ZOMBIE FORUMS

It's a stinking, shambling corpse grotesquely parodying life.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 3:56 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 10:39 pm 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 7:12 pm
Posts: 731
Location: Central Coast, Colanirfia
...
Dammit, I had bunch (well, two) nifty points, and Herbal got there first. Grats, Herb, you wrote them better than I could've. One thing:

Herbal Enema wrote:
So ... ovulation is immoral, because it has the potential to be human? As does sperm? So even if you're having sex to have a child, you're 'wasting' all that precious pre-human life, because only one spem makes it some of the time? So the only way to make sex moral is to remove it entirely, and only go with artifical insemination, because it wastes less sperm?


Actually, no. What we'd have to do is set up facilities for millking semen, and have every single man on the face of the earth just squat there 24/7, and set up some way of extracting eggs from women, and mix them all up together and mass produce babies that way, because that way we'd have more babies than any other way, and since it's possible to have that many, then of course we are morally obligated to do so, because denying the potential for human life is morally wrong. Of course, there would still probably be theoretical ways of having more babies, so we wouldn't even be doing the morally best thing; we would be attempting to do the best thing. Duh! :lol:

_________________
Quote:
"In real life, you don' have a Subterfuge skill above one." - Phill
"What?! You spent THREE YEARS believing that I didn't masturbate!" - Steven


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 1:33 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2885
Location: San Antonio
Herbal Enema wrote:
Pro-Life: Abortion is wrong!
Pro-Choice: But what about this, and this, and this, and what alternative do you suggest, and why do you say it's wrong?
Pro-Life: It's wrong because it is!
Pro-Choice: But you didn't really answer my question... why is it wrong?
Pro-Life: It's morally wrong!
Pro-Choice: But my morals are different...
Pro-Life: Then you are immoral!

I've noticed that pro-lifers don't really have an argument beyond "it's immoral" and "it's wrong" and "you have to deal with the 'consequences' of your actions!." Isn't having an abortion dealing with the issue? Isn't ignoring it until it's too late to do anything not dealing with the consequences of your actions?


OK, well you know already I'm not exactly pro life, but I can use your socratic argument about things being ok.

Why shouldn't I kill someone who's inconvenient to me if I can get away with it?

Because it's wrong? Who said? MORALLY wrong? My morals are different from yours. I'm dealing with my problems in a direct and proactive way. Wouldn't not killing them be NOT dealing with the problem? I can't afford to have someone causing me trouble at work! I am perfectly comfortable working at my job as it is, but if I get a bad supervisor, he might cost me my job by giving me poor evaluations.

If you are going to just blow off the argument that something's immoral, I can blow off the argument that ANYTHING is immoral.

_________________
We used to play for silver, Now we play for life.
One's for sport and one's for blood
At the point of a knife, Now the die is shaken
Now the die must fall,
There ain't a winner in this game
Who don't go home with all, Not with all...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 4:45 am 
Offline
Local
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 1:49 pm
Posts: 399
Location: Somewhere else
Okay, but what are your reasons for saying aborting a fetus is wrong (you still havn't answered!)?

Here's why I say it's okay.

1) It cannot survive outside of the mother. The same cannot be said for your supervisor (despite the fact that he may be living in his mother's basement).

2) Having a child is a choice. If pregnancy happens even though you're protected, it doesn't mean it has to ruin your entire life. For those who say "just let it out for adoption," do you have ANY idea of the difference in the numbers of abortions (a million and change) compared to the number of adoptions (20k?). Well, I guess you do now.

3) Clay, you've said time and time again that you are against 3rd trimester abortions. Isn't aborting someone who is already born (and speaking!) a bit later than the 3rd trimester? Not really relevent, but an interesting point, none the less.

4) I've actually heard (well ... seen in message boards) pro-lifers saying something akin to "Well, if I get pregnant when I'm not ready, I'll just drink it into submission and beat my stomach until I miscarry, because then I won't have had an abortion, and I won't have to deal with the kid!"

5) My wife said she found some statistics that said that a suprisingly few number of abortions are teens, more are people in the 20s. Also not very relevent to this rebuttal, but interesting to note. Found on the Center for Disease Control's website.

=======

I've said it before, and I'll say it again -- fetii are parasites. Sometimes welcome, sometimes not. Certainly never to be taken lightly.

So I have a choice. 9 month of utter misery for my wife, followed by 2 years of diapers, with at least two more years before you can ship the kid off to school, so you can get some peace and quiet for a few hours. Not to mention complete lack of privacy and intimacy with my wife (Hey babe... crap, the baby.) Booster shots and chicken pox, Doctor and Dentist, braces, strep throat, temper tantrums. All this time we either have to live in horribly crowded conditions (I live in a 1 bedroom apartment with my wife), or I spend more money (on top of the other child-related expenses) on a larger apartment or house to rent (no WAY I could afford a house payment -- for a cheap house in the area on a 30 year loan it's at least 300 more a month that this apartment, since the apartment is all bills paid). And, since I couldn't afford that, I'd have to go on welfare (oh joys!). I'd probably end up stuck in some dead-end job that barely paid the bills because I couldn't afford the time to finish college to get a good job, because I have to work at barely above minimum wage just to pay the bills. This is on top of the fact that I would never get to see my wife again, as she would have to get a job to help cover the bills, and since we couldn't afford day-care, we'd have to arrange schedules where at least one of us was home all the time. And neither of us would be in very good shape to take care of the kid, because full time jobs can be tired.

Or, we could have an abortion, and take on all of that when we are in a better position to do so.

edit: just thought of something, a point I should have made originally: My beef with the 'morality' arguement is that it's the *only* arguement they have. Morality is all and fine, but do you have something else?

_________________
--- This space for let ---


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 10:52 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
Is there ever really another arguement to say something is WRONG besides ETHICS?

If you want to conclude something is wrong, you back it up with facts, but the facts point to it being morally wrong, the facts themselves have no point without a set of morals to judge them with. For example you cannot conclude killing is wrong without some basic morals; I suppose the leanest set you could get out with would be 'what is counterproductive to the survival of the species is wrong.'

Your entire arguement being, "its not morally wrong because I'd like to classify the fetus as something other than human, and it inconviences me; thus, its okay for me to kill it at any time I choose."

Well, lets look at how you define human, then

Physically, the fetus would be human twords the end of the 2nd trimester; as well, saying this qualifies you as human leads to some interesting problems with deformations; unless you'd like to deal with "a deformed person isn't human" issues, or say that somehow the womb is SSSSPPPEEECCCIIAAALLLLL moral territory, then thats a no go.

Genetically, the fetus starts being human at the moment of conception; egg + sperm = full set of DNA, it just begins to do funny things that become a full set of arms, legs, torso, head and organs later on. However, it should be relevant to point out, genetically is also rather smacktarded; then chunks of your skin that fall off or are cut off start having human rights. Dum dum.

Kylaer had an interesting proposition; genetically human + nerve cells (and thus the capability to think) = human. Fair enough, and I'll go with that. (Interstellar relations aside, this I think is the best system we can hope for; all other lines are essensially judgement values, this one is the most concrete one I can think of right now.)

So, how do you define human? If you are struck down and fully dependant on some machinery or other person for life, does your status as human become revoked?

Put it another way. A very theoretical and highly improbable way, but lets do it anyway cuz its fun; you (God forbid) get hit by a car, and are put into a coma. The doctor, through some MMEEEDDDIIICCCIIINNNEEE MMAAAGGIICCC finds out you'll wake up in about a year; afterwards, extensive therapy will be needed for you speak, eat, or even walk again, costing a whole lot of money. There is one definite though; namely that you will wake up within a year if left on life support.

Now, in much the same way a fetus is, you have become a parasite. Instead of a womb of a woman, however, you are on macherny. Much the same way as a baby, you will need to learn everything over again. Unfortunately for you, however, that'd be too much of an inconvience for your respective next of kin; plug is pulled, you die, goodbye charlie.

First off, A) Would your wife really do that to you? and B) Is that theoretical act* moral?

Point being, just saying "if you are completely dependant on someone else, they have the right to kill you" is what we in the scientific community like to call SMACKTARDED. For one, that would become rather fuzzy on life support issues; is the nurse who tends the machine who you're dependant on? Or the mechanic? Or the doctor? Or the person who pays for it? For another, its an invention solely to justify abortion...and, well, inventions solely to justify a single act tend to become convoluted.

So far your arguement buries itself; the fetus is a parasite, not a human. It inconviences you. Thus it should be able to be killed. However in certain situations (3rd trimester especially) it is identical to a human besides the fact that it is dependant on the potential mother. This becomes a problem as in your view it would be okay if a doctor could say- "Your husband will wake up in 1 hour" and then the woman pulls the plug, citing inconvience on her part to pay for physical therapy and the like. Thus that, in a world where abortion is 100% okay under any circumstance, thats not only morally correct but your wife's right, if she feels it inconviences her.

So the problem becomes when is a fetus close enough to human that you shouldn't really abort it? See above for that.

Anyway, my thoughts. Take 'em as you will.

*It should be noted this situation is currently impossible, due to the fact that we don't know if people will come out of comas within a certain time. This theoretical exercise, however, puts a lot of things in perspective (I think.) In reality, however, people would wait a certain amount of time before concluding "well he's not gonna wake up" and pull the plug. Its not scientific at all, but its the best we got for that situation, sadly.

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Last edited by The Man In Black on Sat Nov 01, 2003 1:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 1:20 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 06, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1967
Location: All curled up in a Calabi-Yau space
Akuma Kei wrote:
Wandering Idiot wrote:
100% effective passive birth control would pretty much do away with unwanted pregnancy.

Ah, but there is such a thing. It's called Abstinence. Many people practice it, but most don't. I think it would solve the entire issue. Unfortunately for me, it's a pretty idealistic viewpoint, and it would never happen. There are too many people in the world who don't care about the consequences enough.

I meant an actual workable solution for the real world full of flawed, horny, and/or stupid people, not a magical fairyland where everyone is competent and responsible.

The Man In Black wrote:
Is there ever really another argument to say something is WRONG besides MORALITY?

Replace that with "ethics", and I'd have to agree with you. (My personal definitions are that ethics involve actual harm to others, while morals are societal rules with vague advantages that I have little interest in).

Herbal Enema wrote:
Okay, but what are your reasons for saying aborting a fetus is wrong (you still haven't answered!)?

That should be obvious to anyone with half a brain. In fact, you would have to purposefully blind yourself and give yourself a lobotomy to not see it.

*points to previous post*

Infanticide is illegal. Birth control is not. The question of where to set the midpoint between them does not have a definitive rational answer, sine it is based on somewhat subjective grounds. Hence -> endless debate which will never be answered until it is made all but moot by technological advances in birth control. The thing that annoys me about the debate is when people pretend that their opponent's position has no validity whatsoever, and are simply taking their position for the sake of randomness. Which you seem to be doing.

_________________
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.
- Robert Anton Wilson


Last edited by Wandering Idiot on Sat Nov 01, 2003 4:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 1:26 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
Wandering Idiot wrote:
The Man In Black wrote:
Is there ever really another argument to say something is WRONG besides MORALITY?

Replace that with "ethics", and I'd have to agree with you. (My personal definitions are that ethics involve actual harm to others, while morals are societal rules with vague advantages that I have little interest in).


What I really wrote wrote:
Is there ever really another arguement to say something is WRONG besides ETHICS?


Now now, WI, misquoting isn't for serious debates like this...

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 1:31 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 06, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1967
Location: All curled up in a Calabi-Yau space
You're right, I'm sorry.

...HATE

_________________
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.
- Robert Anton Wilson


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 1:35 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
^__^

MUCH anal HEART

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 5:33 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2428
Location: In the ether, Hand of DM poised for enervation at will
My chauvanist 8th Grade History Teacher wrote:
"You can't legislate morality"


This is the one point I actually agreed with him on. Whether or not people think it's moral or not, they can't do anything about it unless it's their body. You can bitch and complain and rant about how their morals are inferior to yours, but it doesn't mean a damn thing, because once a person is truly set on something, they believe it's right. That goes for both sides.

If a woman wants to get an abortion, then let her get an abortion. You can't say a damned thing about it unless she's your wife, family member or daughter. If you aren't one of those things, it's none of your business, and you have no right forcing your opinion on her or anyone else. Leave her alone and go on your merry way.

As for a right answer, I don't believe their truly is a right answer, only opinion, in this matter. There won't be a definate "right" answer until there's a way to discern when a fetus "gains a soul", and even then, that's a whole 'nother debate based on religion, which not all people have.

I, personally agree with Herbal Enema when he says that giving a fetus, a group of cells, which, at the point where it can be aborted, have very little to no human features, full human rights takes away those of the mother. At that point, since the fetus has no brain to think, no nerves to feel, and is basically a group of cells attached to the womb, the decision on what is to happen to the fetus is up to the mother.

But I'm biased, and that's my opinion, neither right nor wrong.

Again, there isn't any right answer to this debate at this time. There won't ever be until we find a happy medium between religion, science and law.

_________________
The scent of Binturong musk is often compared to that of warm popcorn.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 5:56 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 06, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1967
Location: All curled up in a Calabi-Yau space
Ryven wrote:
My chauvanist 8th Grade History Teacher wrote:
"You can't legislate morality"

This is the one point I actually agreed with him on.

Quite right, despite numerous attempts to do just that (see: drug laws). You can, however, legislate ethical matters. They are about the most legitimate form of laws, in fact. Hence murder, maiming, and child abuse are illegal, because they all involve actual harm to others.

To deny that abortion is an ethical question, at least to the pro-lifers, equating it with a simple moral matter like sex before marriage, is an abject stupidity, and I will personally whack with a poison-spike-studded Titanium Clue Stik™ the next person who says anything along those lines.

Quote:
As for a right answer, I don't believe their truly is a right answer, only opinion, in this matter.

Bingo. Subjective criteria = no definitive answer. Most subjective matters we can deal with without too much hand-wringing (whether coconut is a tasty treat or a collection of unchewable shredded wood chips, for instance), but unfortunately this one involves human lives. Which is why I hope we get nano, biological, or other means of cheap, foolproof (nearly- can't forget about the odd cosmic ray and so forth) passive pregnancy prevention, which will avoid for the most part both the questionable ethics of late-term abortions and the spectre of greater government involvement in reproductive matters.

_________________
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.
- Robert Anton Wilson


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 5:58 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 6:38 pm
Posts: 3148
Location: Gay bar at the end of the universe
I support abortions up through the thirteenth year of infancy/childhood. In fact, I encourage them. Ninety percent of human beings are going to turn out to be dumb, rude, violent, heartless, or manipulative. One hundred percent of humans are going to be greedy, covetous bastards.

EDIT: WI should have been forcefully aborted with a rusty coat hanger...


At the age of 12.


Last edited by revolutio on Sat Nov 01, 2003 6:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: I mean, they're not even that near each other on the keyboard...
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 6:11 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 06, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1967
Location: All curled up in a Calabi-Yau space
revolutio wrote:
One hundred percent of humans are going to be creedy, covetous bastards.

Yes! Death to the creedy! [/pedant]

_________________
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.
- Robert Anton Wilson


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 6:55 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 2571
I hope I haven't skipped over anything. I've been reading through the debate so far (Herbal Enema, I think I love you <3)

Here are some interesting links of teen abortions/misscarriages/birth rates:
- http://home.earthlink.net/~mmales/yt-sex.htm
- http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/010201/sex-book.shtml
- http://www.agirllikeu.com/mind_pregnancy.asp

That's our happy little world. Fuck knows I'm fully Pro-Choice. I don't like the process of pregnancy, I don't like children, I don't like what children become. But that's my personal opinion. Everybody is free to operate however they wish. A few of my reasons are along something like this (there are countless others):

Quote:
- To not live at all is neutral. They enjoy none of the joys of life, however they are spared from the torments that come with it as well. If you know a child's life will net unhappiness and pain then it is perfectly reasonable to spare the child that.

- Faced with the option of drastically reducing my income, educational possibilities, employment options, etc. and putting a bullet in the brain of some poor fucker I don't even know all that well, with full legal protection of my action, I might be tempted to go for the bullet option.

- I've said it before, and I'll say it again -- fetii are parasites. Sometimes welcome, sometimes not. Certainly never to be taken lightly.

- "Well, if I get pregnant when I'm not ready, I'll just drink it into submission and beat my stomach until I miscarry, because then I won't have had an abortion, and I won't have to deal with the kid!"

As far as that last one is concerned, I'm likely to do much more hazardous and toxious things than just drink and beat myself. If you people know me at all... but that's not the issue. Miscarriage does far more emotional scarring and hurts the body far more than a simple abortion. And if you're pro-life and beat the child out of you, then you've murdered your child in a much worse way and you lose the point of not having an abortion. Something to think about.

As far as I can see this, the whole issue is debating ethics and morality. A banning of abortion is done purely because part of the population views this as murder. But since when is it their duty to shove their own personal morals down other people's throats? You're going to become as bad as the Communist world leaders (no disrespect, but their utopian paradise was full of violence and rebellion).

Quote:
You can bitch and complain and rant about how their morals are inferior to yours, but it doesn't mean a damn thing, because once a person is truly set on something, they believe it's right.

This applies more to more than abortion. Really insightful, in my opinion. Wars are started because of this... daily dilemas even. And it's a true aspect of human nature... look at a few of those who preach Christianity (again, no disrespect, but some people preach out of context, like the KKK).

Pro-choice means simply that. choice You don't have to kill your accidents if you don't want to. But it should be an option free to everyone. We all have different personal morals one way or another, we need to find a way to co-exist with them. And so pro-life peolpe can live in their happy self-ritcheous dignity, thinking themselves above the pro-choice people who found happiness through different means.

Now, quotes I just wanted to say something on:
Quote:
To save it from a bad life that it wouldn't want. Well, a bad life is better than no life at all. Even in a bad life a child has the ability to learn, to grow, to gain experience and possibly rise above what most would call a "bad life."

Wow. You're extremely unsympathetic and close-minded. No offense, but wh00sh! Haha. Sometimes the curse of living is bestowed on the angsty, but also on those who can't help it. Depression being a physical disease. Life can be a blessing sure, but it's not up to you to make the decision on behave of all who have lived, all who do live, and all who will ever live. (btw, it's more likey the kid is going to be cursed, you'd be surprised how that fucks with a child, I have many friends in that situation I've seen it wreak havoc upon.......) *stabs the quote*

Quote:
Why shouldn't I kill someone who's inconvenient to me if I can get away with it?

You know... people do reason it that way. People do do things like that. Why do you think murder rates are so high...? Fuck, the only thing stopping me and a bunch of other people is the fact that it takes so much effort to commit the perfect crime. ~_~ Why shouldn't you kill someone? Because you're very likely not going to get away with it.

But let's get off morality. Because it's "immoral" to murder. Whatever. As well as having different morals, people also have different opinions. Opinions on who should live and who shouldn't. The law is there to protect countless murders just because a person said something rude, or because a person bumped into another. People are extremely stupid and do take advantage of most everything they can get away with. Making murder illegal is just convenient, so everyone doesn't live in the drastic fear of the middle ages. And people try to get away with it anyways, this just prevents some. Besides, what if someone murdered the president? Are they justified because they think he's annoying (hypothetically, don't apply this to Bush)? The president is important for reasons... and for that someone to get away with it is troublesome. People would live in anarchy... society would crumble... yada yada yada. I think I killed this subject. I'll leave now, it's dinner time.

Thanks for letting me get my 2 cents in.[/quote]

_________________
-DNI ~ by Ezelek
I have earned the title of Pedant.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 8:03 pm 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 999
Location: Midworld
Kali_Ava wrote:
I don't like the process of pregnancy, I don't like children, I don't like what children become.


I know a lot of girls, highschool aged (no offense to you, Kali, if you're older, those are the ones I've actually talked to), who are of the same mind. They just don't wanna have kids. I have to ask, though, why? Note, I'm not talking about girls who are pregnant and get abortions. I'm fine with that. A teenager has no business having a child. They're not ready for it. I'm talking about girls who, at the age of 16 or so, have decided that they won't be parents at any time during their life. It seems counter-intuitive. Procreation is what we're here for, barring all that philosphical crap, and choosing to not have children seems wrong.

I know for a lot of them, it's a sort of rebellious, women's lib (nothing wrong with that), I'm-not-gonna-become-the-stereotypical-live-at-home-wife statement that I know they'll probably renounce after five or ten years when they finally realize what they're saying, but for others, it's a genuine dislike of children, and their behavior, that turns them to this course of action. Why? Don't they realize that often times the child's behavior is more indicative of its parents than of the child itself, and that in order to have a child who behaves well, you just have to raise him correctly?

_________________
Go then. There are other worlds than these.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 8:05 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2788
Location: Neo-Connecticut
Probably because they realize there are already too many people in the world, and that there's no point in wasting their time and resources to add even MORE?

*shrug*


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 8:22 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 14, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3447
Location: New York
Jasper wrote:
Procreation is what we're here for, barring all that philosphical crap, and choosing to not have children seems wrong.


Must... resist... urge... to... digress... into... totally unrelated... philosophical... issues...

Why... am... I... talking... like... Shatner?

Seriously though, if there's one thing I hate, it's when people attribute teleological significance to purposeless natural processes. I'm not alone in this either; Stephen Jay Gould, for example, wrote quite a bit on the error of portraying evolution this way. I suggest you read some of his stuff.

My point is, saying that the scientific fact of natural selection implies that we should further our genetic lineage makes about as much sense as saying that, because gravity has a tendency to pull things toward the center of the Earth, we should spend our entire lives digging a hole in order to get as close to the planet's core as we can.

Anyway, sorry for the digression, but you hit upon one of my scientific/philosophical pet peeves.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 8:28 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 2571
Jasper wrote:
I'm talking about girls who, at the age of 16 or so, have decided that they won't be parents at any time during their life.


Hehe... I just meant now, as a teenager. I expect one way or another children are going to happen, whether I want them or not. I expect to be a parent someday... but that's far *far* in the future. So I really can't answer on behalf of those women...

But I pity my kids. I'll raise them, but not traditionally. Hehe, they're going to fucked up beyond belief. I mean, fuck knows I'm not bringing them into religion until they're at least 5 years if not 10. (I also pity whoever marries me, I'm a controlling know-it-all bitch who just has to get her way in these matters).

But that's besides the point. Have fun debating

Edit: I am, by the way, 15 years old. Very high school aged.

_________________
-DNI ~ by Ezelek
I have earned the title of Pedant.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 8:38 pm 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 999
Location: Midworld
Eronarn wrote:
Probably because they realize there are already too many people in the world, and that there's no point in wasting their time and resources to add even MORE?

*shrug*


That's not the feeling I got from their attitude when they said it, but it might very well be the reason.

IcyMonkey wrote:
Jasper wrote:
Procreation is what we're here for, barring all that philosphical crap, and choosing to not have children seems wrong.

My point is, saying that the scientific fact of natural selection implies that we should further our genetic lineage makes about as much sense as saying that, because gravity has a tendency to pull things toward the center of the Earth, we should spend our entire lives digging a hole in order to get as close to the planet's core as we can.


Hmm... Don't see how that analogy works, as one brings more potential, and one brings less. That wasn't, however, why I said that. More along the lines that, without children, humanity doesn't exist. Frankly, I couldn't care less what my kids' genes are like (though if half of their genes come from my wife, the other half damn well better come from me, or there's gonna be some splainin' to do).

IcyMonkey wrote:
Must... resist... urge... to... digress... into... totally unrelated... philosophical... issues...

Why... am... I... talking... like... Shatner?


Because of all the pent-up frustration at not being able to post for a few days?

_________________
Go then. There are other worlds than these.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 8:43 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2428
Location: In the ether, Hand of DM poised for enervation at will
There are a lot of reasons a younger women decides not to have children. One of the reasons being they're not mentally, emotionally nor physically mature enough to fathom the responsibility of being responsible for another life. The responsibility of being a parent is very overshadowing. It was for me.

Now that I'm older, I still don't want to have children. I have other things to do with my life than kick in the baby factory and add to overpopulation. "Counter-intuitive" as it is, we've evolved and are able to have sentinece because we can think past our baser instincts.

ANYWAY......bringing us back to the original topic of discussion... *kicks the thread Back On Topic!*

_________________
The scent of Binturong musk is often compared to that of warm popcorn.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 02, 2003 3:02 am 
Offline
Expatriate
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 11:08 pm
Posts: 139
Location: Beyond the Singing Stars
Kali_Ava wrote:
Pro-choice means simply that. choice


Hmmmm.... Seems to me that if the problem is there, you've already made your choice. Children are a natural consequence of sex. You make the decision to have sex, you've given yourself up to the possibility to have children. You don't want children? Make the choice not to have sex.

Kali_Ava wrote:
I don't like children, I don't like what children become.
Really? An interesting psychological profile. Since you yourself (agewise, depending on cultural beliefs on "coming of age." I mean no insult) are a child. But besides that, what about the child who grew up to be Plato? Or how about the one who grew up to be Stephen Hawking? All children have the potential to become one of the greatest people in our world. Does that mean they will? Heck no.

Kali_Ava wrote:

I wrote:
To save it from a bad life that it wouldn't want. Well, a bad life is better than no life at all. Even in a bad life a child has the ability to learn, to grow, to gain experience and possibly rise above what most would call a "bad life."


Wow. You're extremely unsympathetic and close-minded. No offense, but wh00sh! Haha. Sometimes the curse of living is bestowed on the angsty, but also on those who can't help it. Depression being a physical disease. Life can be a blessing sure, but it's not up to you to make the decision on behave of all who have lived, all who do live, and all who will ever live. (btw, it's more likey the kid is going to be cursed, you'd be surprised how that fucks with a child, I have many friends in that situation I've seen it wreak havoc upon.......) *stabs the quote*


First off, where exactly did I say I was trying to make a decision for anyone else? My entire point is that I think it's a bad idea for people to take the choice away from others. Now, that said, who are you to make that choice either? By taking the life away, are you not choosing to deny it the opportunity to have experiences that you have had? What gives you the right to be so hypocritical as to decide for someone else that they should not even be given the chance?

Now, I forget, who was it who said, "'Tis better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all?" Could this not also be applied to life? 'Tis better to have suffered the joys and pains of life than never to have lived at all?

Herbal Enema wrote:
To put your words into a slightly different light... "Well, the tapeworm may physically be in your body, but it is not you!" I understand a tapeworm is not human, but, a fetus is a parasite. A baby can live without the mother. A fetus cannot.


This example isn't exactly the same. For one thing, you didn't put the tapeworm in yourself (unless you did, at which point I wonder about you).

_________________
A float, a drift, a flight, a wing
A hawk, a quail, the promise of spring
And the river bank talks of the waters of March
It's the end of the strain, It's the joy in your heart
~Susannah McCorkle - The Waters of March


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group