ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags abortion issues , adoption issues , sexism issues

Reply
Old 9th August 2019, 04:47 PM   #201
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,548
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
You may argue that but in actual practice people do take this right upon themselves.
People also took in upon themselves to take other humans into slavery too. Your argument seems to be they have the right because they took the right, this is rather circular.

Quote:
I'm not saying it's "right", rather I'm saying they claim that right for themselves. All societies do to one extent or another. One of major drawbacks of living in any society is that the line between "private" and "public" isn't neither clear nor is it unchanging.
And what I am saying is that for societies to intrude on private things then they need to show a rational and reasonable context to that intrusion.

Quote:
As society must renew its population in order to sustain itself, this necessarily means that sexual relationships, procreation, child rearing and such is something that society would concern itself with to one extent or another.
This isn't a reasonable argument. Even if Abortion was allowed totally on demand at any point in the pregnancy, there would be no threat to the renewal of the population of a society. The fact is that while there might be a desire to have a need for reproduction in the entire herd, there is no need to require the individuals to so so against their will. Using the logic you have here, then why shouldn't lesbians and women that don't want kids be forced to marry men to have kids as well to make sure that we have a population renewal? Sorry, no, as an argument it just doesn't bear out as reasonable.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2019, 04:48 PM   #202
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,548
Originally Posted by rockysmith76 View Post
Its not that basic a thing. Yes, ultimately it's the Woman's choice, but also her responsibility. One edge of the sword is that if she chooses to end that new life she is responsible for creating that is on her, and if bringing a new life into the world isn't something she's ready for, then imo, it's her responsibility to not put herself in a position where she might. Both Caveats apply here.
I can put you down as "women should be punished for sleeping around" then?
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2019, 08:30 PM   #203
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 18,476
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Which to me is why is should be left to the Doctors to make the call. If they believe that the fetus would be viable and there is no excessive risk to the mother, then any termination at that point should be an induced birth or c-section.
I haven't heard that view before.

Quote:
It was covered in being specifically excluded from the conversation.
You only excluded "related" and "in a relationship" neither of which necessarily excludes (would-be) "father".
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2019, 10:32 PM   #204
Southwind17
Philosopher
 
Southwind17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,152
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
If your definition is "not reliant on the mother per se" then I don't see how.
You don't? But "not reliant on the mother per se" is the perfect example of separate; reliant the opposite. My 'definition' fits exactly with my position.
__________________
"Always" and "never" are two words that you should always remember never to use.
"For successful technology reality must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled." (Richard Feynman - Challenger Accident Presidential Commission Report)
"Life is but a gamble ... let flipism guide your ramble." (Donald Duck)
Southwind17 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th August 2019, 10:43 PM   #205
Southwind17
Philosopher
 
Southwind17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,152
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
I can put you down as "women should be punished for sleeping around" then?
How can requiring women to take responsibility for the potential consequences of their actions when it comes to pregnancy possibly translate to punishing them, not to mention that such position necessarily implies that such women sleep around?!?
__________________
"Always" and "never" are two words that you should always remember never to use.
"For successful technology reality must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled." (Richard Feynman - Challenger Accident Presidential Commission Report)
"Life is but a gamble ... let flipism guide your ramble." (Donald Duck)
Southwind17 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 01:50 AM   #206
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,802
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
For me the difference in DNA is sufficient to establish that there are two different human entities - regardless of the state of development of the unborn child. But you are right. You can make this so complicated that even you don't know what you are talking about.

Of course, none of this has anything to do with the child's right to life (if any) nor if anybody has the right to interfere with a woman's decision to terminate a pregnancy or carry it to completion.
Chimeras must confuse you!
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 02:00 AM   #207
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,802
I really have no concerns about aborting a fetus or killing a baby before it is born, the wording makes no difference to me.

For me everything changes once the baby is born, then it acquires its own rights and despite it costing me I'm happy to say it should be well looked after, educated, healthcare and so on at the expense of society regardless of the parents ability to provide all that.

I know it puts me in an extremist position compared to many but we have plenty of children in the world and plenty of people happy to make more of them. But for me the point that makes me take this extremist position is that I don't want a child to be brought up by someone who doesn't want it from before it was even born.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 02:52 AM   #208
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 18,476
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
the wording makes no difference to me.
I agree with that. In fact folks’ insistence on the perceived validity of certain terms and invalidity of others (including all of zygote, foetus, unborn child, baby, human, human life, virus, killing, aborting, terminating) as well as ascribing others’ views to religion (meaning flawed when this is done) merely indicates attempts to buttress a view or preference into some kind of hard truth that it isn’t.
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 03:44 AM   #209
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,691
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Chimeras must confuse you!
Your point being?
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 04:47 AM   #210
applecorped
Suspended
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 19,621
Wink

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I really have no concerns about... killing a baby..
How nice for you
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 04:50 AM   #211
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,984
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I really have no concerns about aborting a fetus or killing a baby before it is born, the wording makes no difference to me.

For me everything changes once the baby is born, then it acquires its own rights and despite it costing me I'm happy to say it should be well looked after, educated, healthcare and so on at the expense of society regardless of the parents ability to provide all that.

I know it puts me in an extremist position compared to many but we have plenty of children in the world and plenty of people happy to make more of them. But for me the point that makes me take this extremist position is that I don't want a child to be brought up by someone who doesn't want it from before it was even born.

Personally consider that extreme

If you are willing to accept a woman can have an abortion the same day the kid is due for instance, that is stretching the theory you are not taking a persons life.
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 07:49 AM   #212
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,802
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Personally consider that extreme



If you are willing to accept a woman can have an abortion the same day the kid is due for instance, that is stretching the theory you are not taking a persons life.
I said it will make me an extremist to some


As I also said call it aborting a fetus, killing a baby or taking a persons life makes not one iota of a difference to my position or opinion. Or what is being done.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 08:31 AM   #213
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,889
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Just because it does, doesn't make it right. Pre-the 1980's most Societies considered Homosexuality wrong enough for it to be illegal, a lot of societies still do.

The question is not one of does society do so, but should it? What is the reasoned and rational argument behind it. For the most part I only see a religious one, and personally, despite being a Christian, I personally believe that no Law should be made on the basis of any Religious belief, and in the US such practice would be a violation of the 1st Amendment.
There are two people involved. Society does - and should! - mediate disputes between two people.

I have yet to see you even acknowledge this argument.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 08:37 AM   #214
pharphis
Master Poster
 
pharphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 2,015
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
There are two people involved. Society does - and should! - mediate disputes between two people.

I have yet to see you even acknowledge this argument.
and it's not a simple dispute. It's literally rights to body autonomy vs rights to life
pharphis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 08:43 AM   #215
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,889
Originally Posted by pharphis View Post
and it's not a simple dispute. It's literally rights to body autonomy vs rights to life
Exactly.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 09:19 PM   #216
Silly Green Monkey
Cowardly Lurking in the Shadows of Greatness
 
Silly Green Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,705
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Absolutely not. A skin cell will not grow into a full human, nor will a fish zygote. Human zygotes grow into humans.
Maybe. One might even go as far as 'usually'. Human zygotes do not always grow into humans. There's a million and one things that can go wrong, most will kill the baby but some merely damage it. Go spout your 'right to life' nonsense to cold heartless DNA.
__________________
Normal is just a stereotype.
Silly Green Monkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 09:42 PM   #217
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,984
Originally Posted by Silly Green Monkey View Post
Maybe. One might even go as far as 'usually'. Human zygotes do not always grow into humans. There's a million and one things that can go wrong, most will kill the baby but some merely damage it. Go spout your 'right to life' nonsense to cold heartless DNA.
...Like having an abortion
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2019, 11:13 PM   #218
Southwind17
Philosopher
 
Southwind17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,152
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I really have no concerns about aborting a fetus or killing a baby before it is born, the wording makes no difference to me.

For me everything changes once the baby is born ...
How so (putting aside legalities)? What's the fundamental difference between a baby the minute before it's born and the minute after that leads you to this view?
__________________
"Always" and "never" are two words that you should always remember never to use.
"For successful technology reality must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled." (Richard Feynman - Challenger Accident Presidential Commission Report)
"Life is but a gamble ... let flipism guide your ramble." (Donald Duck)
Southwind17 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 04:30 AM   #219
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,802
Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
How so (putting aside legalities)? What's the fundamental difference between a baby the minute before it's born and the minute after that leads you to this view?
There isn't one. It is merely the arbitrary point I've decided to use.

I suppose if you want some reasoning I'd say there has to be some point at which we decide a bag of mainly water becomes something we decide has rights. To me after birth seems a pretty straightforward to police demarcation line.

And just to make it clear I do also support euthanasia so if a baby is born I'm quite happy it being euthanized or if you like killed if it is going to be nothing but a vegetable all its life or will suffer for a few months before its inevitable death because of defects.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 06:14 AM   #220
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,889
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
There isn't one. It is merely the arbitrary point I've decided to use.

I suppose if you want some reasoning I'd say there has to be some point at which we decide a bag of mainly water becomes something we decide has rights. To me after birth seems a pretty straightforward to police demarcation line.

And just to make it clear I do also support euthanasia so if a baby is born I'm quite happy it being euthanized or if you like killed if it is going to be nothing but a vegetable all its life or will suffer for a few months before its inevitable death because of defects.
Euthanasia does seem to be a moral choice in some cases, yes.

What I'm really curious about is your position on infanticide of convenience. Is there anything wrong with it, in your opinion? Other than it falling on the "wrong" side of your arbitrary dividing line?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 06:36 AM   #221
Southwind17
Philosopher
 
Southwind17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,152
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
There isn't one. It is merely the arbitrary point I've decided to use.

I suppose if you want some reasoning I'd say there has to be some point at which we decide a bag of mainly water becomes something we decide has rights. To me after birth seems a pretty straightforward to police demarcation line.
A baby one minute before it's born is a 'bag of mainly water'?!? You mean as in humans are largely made of water, or a baby resembles a bag of water until it's born???

So how about an alternative 'arbitrary point': at the point it can speak, or how about the point it can walk? No let's be more rationale ... how about it's 16th birthday? Yes I'm sure people tend to acquire certain rights at that age. That would seem more rational than the day a person is born, no???
__________________
"Always" and "never" are two words that you should always remember never to use.
"For successful technology reality must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled." (Richard Feynman - Challenger Accident Presidential Commission Report)
"Life is but a gamble ... let flipism guide your ramble." (Donald Duck)
Southwind17 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 09:31 AM   #222
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,802
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Euthanasia does seem to be a moral choice in some cases, yes.

What I'm really curious about is your position on infanticide of convenience. Is there anything wrong with it, in your opinion? Other than it falling on the "wrong" side of your arbitrary dividing line?
I only threw in the euthanasia comment to make it clear that I don't think society's responsibility to a born baby ends with the birth. But this is a thread about abortion not infanticide so some folk may not want us to derail the thread to discuss post birth killing of a baby. If you want to discuss it start a new thread and I'll answer you there.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 09:34 AM   #223
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,802
Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
A baby one minute before it's born is a 'bag of mainly water'?!? You mean as in humans are largely made of water, or a baby resembles a bag of water until it's born???
As in we are all nothing more than a bag of water with a few other odds and ends thrown in.


Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
So how about an alternative 'arbitrary point': at the point it can speak, or how about the point it can walk? No let's be more rationale ... how about it's 16th birthday? Yes I'm sure people tend to acquire certain rights at that age. That would seem more rational than the day a person is born, no???
We are talking about abortion in this thread i.e. pre birth. As I said to theprestige if you also want to discuss infanticide than I think we need to do so in a new thread.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 12:20 PM   #224
Silly Green Monkey
Cowardly Lurking in the Shadows of Greatness
 
Silly Green Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,705
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
...Like having an abortion
Yes, most gone-wrong human live zygotes abort. Some don't. And some of those that do abort, don't flush from the body by themselves. There are just as many ways for a pregnancy to kill the mother as it is to kill itself.
__________________
Normal is just a stereotype.
Silly Green Monkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 03:27 PM   #225
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,691
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I only threw in the euthanasia comment to make it clear that I don't think society's responsibility to a born baby ends with the birth. But this is a thread about abortion not infanticide so some folk may not want us to derail the thread to discuss post birth killing of a baby. If you want to discuss it start a new thread and I'll answer you there.
I thought that this thread was about the right of men to tell a women if or when abortion is OK.

You might draw the line at birth but you are still arbitrating on the question of abortion.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 03:44 PM   #226
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 5,319
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Who else is having that trouble?


Me.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 04:09 PM   #227
Southwind17
Philosopher
 
Southwind17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,152
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
We are talking about abortion in this thread i.e. pre birth.
Yes I get that. I'm just trying to understand your arbitrary threshold in context - in particular why you consider that a barrel of water within a cupboard connected with a hose to a mains supply is fundamentally different from a barrel of water removed from the cupboard and disconnected from the mains supply. Aren't they still both just barrels of water - functioning exactly the same? I think, if we're to distinguish between those two barrels of water for the purpose of justifying whether we dispose of one and retain the other, it probably requires a different test.
__________________
"Always" and "never" are two words that you should always remember never to use.
"For successful technology reality must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled." (Richard Feynman - Challenger Accident Presidential Commission Report)
"Life is but a gamble ... let flipism guide your ramble." (Donald Duck)
Southwind17 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 04:23 PM   #228
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,691
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Me.
Edited by zooterkin:  <SNIP>
Edited for rule 0 and rule 12.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

Last edited by zooterkin; 14th August 2019 at 02:13 AM.
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 11:50 PM   #229
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,802
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
I thought that this thread was about the right of men to tell a women if or when abortion is OK.



You might draw the line at birth but you are still arbitrating on the question of abortion.
Yep.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2019, 11:58 PM   #230
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,802
Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
Yes I get that. I'm just trying to understand your arbitrary threshold in context - in particular why you consider that a barrel of water within a cupboard connected with a hose to a mains supply is fundamentally different from a barrel of water removed from the cupboard and disconnected from the mains supply. Aren't they still both just barrels of water - functioning exactly the same? I think, if we're to distinguish between those two barrels of water for the purpose of justifying whether we dispose of one and retain the other, it probably requires a different test.
But I'm not saying there is a fundamental difference, I thought I'd made that very clear. In the end if there is to be legal abortion than we are going to have to set an arbitrary line somewhere, it's akin to an age of consent. No one truly thinks there is a fundamental change that happens between "age of consent minus 1 day" and "age of consent plus 1 day" but we need to set a line for practical policing.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2019, 02:42 AM   #231
Southwind17
Philosopher
 
Southwind17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,152
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
But I'm not saying there is a fundamental difference, I thought I'd made that very clear. In the end if there is to be legal abortion than we are going to have to set an arbitrary line somewhere, it's akin to an age of consent. No one truly thinks there is a fundamental change that happens between "age of consent minus 1 day" and "age of consent plus 1 day" but we need to set a line for practical policing.
Well I suppose the issue for me then is where you've set your arbitrary line. To my mind it's equivalent to setting the age of consent at say 50. How can somebody who's 49 possibly be deemed too young? Hence how can a baby one day prior to birth possibly be deemed to be suitable for abortion?
__________________
"Always" and "never" are two words that you should always remember never to use.
"For successful technology reality must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled." (Richard Feynman - Challenger Accident Presidential Commission Report)
"Life is but a gamble ... let flipism guide your ramble." (Donald Duck)
Southwind17 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2019, 03:05 AM   #232
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,802
Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
Well I suppose the issue for me then is where you've set your arbitrary line. To my mind it's equivalent to setting the age of consent at say 50. How can somebody who's 49 possibly be deemed too young? Hence how can a baby one day prior to birth possibly be deemed to be suitable for abortion?
Because it is unwanted and we allow people to abort unwanted babies.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2019, 04:12 AM   #233
Southwind17
Philosopher
 
Southwind17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,152
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Because it is unwanted and we allow people to abort unwanted babies.
Nah I'm not accepting that - too simple a position. We only allow people to abort unwanted babies up to a certain stage of development. That will always be the case. Your arbitrary line ignores that, so essentially the position you hold is both untenable and unjustified.

Good attempt, but must try harder.
__________________
"Always" and "never" are two words that you should always remember never to use.
"For successful technology reality must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled." (Richard Feynman - Challenger Accident Presidential Commission Report)
"Life is but a gamble ... let flipism guide your ramble." (Donald Duck)
Southwind17 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2019, 04:12 AM   #234
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 83,937
Originally Posted by Silly Green Monkey View Post
Maybe. One might even go as far as 'usually'. Human zygotes do not always grow into humans. There's a million and one things that can go wrong, most will kill the baby but some merely damage it. Go spout your 'right to life' nonsense to cold heartless DNA.
Yeah, just like some bridges collapse before they're completed but that doesn't mean you're not building a bridge.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2019, 05:30 AM   #235
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,802
Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
Nah I'm not accepting that - too simple a position. We only allow people to abort unwanted babies up to a certain stage of development. That will always be the case. Your arbitrary line ignores that, so essentially the position you hold is both untenable and unjustified.



Good attempt, but must try harder.
Not accepting what? That my arbitrary line is different to yours?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2019, 07:04 AM   #236
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 18,476
Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
We only allow people to abort unwanted babies up to a certain stage of development. That will always be the case. Your arbitrary line ignores that, so essentially the position you hold is both untenable and unjustified.
That's odd because I would have thought that what Darat suggests is precisely "up to a certain stage of development" which according to you should render it tenable and justifiable.
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2019, 07:16 AM   #237
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,982
Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
That's odd because I would have thought that what Darat suggests is precisely "up to a certain stage of development" which according to you should render it tenable and justifiable.
And it's a line that is a lot more objective and easy to determine than the ones we set now. The "the line" Dara set is right at the point the baby is no longer part of the mothers body which is a key point.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2019, 07:28 AM   #238
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,691
Originally Posted by Amazer View Post
As a devil's advocate:

The fertilized egg (and from there onwards) is a human life... as such it deserves the same rights and protection as any other human life. It's our duty as society to enforce those rights and that protection.
To which I would ask; to what extent to you, as a supporter of restrictions on womens' bodily integrity, consider it reasonable to endanger the lives of those women by forcing them to involuntarily remain pregnant?
Compared to the 'normal' risk of death or serious injury over the period of a pregnancy, is a 25% increase acceptable? 50%? 100%? 200%? 4o0%? 800%? 1600%?
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2019, 07:31 AM   #239
Pterodactyl
Graduate Poster
 
Pterodactyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,163
I love threads like this... pure mental masturbation.

Although I understand the logic behind the complaint that the father doesn't have the same rights as the mother, there's just not a reasonable alternative solution.

Best we can do as-is.
Pterodactyl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2019, 07:39 AM   #240
rockysmith76
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 60
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
I can put you down as "women should be punished for sleeping around" then?
No... but just like men, if they don't use protection, they bear responsibility for their carelessness, and there is no need to be a whore, whether that whore is male, female, or regardless of sexual orientation. Sleeping around comes with risks and consequences.
rockysmith76 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:22 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.