Abortion Rights

#901
#901
LouderVol said:
no. that is how you have chosen to define it so you can sleep at night while you accept murder.

how is thinking abstractly not arbitrary? how is an expression of sentiment not arbitrary?

animals can't express themselves like we can but there has been compelling evidence that they have feelings and can problem solve (think abstractly).
Click to expand...

They can feel pain and pleasure. That's quite distinct from sentiment. And, no, they cannot think abstractly.
 
#904
#904
therealUT said:
And, any being with the power to stop them who refuses to then stop them is a being who is doing something morally wrong, bad, committing a sin?
Click to expand...

more or less. I don't believe as an outsider I have the right to stop/prevent a robbery with killing the robber. violence should always be a last measure, and it can certainly never be justified in a "future murder" situation. basically I can't kill someone on the off chance they might commit murder at some vague point in the future. but if I directly observe someone plotting murder and pointing a gun at some one I have the obligation to stop them, or at least try. But I can not be faulted for a murder half the world away because I could have done a vague "something".

basically I don't think we have moral obligation to do something that would other wise be morally prohibited on uncertainties.
 
#905
#905
LouderVol said:
more or less. I don't believe as an outsider I have the right to stop/prevent a robbery with killing the robber. violence should always be a last measure, and it can certainly never be justified in a "future murder" situation. basically I can't kill someone on the off chance they might commit murder at some vague point in the future. but if I directly observe someone plotting murder and pointing a gun at some one I have the obligation to stop them, or at least try. But I can not be faulted for a murder half the world away because I could have done a vague "something".

basically I don't think we have moral obligation to do something that would other wise be morally prohibited on uncertainties.
Click to expand...

If you are half the world away, you probably lack the power to prevent. But, I'm asking about those with said power. Do they sin in permitting when they have the power to prevent abortion, infanticide, murder?
 
#906
#906
therealUT said:
If I die painlessly, I am not harmed.
Click to expand...

what? so what about property loss? you don't experience any pain, but you said earlier you were wronged. pain is a meaningless justification on for murder vs whatever you want to call it.

what if I only hurt you a little when I kill you? Like you feel a cold pinch? is that harm? what if I numb you first, no pain, no harm?
 
#908
#908
LouderVol said:
what? so what about property loss? you don't experience any pain, but you said earlier you were wronged. pain is a meaningless justification on for murder vs whatever you want to call it.

what if I only hurt you a little when I kill you? Like you feel a cold pinch? is that harm? what if I numb you first, no pain, no harm?
Click to expand...

I didn't say pain is essential to wrongdoing. I said I'm not harmed if I am killed painlessly. I'm not.
 
#909
#909
therealUT said:
They can feel pain and pleasure. That's quite distinct from sentiment. And, no, they cannot think abstractly.
Click to expand...

ok, objectively describe those two, because I believe we disagree. and I don't think you can. you continue to avoid my countering points. is an illiterate fundamentally incapable of having rights?

you have the cases of monkeys being raised by the steel mockeries of the real thing and those monkeys dying or not developing correctly. there is more than pain, pleasure, and sustenance that goes into life. you have cases of the apes communicating with their handlers (sign language) that goes beyond a physical pain metric or taught reaction. you have the viral videos of monkeys reacting to card tricks, or zoo animals responding to a visibly pregnant woman in a manner that is strikingly human. what was it the Discovery Channel or Planet Earth said? Surprisingly human.

you have yet to set out an objective metric you are subjectively changing what counts depending on how it fits your narrative.
 
#910
#910
therealUT said:
If you are half the world away, you probably lack the power to prevent. But, I'm asking about those with said power. Do they sin in permitting when they have the power to prevent abortion, infanticide, murder?
Click to expand...

Do I sin by not fire bombing the clinics, threatening the doctors, or the women? No I do not sin by not taking part in those actions. Do I sin by not taking part in every Right to Life march? By not signing every petition? By not calling/writing my senator everyday? no.
 
#911
#911
LouderVol said:
ok, objectively describe those two, because I believe we disagree. and I don't think you can. you continue to avoid my countering points. is an illiterate fundamentally incapable of having rights?

you have the cases of monkeys being raised by the steel mockeries of the real thing and those monkeys dying or not developing correctly. there is more than pain, pleasure, and sustenance that goes into life. you have cases of the apes communicating with their handlers (sign language) that goes beyond a physical pain metric or taught reaction. you have the viral videos of monkeys reacting to card tricks, or zoo animals responding to a visibly pregnant woman in a manner that is strikingly human. what was it the Discovery Channel or Planet Earth said? Surprisingly human.

you have yet to set out an objective metric you are subjectively changing what counts depending on how it fits your narrative.
Click to expand...

I haven't changed anything of substance. I think there's a difference between personhood and capacity to consent. You do, as well. So, that's a non-issue, here.
 
#912
#912
LouderVol said:
Do I sin by not fire bombing the clinics, threatening the doctors, or the women? No I do not sin by not taking part in those actions. Do I sin by not taking part in every Right to Life march? By not signing every petition? By not calling/writing my senator everyday? no.
Click to expand...

Yet, you support using physical force to prevent abortion. You might want to consider what the law is, in its essence (hint, it's the threat to kill someone who does not conform).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#915
#915
therealUT said:
Yet, you support using physical force to prevent abortion. You might want to consider what the law is, in its essence (hint, it's the threat to kill someone who does not conform).
Click to expand...

no, I don't punish someone to prevent abortion. I punish someone who has committed abortion. again this is why I brought up the self defeating nature of a physical action in stopping abortion, same as suicide.

I don't believe the laws stop people. I believe morals do. I want my laws to align with my morals, I think everyone does. not saying my morals specifically but the ones an individual might possess. but I accept that my morals don't cover everything, nor should they, so my personal morals will never be the basis of law, we give that over to society. so again the law does nothing. the morals are everything.
 
#916
#916
LouderVol said:
no, I don't punish someone to prevent abortion. I punish someone who has committed abortion. again this is why I brought up the self defeating nature of a physical action in stopping abortion, same as suicide.

I don't believe the laws stop people. I believe morals do. I want my laws to align with my morals, I think everyone does. not saying my morals specifically but the ones an individual might possess. but I accept that my morals don't cover everything, nor should they, so my personal morals will never be the basis of law, we give that over to society. so again the law does nothing. the morals are everything.
Click to expand...

Right, so you want to use physical force to prevent people from providing abortions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#917
#917
So, back to the question. Is it morally wrong to permit people from providing an abortion when you have the power to prevent it?

So, a government that permits people to provide abortions when they could prevent it is doing something morally wrong?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#918
#918
therealUT said:
I haven't changed anything of substance. I think there's a difference between personhood and capacity to consent. You do, as well. So, that's a non-issue, here.
Click to expand...

personhood/consent is not the argument.

again

does an illiterate have rights in your world? at what point in mankinds existence did we gain personhood?
 
#920
#920
LouderVol said:
personhood/consent is not the argument.

again

does an illiterate have rights in your world? at what point in mankinds existence did we gain personhood?
Click to expand...

An illiterate with personhood has rights. And, if they can consent, then they can exercise those rights.
 
#922
#922
therealUT said:
Right, so you want to use physical force to prevent people from providing abortions.
Click to expand...

if by providing abortions you mean continuing to provide it after the law changes, yes. No one is guilty of breaking the law until it has happened. I believe under the laws as it is one would be wrong to imprison someone over abortion. my morals are not their morals, which is again why the laws don't really matter.
 
#923
#923
therealUT said:
An illiterate with personhood has rights. And, if they can consent, then they can exercise those rights.
Click to expand...

how are they going to express abstract thought or pass your triangle exam? Again you continue to avoid objectively defining what abstract thought is (good luck) or what qualifies as sentiment.
 
#924
#924
LouderVol said:
how are they going to express abstract thought or pass your triangle exam? Again you continue to avoid objectively defining what abstract thought is (good luck) or what qualifies as sentiment.
Click to expand...

Illiterate persons can do both.
 
#925
#925
therealUT said:
I'm not harmed by such a thing if I don't exist.
Click to expand...

no, you are currently a person, under your vague and arbitrary system. you have rights, then one day you wake up and they have been taken away but you are in no physical pain from the loss. no harm right?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top