parasites don’t have children, or at least I very sincerely hope they don’t, and never will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.