|
|
| Post Number: 41
|
|
|
| Post Number: 42
|
DuSTman 
70% water in a flexible container.
Group: Members
Posts: 797
Joined: May 2000
|
 |
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,17:43 |
|
    |
I have said before that I really hate it when people start talking "what gives people the right" questions. If anything the question should be "What takes away the right" seeing as in the base physical world we are entirely free to do anything, and therefore have the right to do anything.The main focus of this conversation seems to be it's "right" to kill the feotus, and if you consider it alive. I would like to, instead, focus on the lack of things that would make it "wrong" - not that I believe in moral absolutes. There are many things that state that it is wrong to kill. The bible, the law of most countries and it is a basic facet of what I like to think of as our instinctive morality (I think that though much of our moral code is tought to us unconsciously, we have some basic instinct for teamwork), but I would note that to kill means to "take the life of.." and we should note that is, indeed, difficult to define what we mean by "life" exactly, and I think we all have different ideas on what it means, and this is what leads to this muddle over whether feotuses count. The other main issue is the "rights" of the mother versus those of the growth. once again, I say that in a base, limited-only-by-physics world we have the right to do anything, therefore the growth has a right to live, but the mother also has the right to kill it if that is her decision. The right of one cannot be resolved without impinging upon the right of the other. This is why I hate discussions arout "rights". I don't think there's anything absolute enough at all to talk about in the way that people do when they talk about rights. The decision from the mothers point of view is this:
a: Abort the baby, feel bad about the whole thing for a long time.
b: Have the baby, keep it and have to change any dreams she may have had to be something more than just a mother.
c: Have the baby, have it adopted, and feel bad about it forever, knowing that the baby thinks it was unwanted. None of the options could exactly be termed attractive, but what you really think about when you talk about the right of the baby, I think, is the wasted potential there. There really isn't any such thing as a "right".
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 43
|
Michael
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 290
Joined: Sep. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,18:14 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kuru:
michael: regardless of how intelligent my decisions, the fact that it was pointed out that i'm capable of murder (you do consider abortion murder) doesn't exactly say good things about me.
Well, technically everyone is at least _capable_ of murder. I can think of several situations where I wouldn't hesitate to try to kill someone. And as for the question of whether abortion should be legal or illegal, I don't believe that I ever stated that it should be illegalized. What I did say was that people, individuals, should take responsibility for their own actions. There are really two separate questions here: what people _actually_ do, and what they _should_ do. The former is what laws deal with, but as soon as you start talking about right and wrong, it's a moral question, not a legal one. Legalizing abortion is similar to legalizing drugs, prostitution, or assisted suicide. In all these cases, people are going to do it anyways, so you're better off making it legal and thus safer. But saying that something should be legal is not the same as saying that it is the right thing to do.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 44
|
|
|
| Post Number: 45
|
|
|
| Post Number: 46
|
DuSTman
70% water in a flexible container.
Group: Members
Posts: 797
Joined: May 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,20:59 |
|
|
quote:
Well, why not? Some moral values are just about universal. For instance: "Thou shalt not kill DuSTman." Wouldn't you hope that that's an absolute statement, rather than something like "Thou shalt not kill DuSTman unless there are mitigating circumstances, such as if he manages to annoy you sufficiently."
Well, i'd rather people thought of it in terms of what would the consequences of their actions, and then make a decision on what to do based upon those consequences. I.E. "If thou kill DuSTman you will probably be locked in prison for 15 or so years, and make DuSTman's parents sad.", rather than just thinking "it would be wrong to kill DuSTman". True, most people would think that my death wouldn't be worth 15 years in jail, so there's going to be a trend against the killage of me, but if you hate me enough to take the consequences, then my all means, make with the stabbing. quote:
First of all, there's nothing that says that a woman can't be anything "more than just a mother" just because she has a baby. Second of all, option c should read more like: "Have the baby, have it adopted, and know that your child is living in a much more loving and supportive environment than you could have provided, and has parents that love him or her very much and to whom he or she was definately _not_ unwanted."
True enough, women can be "more than just a mother" but I think it's highly unlikely that any mother would sacrifice the welfare of her children to improve her career, and children can be very demanding. Who can say what that woman would have achieved in her career in those 18 years if it wasn't for the mammoth drain on financial support and time that children constitutes. Having a child WILL hold back your career somewhat, you can believe that. There are two people in a room. One of them has a gun. The decision on whether to shoot the other one is made entirely by the one with the gun. The other person might think "I don't want to be shot" and try to influence the decision of the man holding the gun. All in all though, the man should make a decision not based on this, but on the factors for and against executing hte other man. This is similar to the abortion scenario: Two beings, a feotus and a mother. The mother holds the gun, and therefore the primary logic from the mother should be on the factors that affect her. Yes, she'll feel sad about killing the baby, but I believe the logical choice would be to shoot unless you want a family and are in the appropriate situation in life. I would like to see abortion be made the default choice in dealing with pregnancy and the focus should be instead "Why should i have this baby".
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 47
|
Sithiee
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 1941
Joined: May 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,21:10 |
|
|
michael, now your being discriminatory. just because the tumor wont become a person doesnt mean it has any less right to live.and id like to add to my previous satire(it was satire, if you didnt know..). another exception we should stop making is for women who will die if they have their baby. what right do we have to kill the baby? the mother shouldnt get to decide whether or not the baby lives or dies, its a life! i mean, so what if the mother dies, as long as the baby is around, its ok, right? one more thing. some of you say that it is the mother responsibility to have the baby if she gets pregnant, because you shouldnt kill the baby. but to me, that sounds more like your trying to use the baby as a disciplinary tool (dont have sex, or youll have to take care of babies) instead of actually trying to think about the baby and its future...
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 48
|
|
|
| Post Number: 49
|
Sithiee
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 1941
Joined: May 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 05 2001,23:10 |
|
|
lemme put my point in more obvious terms. say theres a really easy girl you like. you offer to help her do some work or some shit. what are your motives? are your motives to get some, or to actually help her? its the same thing with saying that they should have the baby because its their responsibility. when you say that, you say it, not for the baby's benefit, but rather to try and discipline the mother. to sum up: try and think about your true motive, and use that as your argument, because if its the right thing to do, you shouldnt need any other argument.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 50
|
|
|
|
|
|
