hhhmmmmmm......your right. But then in conclusion, the general population is not very smart, because you can also manipulate the the pplz who arent bookworms, but are even dumber. They may have common sense, but no intelligence.
Edit: WTF? double post, how did that happen? Oh well, srry pplz.
Nah, part of the reason that as a whole people are more easily manipulated nowadays is that information travels faster through the media we use, like television and the internet. The media is important because it is the primary vehicle used to carry messages used to inform/misinform, and manipulate. I think. There was a time when people had to had to send messengers on horsebacks to deliver letters and pamphlets. Another reason that people are more easily swayed and gullible nowadays is that, at least in this country, we are able to live comfortable lives without knowing very much of the wide range of issues on which those who govern us base their decisions. Consequently, people choose to remain willfully ignorant of those issues and just go about their lives, trying to put food on their tables, amassing a fortune, or whatever. If you were to consider the US as a whole, I think that, at best, people are adequately informed only on those issues which they care about the most, which for most people is a very narrow spectrum of issues. So when it comes time for them to make a decision on most things, they cannot make informed decisions on most issues without hours of research. Think they'll do the research? Furthurmore, this ignorance of the issues allows whoever is knowledgeable to create seemingly credible "half-truths" and all out lies that most people would be hardpressed to identify as such. I think that about covers it, in a nutshell.Originally posted by: darkmetal505
common sense and intelligence are two different thingsOriginally posted by: God#2
Originally posted by: Zinobi
So I have this friend and she HATES the thought of abortion, BUT She would have the baby then LEAVE it to DIE if it would save her life.........or get her what she wants............she scares me most of the time.........
KILL HER
@compliche8: if people are even easier to manipulate now adays, how can they be smarter? I smell a contradiction.
Oh, and thanks for the book recommendation.
Edit: By the way, its already been mentioned, but I think this topic, not being part of the abortion discussion, but worthy of conversation nonetheless, should get its own topic. If possible, could a mod maybe start a new thread for it and move the relevant posts to the new thread? Some posts contain large amounts of discussion on both abortion and racism and goverment. Those posts should remain in this thread, but also be present in the new one. It should take about 10 minutes of efforts, but I think its worth it. These posts have been unsually insightful and the topic is important. That way, if I want to continue a discussion on racism in the future, I don't have counterintuitively search for the keyword "abortion" to find the proper thread to do so.
It's a good thought. Unfortunately, mods don't have the ability to move individual posts. The best you could do is start a new topic and copy and paste the posts you wanted transferred.
GotWoot Moderator
Edit: *Nods* I'll definately do it when I'm not so tired and don't have such a hectic day ahead of me, so...later tonight in all likelihood I'll have it done.
"You are not free whose liberty is won by the rigour of other, more righteous souls. Your are merely protected. Your freedom is parasitic, you suck the honourable man dry and offer nothing in return. You who have enjoyed freedom, who have done nothing to earn it, your time has come. This time you will stand alone and fight for yourselves. Now you will pay for your freedom in the currency of honest toil and human blood."
- Inquisitor Czevak
i offer no responsibilities or changes for the ruckus that has become this forum.
on topic:
Alito's confirmation is drawing ever closer in the Senate
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,182725,00.html
http://www.signonsandiego.com/...060125-0935-alito.html
http://www.lifenews.com/nat2032.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...5/AR2006012501165.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4648014.stm
Humans are different from animals. We must die for a reason. Now is the time for us to regulate ourselves and reclaim our dignity. The one who holds endless potential and displays his strength and kindness to the world. Only mankind has God, a power that allows us to go above and beyond what we are now, a God that we call "possibility".
I'm mostly only against abortions for two reasons. The first being that they would not be necessary if people would learn to use contraceptives better, for example if guys always used condoms and girls always use the patch or some other method of contraception. The second reason is that most abortion techniques are fucked up, causing physical harm to the woman and literally tearing an unborn baby apart is just fucked up. If we had a safer way to abort babies I wouldn't have quite as much of a problem with it. If these views make me pro-life or pro-choice, then so be it. This is just my take on the subject.
Edit: I chose Pro-life when the mother's life is in danger... because I guess thats the closest to my viewpoint
And I meant to choose that human life begins at the moment of fertilization, because at that point the fertilized egg has it's own set of DNA that is undeniably human... unfortunately I had a wierd day today and my vision is blurred so I accidentally clicked when the child is born... my bad
it's not like people will use aborts as a means of contraception. it's literally a pain in the ass to do and also expensive.
people have their reasons, but it's not like they'll fuck around freely even if they can rely on getting an abortion.
a set of DNA is a human being? hmm.
my own opinion that i'm unable to back up with scientific facts if that a human lifes begin when they start doing things other than those they are programmed to do in order to survive their period of sub-consciousness.
you can always make new babies that cry, sleep and suck on boobs but grown-ups are unique.
i'm new to this thread. But let me just say that people should know what they're going into. However the government, nor the slightest hand short of god can tell a woman what to do with her body, and that much i know for sure.
tahts an intresting statement. However i think its the other way around. Think about the life of an adult compared to the life of a baby. the traits u mentioned are all biological necessities and all adults need to sleep, eat, relieve themselves, etc. But consider ther rest of an adults life: wake up, go to work, come home. admittedly there are more things in the middle, but thats the basic outline of an adult life.Originally posted by: Aramis
you can always make new babies that cry, sleep and suck on boobs but grown-ups are unique.
A childs life is quite different. They have 24 hours of that free time in which us adults define ourselves. between wakign up and going to sleep, there is absolutely no order in a childs life.
I hate everyone.
somehow i doubt you're one of Gotwoot's favorites either.... and, don't muck up this thread with your useless one-line bitching. Hell, we have an entire thread made just for that purpose.Originally posted by: God#2
I hate everyone.
on topic:
Appeals court upholds finding that Partial-birth Abortion Ban is Unconstitutional
other coverage on same story:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/s...nlawsuits.html
http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/...ap2489659.html
ABC says that two appeals courts say that the ban is unconstitutional
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1562196
Humans are different from animals. We must die for a reason. Now is the time for us to regulate ourselves and reclaim our dignity. The one who holds endless potential and displays his strength and kindness to the world. Only mankind has God, a power that allows us to go above and beyond what we are now, a God that we call "possibility".
Well, I wasn't really serious, sooooooooooo............I should have added a smiley![img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]
Anyway, I guess its going to be illegal for a while. I actually value a child's life more. Children often seem more innocent (except for those few annoying bitches who you just want to #@(#*#$&[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img](#@*(&%Y*)@!). Adults on the other hand can be very scawy.[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-sad.gif[/img]
Unconstitutional or not, if they start killing half born babies again, people are going to start bombing abortion clinics again, and I'm not sure i'm going to help stop them this time....
Edit: *sigh* of course Ill stop them, its my job. The thought that people are irresponsible enough to need abortions at the rate we have them in this country is sad enough. They should start making sterilization mandatory with the 2nd needless (As in not product of rape,incest, or danger to mothers life). That way we can solve this abortion problem right now.
Because god forbid we take away americas right to murder children. I mean come on, for 3000 years this would have been considered barbaric to people who eat raw flesh, yet now we feel all nice about it because we have enough arrogance to justify our right to decide who lives or dies. There needs to be some kind of mandatory birth control pill given to all men and women and the antidote will only be given to them when they have the financial and mental means to take care of kids. I am so tired of supporting half the ghetto with my tax dollars while they pop out 15 children to get more welfare checks, while I pay to feed the children to. That isnt fair to me, I could be a lazy ass and collect welfare too, but I dont.. everyone has a choice. (Except the poor mentally and physically disabled, and I feel for them and wish the money going to the drug dealers and crack whores would go to those who actually deserve it). I am so tired of having to buy ground beef while the guy with the foodstamp card buys big cuts of meat and drives an escalade, while my taxes feed his worthless drug dealing ass.
Throwing in a smoldering coal here. You guys can argue against it if you wish. These are statements based on what the Catholic Catechism teaches.
3 Basic Arguments Against Abortion:
1. The fundamental purpose of law is to protect human rights; the first and foundational right is the right to life.
2. All human beings have the right to life.
3. Already-conceived but not-yet-born children of human beings are human beings.
So basically, any pro-choice person would disagree with one or more of the premises above in some way. Consequently, if you agree with all three premises above, you are most likely pro-life.
Extending this idea-- then there are basically 3 types of pro-choicer's. Some of you might be hating on these "generalizations" already but from what I've been reading in this thread, most of the pro-choicers here really do fall in one or more of these categories.
1. Some people will admit that all persons have a right to life and that unborn kids are persons BUT deny that this right should be protected by law. The Catholic Church argues that this is a serious legal error and it undermines the idea of equality by denying certain individuals the right to life. This right should be guaranteed to everyone, including the unborn.
2. Other people might admit the law should protect the right to life and that unborn kids are humans BUT claim that not all human beings deserve the right to life. Personally, this is a tad appalling to me because now you have "people like us" determining who should live and who should die. Should we be really killing off those whom society today deems "useless"? Once we start accepting this idea, I feel like we begin to lose our humanity. And by "humanity" I mean our conscience, our compassion, etc.
3. And finally, there are people who might admit that the law should protect the right to life and that all humans have this right BUT deny that unborn children are human beings. Did you know that before Roe v. Wade all science textbooks taught the biological concept that life of any individual of any species begins at conception when sperm and ovum unite to create a new being with its own complete and unique DNA code? So all growth and development thereafter was just an unfolding of what was already "there". This concept stopped being taught not b/c of any new science proving otherwise but b/c of politics. How's that for general public manipulation?
Besides the fact that I am pro-life, I felt like there were very few pro-life arguments for it here in the thread and just offered some (hopefully) solid views for once. I think I did a pretty good job avoiding most of the theological grounds (granted, these arguments are what the Catholic Church adheres to) but other than that, pick it apart and/or respond if you wish. I'll try to respond when I can. School and anime have been taking up most of my time lately [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]
And thats the way it should be!Originally posted by: Honoko
School and anime have been taking up most of my time lately [img][/img]
I think of a person as someone who actually has an intellect. I don't think embrios and unborn children really have minds of their own really, that can think like a born child can. But who am I to say, you never know.
well to them, its about saving the baby, not about the woman.Originally posted by: dantheman62
i'm new to this thread. But let me just say that people should know what they're going into. However the government, nor the slightest hand short of god can tell a woman what to do with her body, and that much i know for sure.
It's always bothered me that you have to go through testing and demonstrate competence to obtain a drivers license, but all you have to do is have unprotected sex to bring another human being into the world. It's frightening. Raising a child is a huge responsibility, and conceiving a child should be something that is given serious consideration. I think part of this can be attributed to the attitude of our society. It's the attitude that says, "I should be able to do whatever I want" which leads people to conveniently forget about the consequences of their actions, and people use it as an excuse for irresponsibility and ignorance.Originally posted by: ImitationSanen
Edit: *sigh* of course Ill stop them, its my job. The thought that people are irresponsible enough to need abortions at the rate we have them in this country is sad enough. They should start making sterilization mandatory with the 2nd needless (As in not product of rape,incest, or danger to mothers life). That way we can solve this abortion problem right now.
Oh my God I'd agree completely with all of that if not for one thing. Who then decides who's "right" it is to have children? I'd be in favor of a system such as that if it were not so selective. Perhaps secretly administering these sterility pills to low-income families who already have about 2 or 3 children, or to anyone who is not a legal adult (that'd stop a lot of dumbass teens).Originally posted by: ImitationSanen
There needs to be some kind of mandatory birth control pill given to all men and women and the antidote will only be given to them when they have the financial and mental means to take care of kids. I am so tired of supporting half the ghetto with my tax dollars while they pop out 15 children to get more welfare checks, while I pay to feed the children to. That isnt fair to me, I could be a lazy ass and collect welfare too, but I dont.. everyone has a choice. (Except the poor mentally and physically disabled, and I feel for them and wish the money going to the drug dealers and crack whores would go to those who actually deserve it). I am so tired of having to buy ground beef while the guy with the foodstamp card buys big cuts of meat and drives an escalade, while my taxes feed his worthless drug dealing ass.
Of course I'm not totally serious about that, but I am in favor of some way of stopping all these unwanted births without actually killing the fetus. I'm ideally pro-life, but I realize that some situations might call for it to not be illegal to have an abortion.
<@Terra> he told me this, "man actually meeting terra is so fucking big", and he started crying. Then he bought me hot dogs
This is sounding like Brave New World. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-tongue.gif[/img]
I completly agree with you. Raising a child is the biggest responsibility in the world. If you brought the person into this world, you should whatever necessary to make sure that child ends up with a happy life instead of a poor(I literally mean "poor"), miserable life. If you cant afford to have a child, then just have protected sex. Dont risk the chance of becoming pregnant.Originally posted by: KitKat
It's always bothered me that you have to go through testing and demonstrate competence to obtain a drivers license, but all you have to do is have unprotected sex to bring another human being into the world. It's frightening. Raising a child is a huge responsibility, and conceiving a child should be something that is given serious consideration. I think part of this can be attributed to the attitude of our society. It's the attitude that says, "I should be able to do whatever I want" which leads people to conveniently forget about the consequences of their actions, and people use it as an excuse for irresponsibility and ignorance.Originally posted by: ImitationSanen
Edit: *sigh* of course Ill stop them, its my job. The thought that people are irresponsible enough to need abortions at the rate we have them in this country is sad enough. They should start making sterilization mandatory with the 2nd needless (As in not product of rape,incest, or danger to mothers life). That way we can solve this abortion problem right now.
Man... You know that each cell that you have (with a few exceptions) have a full set of DNA. are they all human? is cutting your finger murder then?Originally posted by: The1LittleMchale
because at that point the fertilized egg has it's own set of DNA that is undeniably human... unfortunately I had a wierd day today and my vision is blurred so I accidentally clicked when the child is born... my bad
Also, people with Down syndrome have MORE than a full set of chromosomes. and there are people with less than a full set (missing one or two). are they not human?
personally, i don't think it is necessary to define human to think about abortion. why? because its so blurred, its ridiculous. a spermatozoid and egg combo can potentially give rise to a human (actually, they might be able to do so each on their own...). a blastocyst has several cells and if cared for, will give rise to a human. so, getting rid of any of those, you are getting rid of a potential human.
Saying this, I am Pro-choice since I believe that the women must be able to choose whether or not they want the child since they will have to care for it. this is important, as an uncared child has more chances of being a boulder for society.
therefore, my bottom line is, humans exist as a society, and to not have this society father people in misery, abortion is necessary. for now.
technically, this is one argument consisting of three premises and a conclusion. But that's just hair-splitting, and there's better things to object to, and I'm in a "devil's advocate" mood again today. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]Originally posted by: Honoko
Throwing in a smoldering coal here. You guys can argue against it if you wish. These are statements based on what the Catholic Catechism teaches.
3 Basic Arguments Against Abortion:
I disagree. The fundamental purpose of law is to protect human social structures. Human rights are an afterthought. There are not many laws that permit things, but a LOT of laws that restrict them.1. The fundamental purpose of law is to protect human rights; the first and foundational right is the right to life.
Think about it ... there are about 30 laws involved in the concept of driving that restrict what you can do. You can't drive at all until you have a license. Even with a license (that is, explicit permission from the state to do something you otherwise couldn't do) , you can't drive in an impaired state, you can't drive faster than the posted speed limit, you can't disrupt traffic flow (ie: driving below posted minimum speeds on the highway), you can't drive without insurance, you can't drive at night with nonfunctioning lights, you can't pass other cars under certain conditions ... it goes on and on. None of these things defines something you explicitly CAN do. This defines a set of allowed behaviors by taking a default-open set and masking off the parts of it that are forbidden.
Speed limit laws are the best example of my point though. Just because a street is "rated" for 30, or 35, or 55, doesn't mean that street's not perfectly safe for everyone involved at 55, or 60, or 80. Why preserve these artificial and often meaningless restrictions?
Moreover, human laws have ALWAYS restricted freedoms. Even biblical laws, dating back as far as Eden, are formulated this way. "Do not eat the fruit of that tree". You can do anything else, but there's this one freedom which you don't have. Similarly, the Ten Commandments are all "Do Not" (or "Thou shalt not" or whatever, depending on your translation -- even the fifth, the only affirmative commandment, is easy to restate as a prohibition to dishonor rather than a prescription to honor). Were I a Jew in 2000 BC, I wouldn't have the "right" to worship idols (another word for picking a different religion), because such a thing is denied to me by the law. As an agnostic in 2006 AD, I don't have the "right" to drive an appropriate speed on the interstate at 3 in the morning, because such a thing is denied to me.
Affirmative laws are very few and far between, and are usually the result of overturning restrictions deemed unjust by modern society. Such, in fact, is the legal precedent determined by Roe vs. Wade -- overturning a law that society's advocates found to be unjust. The bill of rights is another such example -- the people violently rising up against one oppressor's perceived injustices felt it necessary to affirm a basic set of rights as fundamental -- something the Magna Carta was also supposed to do, to some extent. However, these tentpoles of affirmation only guarantee a bare minimum set of liberties, which nearly every other law serves to restrict.
Legally, this isn't the case. Many, many people support the death penalty. If the right to life is fundamental, how can the state selectively deny it based on an arbitrary set of conditions? How can even imprisonment (which is fundamentally a denial of the right to life for a set period of time) be justified without discarding this?2. All human beings have the right to life.
If I take some human DNA, and use it to clone an ear, it's pretty obvious that the ear isn't a human being, it's an ear. If I take some DNA from two sources and artificially combine it in such a way as to accomplish this (for instance, inserting a gene from one person into cells from another, and growing a culture from the result), this is also not a human being.3. Already-conceived but not-yet-born children of human beings are human beings.
A human being (qua "person") is more than a couple dozen strands of tightly coiled DNA. And as far as I know, catholics still support dualism (that is, the idea that human beings are made up of both a body and a soul, and that the soul is an entity independent of the body, via Descartes and others). The test is, when does a soul get "created" or just "bound" to a set of DNA? There's a whole large set of implications to consider, that depend on when you believe that that clump of DNA gets a soul.
Again, if you accept the universal right to life, then any criminal corrections systems are inherently unjust. This premise HAS to be discarded (or at least severely damaged) to rationalize the mere existence of such formal norm enforcement mechanisms.1. Some people will admit that all persons have a right to life and that unborn kids are persons BUT deny that this right should be protected by law. The Catholic Church argues that this is a serious legal error and it undermines the idea of equality by denying certain individuals the right to life. This right should be guaranteed to everyone, including the unborn.
Harping more on the correctional system, I'd be interested to know what you think about that subject. Again, criminal justice is inherently inhumane, unconscionable, and utterly devoid of compassion. It has to be, to do the things it does.2. Other people might admit the law should protect the right to life and that unborn kids are humans BUT claim that not all human beings deserve the right to life. Personally, this is a tad appalling to me because now you have "people like us" determining who should live and who should die. Should we be really killing off those whom society today deems "useless"? Once we start accepting this idea, I feel like we begin to lose our humanity. And by "humanity" I mean our conscience, our compassion, etc.
It seems that a lot of pro-life people also support capital punishment. There's a certain element of hypocrisy to that... make SURE they come INTO the world, so that we can choose when to take them back out of it.
This depends entirely on your definition of "human being". For example, there was a person born a few years ago with a cyst that had developed on the end of her brain stem, which prevented the development of any brain function beyond an autonomic nerve system. I don't know that I would consider such a person human, as they are incapable of what I consider to be the fundamental essences of humanity (thought, emotion, and will). While doubtless they belonged to the species human, such a person fundamentally lacks humanity. I don't think that I could defend such a creature's fundamental right to life. Further, if such a person attains a soul at conception, the duration of their existence isn't going to affect, nor be affected by the presence of such a soul. Why, then, should such a person continue to exist?3. And finally, there are people who might admit that the law should protect the right to life and that all humans have this right BUT deny that unborn children are human beings. Did you know that before Roe v. Wade all science textbooks taught the biological concept that life of any individual of any species begins at conception when sperm and ovum unite to create a new being with its own complete and unique DNA code? So all growth and development thereafter was just an unfolding of what was already "there". This concept stopped being taught not b/c of any new science proving otherwise but b/c of politics. How's that for general public manipulation?
So, I can find objections to all three premises, and various combinations of them [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]. I look forward to your responses.Besides the fact that I am pro-life, I felt like there were very few pro-life arguments for it here in the thread and just offered some (hopefully) solid views for once. I think I did a pretty good job avoiding most of the theological grounds (granted, these arguments are what the Catholic Church adheres to) but other than that, pick it apart and/or respond if you wish. I'll try to respond when I can. School and anime have been taking up most of my time lately
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
