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 7th August 2019, 06:10 AM   #121
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 50,296
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
How about you answer my question?
I'm sorry, I thought the answer was so obvious I'd make you feel very stupid if I answered it. Sexual orientation matters because the vast majority of abortions are on unwanted pregnancies and the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies are from women having had sex with men. That's a configuration much more common with straight people than gay ones. I'm sure you can find some bizarre Springeresque situation wherein a gay man has to get an abortion or a lesbian impregnated her straight female lover but those kinds of cases are so rare it's quite silly to imagine they are worth considering in an abortion debate.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 7th August 2019, 06:13 AM   #122
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 43,794
Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
It seems you might be getting confused between age discrimination and simple age distinction, to use your own word (just checking - there's a fundamental difference, of course )?
I think you are confused about what “discrimination” actually means. If you are 14, you are not allowed to vote or buy alcohol. If you are 24, you are allowed to do both. That is age discrimination. We don’t usually call it that because we accept it, and “discrimination” sounds bad, but the actual meaning of the word is value neutral. Age is different than many other properties such as race or sex, and there are some good reasons to accept certain forms of age discrimination where we would not accept race, sex, or many other forms of discrimination. But we absolutely do discriminate on the basis of age. We would be fools not to in any form.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 7th August 2019, 06:22 AM   #123
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,448
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
If you are a man and disagree with Abortion, can you express what you think gives you the right to dictate how a woman who is unrelated to you, and not in a relationship with you, should have to deal with her own body?
We live in this thing called a "society" and as such what people are allowed to do, including with their own bodies in private, is something that we as members of society may seek to regulate, within the limits of permissible interference in personal autonomy and freedom.

"My body, my choice" is just a trite and ultimately worthless expression because hardly anyone ever applies this consistently and instead arbitrarily draw a line between private drug use, assisted suicide, euthanasia or such potentially objectionable behavior that they happen to disagree with.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr

Last edited by Arcade22; 7th August 2019 at 06:24 AM.
Arcade22 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 7th August 2019, 06:28 AM   #124
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 83,937
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I'm sorry, I thought the answer was so obvious I'd make you feel very stupid if I answered it.
Don't worry about it. Feeling stupid happens to everyone.

Quote:
Sexual orientation matters because the vast majority of abortions are on unwanted pregnancies and the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies are from women having had sex with men. That's a configuration much more common with straight people than gay ones.
Yes but you talked about protection specifically. I'm pretty sure many gay people skip protection all the time, despite the higher risks of STD transmission. Yet I'm sure you wouldn't call gay people as a whole dumb for it.

And that, folks, is the problem with generalisations.
__________________
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 7th August 2019, 06:29 AM   #125
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 18,476
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
We live in this thing called a "society" and as such what people are allowed to do, including with their own bodies in private, is something that we as members of society may seek to regulate, within the limits of permissible interference in personal autonomy and freedom.
Correct.
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 7th August 2019, 06:32 AM   #126
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 50,296
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Don't worry about it. Feeling stupid happens to everyone.
Oh, I would never claim to be an expert in that.

Quote:
Yes but you talked about protection specifically. I'm pretty sure many gay people skip protection all the time, despite the higher risks of STD transmission. Yet I'm sure you wouldn't call gay people as a whole dumb for it.

And that, folks, is the problem with generalisations.
But the topic is abortion, not STDs, hence I didn't address that.

And that, folks, is the problem with underfunded educational systens.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 7th August 2019, 07:02 AM   #127
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 83,937
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
But the topic is abortion, not STDs, hence I didn't address that.
And yet it's part of the same type of thinking: ignoring the risks involved in one's actions.

Here's the short answer: we're all dumb.

Quote:
And that, folks, is the problem with underfunded educational systens.
It would work better if you hadn't misspelled "system".
__________________
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 7th August 2019, 07:07 AM   #128
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 50,296
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
And yet it's part of the same type of thinking: ignoring the risks involved in one's actions.
And yet it's still off-topic. If you're actually interested in my opinion of gay safe sex then yes, I actually do think any gay men who have anal sex without using condoms are idiots. Whether they're in a relationship or not.

Quote:
Here's the short answer: we're all dumb.
If you can't see the difference between gay people having unprotected sex and straight people having unprotected sex when it comes to unwanted pregnancies then perhaps the characterization is not inapt.

Quote:
It would work better if you hadn't misspelled "system".
Yes, it would. Unfortunately my eyesight is not as good as I could wish so the occasional typo is inevitable. At least my mistakes don't require controversial medical intervention to correct.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 7th August 2019, 07:12 AM   #129
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 23,668
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
That's any of this have to do with sexual orientation?
I think your mistake here was taking a joke too literally
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow 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 7th August 2019, 07:19 AM   #130
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 83,937
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
And yet it's still off-topic.
Well it was off topic when you made the comment. I'm just pointing out why your generalisation is stupid.

Quote:
If you can't see the difference between gay people having unprotected sex and straight people having unprotected sex when it comes to unwanted pregnancies then perhaps the characterization is not inapt.
Don't play dense. You know that the parallel was risk, not pregnancy.

Quote:
Yes, it would. Unfortunately my eyesight is not as good as I could wish so the occasional typo is inevitable.
Well, I was ready to blame it on underfunded educational systens.
__________________
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 7th August 2019, 07:22 AM   #131
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,892
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
We live in this thing called a "society" and as such what people are allowed to do, including with their own bodies in private, is something that we as members of society may seek to regulate, within the limits of permissible interference in personal autonomy and freedom.

"My body, my choice" is just a trite and ultimately worthless expression because hardly anyone ever applies this consistently and instead arbitrarily draw a line between private drug use, assisted suicide, euthanasia or such potentially objectionable behavior that they happen to disagree with.
I wonder if PW will return to acknowledge this and the other cromulent replies to his OP.
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 7th August 2019, 09:19 AM   #132
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,695
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I was mostly refering to criminals, for whom we remove some rights temporarily or permanently. Including in some cases the right to live.
I'm sure that you didn't intend to equate unborn children with criminals.
__________________
"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 7th August 2019, 09:20 AM   #133
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 83,937
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
I'm sure that you didn't intend to equate unborn children with criminals.
What, that's not what they mean by "child abuse"?
__________________
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 7th August 2019, 10:11 AM   #134
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Besźel or Ul Qoma - not sure...
Posts: 9,584
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Thank you, Professor Obvious. I take it you don't hang out with a lot of feminists, particularly radical feminists. If you did, you'd be familiar with the term of disparagement for the male partner.
No, I'm more discerning in my choice of friends.
Information Analyst 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 7th August 2019, 10:13 AM   #135
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Besźel or Ul Qoma - not sure...
Posts: 9,584
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
And wherever you see an MRA, can wife beaters be far behind? Radical feminists may include but are not necessarily, misandrists.
Seems to me that radical feminists and MRAs are the opposite sides of the same ******** coin. They deserve each other.
Information Analyst 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 7th August 2019, 10:33 AM   #136
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,448
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
We live in this thing called a "society" and as such what people are allowed to do, including with their own bodies in private, is something that we as members of society may seek to regulate, within the limits of permissible interference in personal autonomy and freedom.

"My body, my choice" is just a trite and ultimately worthless expression because hardly anyone ever applies this consistently and instead arbitrarily draw a line between private drug use, assisted suicide, euthanasia or such potentially objectionable behavior that they happen to disagree with.
I should note here that I'm not actually opposed to abortion either on principled or practical grounds, rather the point is that abortion isn't really special compared to just about any other issue where the state seeks to regulate peoples behavior.

People who don't drink alcohol are allowed to vote (directly or indirectly) for laws that regulate the production, distribution and marketing of alcoholic beverages even if this could have dire effects on the well-being of people who do drink alcohol or make a living off it. The same applies to abortion, hence why men are allowed to involve themselves with abortion laws and regulations.

If anything, encouraging men to view abortion and reproductive health in general as a "woman's issue" because it directly affects women the most, and thus men have no legitimate reason to involve themselves in it, is probably counter-productive. It would leaves the public space open to anti-abortion fanatics and reactionaries who have no compulsion about restricting women's personal freedom.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr

Last edited by Arcade22; 7th August 2019 at 10:35 AM.
Arcade22 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 7th August 2019, 10:36 AM   #137
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,892
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
In my question, I specifically said that she did not want to raise it.
I had inferred from the scenario that she did not want it because she couldn't afford it. Thank you for clarifying.

This clarifies a few things, actually. Since we know she can afford it, the question comes down to who should be responsible for it. And the answer to that is obvious: She should be responsible for it.

This is especially true if you're going to argue that fathers shouldn't have sex if they don't want to be responsible for children they didn't want but the mother chose not to abort.

Quote:
The parents plural ideally, but a lot of women who choose to have abortions do so because they aren't in a stable relationship with the father who would be a good, supporting parent. Maybe she was raped. Who knows? Do you make an exception in cases of rape? If so, does she have to prove that she was raped, or is it enough to simply claim that the fetus was conceived through rape?
Seems to me that if you're going to make exceptions for rape in public policy, then a formal allegation of rape must be lodged and upheld, in order for the exception to apply.
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 7th August 2019, 10:44 AM   #138
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,892
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
As I pointed out in my previous post, there would be about 900,000 more unwanted babies every year needing homes. Do we bring back orphanages? How do we as a society handle that? These are questions which the pro-life person should be willing to answer, if their position is sincere.
Unwanted is not the same as unaffordable. The vast majority of such children could simply be raised by the people actually responsible for them.

And I'd argue that we already have orphanages. In fact, we already have a two-tiered orphanage system: Welfare and foster homes.

Foster homes are basically a distributed orphanage system. We don't reflexively think of them as orphanages, because we don't call them orphanages, and because they don't match the popular image of the orphanages of old, but that's what they are.

Welfare is a little more abstract, but in a sense we're paying the parent to house and raise the child themselves, instead of sending it away to an institutional dormitory. So maybe not an "orphanage" in the traditional sense, or even in the sense of a foster home, but it fills much the same gap in our social fabric as orphanages used to. Fills it better, perhaps.

So my answer to the mother on my doorstep wouldn't be "find an orphanage". It would be, "cash your state child support checks and do your job".
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 7th August 2019, 10:52 AM   #139
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 50,296
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Unwanted is not the same as unaffordable. The vast majority of such children could simply be raised by the people actually responsible for them.

And I'd argue that we already have orphanages. In fact, we already have a two-tiered orphanage system: Welfare and foster homes.

Foster homes are basically a distributed orphanage system. We don't reflexively think of them as orphanages, because we don't call them orphanages, and because they don't match the popular image of the orphanages of old, but that's what they are.

Welfare is a little more abstract, but in a sense we're paying the parent to house and raise the child themselves, instead of sending it away to an institutional dormitory. So maybe not an "orphanage" in the traditional sense, or even in the sense of a foster home, but it fills much the same gap in our social fabric as orphanages used to. Fills it better, perhaps.

So my answer to the mother on my doorstep wouldn't be "find an orphanage". It would be, "cash your state child support checks and do your job".
Isn't attempting to abandon a baby with a stranger a strong indicator someone is not fit to raise a child? Even if she were well-funded by whatever means I don't think the mother in this scenario should be allowed to keep that child, and if she has any other children their situation bears investigation.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 7th August 2019, 12:30 PM   #140
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,892
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Isn't attempting to abandon a baby with a stranger a strong indicator someone is not fit to raise a child? Even if she were well-funded by whatever means I don't think the mother in this scenario should be allowed to keep that child, and if she has any other children their situation bears investigation.
Sure. We have a whole social safety net, which I support and pay into, for just this contingency.

The entire scenario is contrived to force a gotcha, not to promote discussion. Maybe that's the real reason Puppycow has so much trouble getting good faith engagement, with this strategy.
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 7th August 2019, 02:48 PM   #141
sphenisc
Illuminator
 
sphenisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,833
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Sure. We have a whole social safety net, which I support and pay into, for just this contingency.

The entire scenario is contrived to force a gotcha, not to promote discussion. Maybe that's the real reason Puppycow has so much trouble getting good faith engagement, with this strategy.
My problem is that I'm also in favour of incarcerating child murderers, so I've had to accommodate a couple of them in my house.

Plus my support of the reintroduction of wolves into National Parks means there's a couple of them living in the back bedroom.

Again also strongly in favour of research facilities studying deadly nerve agents, transmissible diseases and nuclear weapons, so there's a few jars of them scattered round the front room. It was going to be the toilet but that's full of transwomen at the moment.

The kid's welcome to stay , at least until social services does its checks.
__________________
"The cure for everything is salt water - tears, sweat or the sea." Isak Dinesen
sphenisc is online now   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 7th August 2019, 03:02 PM   #142
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,892
To be fair, I'd be entirely in favor of storing nuclear waste literally in my backyard. Assuming it was in the kind of responsible storage facility the experts generally propose, and I was getting paid a reasonable fee from the government for the use of my property for that purpose.
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 7th August 2019, 06:52 PM   #143
Southwind17
Philosopher
 
Southwind17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,152
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I think you are confused about what “discrimination” actually means. If you are 14, you are not allowed to vote or buy alcohol. If you are 24, you are allowed to do both. That is age discrimination.
Nope. You wrote:
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Not really. Most dramatically, the distinction between adults and minors is age discrimination. It's only in certain contexts and within certain age ranges that age discrimination is considered bad.
The distinction between adults and minors is exactly that - a distinction. It can be construed in many contexts, including, but not limited to, discrimination. Maybe you're confused about what 'distinction' actually means, but to be fair I think it comes down to poor wording.
__________________
"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 7th August 2019, 07:57 PM   #144
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 23,668
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I had inferred from the scenario that she did not want it because she couldn't afford it. Thank you for clarifying.

This clarifies a few things, actually. Since we know she can afford it, the question comes down to who should be responsible for it. And the answer to that is obvious: She should be responsible for it.
Well, I never said she could afford it. You seem to think it's an either/or thing, but it could be both. She doesn't want it and she can't afford it.

Quote:
This is especially true if you're going to argue that fathers shouldn't have sex if they don't want to be responsible for children they didn't want but the mother chose not to abort.
I'm not going to argue that. I think men should be able to opt out if they aren't involved in the decision. In that sense, I'm "pro-choice" for men too. I think the final decision of whether to have an abortion or not should be the woman's, but that men should be able to opt out of parental responsibilities if they disagree with her decision. (If she keeps her pregnancy a secret or never informs or consults him, for example; or if she does and he says that he wants no part of it.)

Quote:
Seems to me that if you're going to make exceptions for rape in public policy, then a formal allegation of rape must be lodged and upheld, in order for the exception to apply.
But by the time the case goes through the criminal justice system and the defendant is convicted, the short window for an abortion (earlier is better in my opinion, if you're going to do it) may already be over. Trials can drag on for years.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow 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 7th August 2019, 08:13 PM   #145
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 43,794
Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
Nope. You wrote:


The distinction between adults and minors is exactly that - a distinction. It can be construed in many contexts, including, but not limited to, discrimination. Maybe you're confused about what 'distinction' actually means, but to be fair I think it comes down to poor wording.
Um... "discrimination" and "distinction" are synonyms.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 7th August 2019, 08:27 PM   #146
Southwind17
Philosopher
 
Southwind17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,152
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Um... "discrimination" and "distinction" are synonyms.
They might be in whatever language you go by, but certainly aren't in the Queen's English! You might care to carefully read their definitions in addition to that for 'synonym'.
__________________
"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 7th August 2019, 08:53 PM   #147
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 43,794
Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
They might be in whatever language you go by, but certainly aren't in the Queen's English! You might care to carefully read their definitions in addition to that for 'synonym'.
You're like the Monty Python black knight. You just lost, but you're pretending otherwise.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 7th August 2019, 10:12 PM   #148
Southwind17
Philosopher
 
Southwind17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,152
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You're like the Monty Python black knight. You just lost, but you're pretending otherwise.
Except that you failed to account for contextdict my dear fellow.
__________________
"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 7th August 2019, 10:26 PM   #149
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 43,794
Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
Except that you failed to account for contextdict my dear fellow.
Seriously? The context is that we discriminate on the basis of age all the time. You haven't actually claimed otherwise. You haven't actually claimed that not allowing people of certain ages to do things that people of other ages can do specifically because of their ages isn't discrimination. Because of course it is.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 7th August 2019, 11:17 PM   #150
Southwind17
Philosopher
 
Southwind17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,152
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Seriously? The context is that we discriminate on the basis of age all the time. You haven't actually claimed otherwise. You haven't actually claimed that not allowing people of certain ages to do things that people of other ages can do specifically because of their ages isn't discrimination. Because of course it is.
Now you're losing the plot! You used the words 'distinction' and 'discrimination' in the same sentence (that, alone, should indicate to you that they're not synonymous - in context!). I questioned your understanding of the meanings of the two words, which Pharsis neatly clarified, in context.

You then pulled me up on my paraphrasing of Pharsis, omitting to appreciate what I claimed in context. I then pointed that out to you, and now you're homing in on a very narrow context for the use of the word 'discrimination', rather than the contexts in which use of the words 'distinction' and 'discrimination' renders them not necessarily synonymous.

Do you see the distinction, or are you planning on continuing to discriminate against my reasoning?

Sadly, you diverted attention to pure grammar, rather than seeking to clarify my, arguably, misinterpretation of your ambiguously-worded statement.

Now who sounds like the Black Knight?!?
__________________
"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 8th August 2019, 05:25 AM   #151
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,310
New Zealand is on a roll, we are voting to kill old people and babies.
(euthenasia and abortion).
With a bit of mission creep we can probably all self destruct and be a sustainable country.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/a...ectid=12256951

Actually those are slightly emotive terms for being rational about choices that are highly personal and not injurious to the great unwashed.
Samson 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 8th August 2019, 07:16 AM   #152
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 43,794
Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
Sadly, you diverted attention to pure grammar
Bwahahahahaha!

No. You're the one who won't discuss the actual argument about age discrimination.

Quote:
Now who sounds like the Black Knight?!?
You. Obviously.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 8th August 2019, 12:47 PM   #153
applecorped
Suspended
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 19,621
Originally Posted by Southwind17 View Post
Now you're losing the plot! You used the words 'distinction' and 'discrimination' in the same sentence (that, alone, should indicate to you that they're not synonymous - in context!). I questioned your understanding of the meanings of the two words, which Pharsis neatly clarified, in context.

You then pulled me up on my paraphrasing of Pharsis, omitting to appreciate what I claimed in context. I then pointed that out to you, and now you're homing in on a very narrow context for the use of the word 'discrimination', rather than the contexts in which use of the words 'distinction' and 'discrimination' renders them not necessarily synonymous.

Do you see the distinction, or are you planning on continuing to discriminate against my reasoning?

Sadly, you diverted attention to pure grammar, rather than seeking to clarify my, arguably, misinterpretation of your ambiguously-worded statement.

Now who sounds like the Black Knight?!?
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 8th August 2019, 01:41 PM   #154
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 18,871
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Not that I'm against abortion, but: if the zygote isn't human life, what is it?
A cell. The religious argument is that a cell has a soul. Given that we all kill millions of our cells every day as a matter of course, that argument is specious.

Then that cell divides and becomes 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 cells and so forth. At what point in that trajectory does it become a person?

Nobody can reliably define that.

Most jurisdictions that allow abortions use viability as a threshold. To me, that seems a best compromise (or least worst) for setting a term limit in a legal sense. Of course, viability is becoming earlier and earlier as medical technology advances.

The bottom line here is that there is no easy way around the issue of defining "personhood". Legally it is fraught with difficulty. Add to that the problem that the laws lag almost a generation behind the current facts on the ground just compounds the matter at hand.

Women (and their babies) have died because of this ineffectual legal futtering around.

As a man, and a father, I have absolutely no right to dictate anything to any woman. Period.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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 8th August 2019, 01:50 PM   #155
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 18,871
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Can you provide some cases of that happening?
Yup.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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 8th August 2019, 02:25 PM   #156
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,448
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
A cell. The religious argument is that a cell has a soul. Given that we all kill millions of our cells every day as a matter of course, that argument is specious.
It's not necessarily that clear cut:

Quote:
In religion, ensoulment is the moment at which a human being gains a soul. Some religions say that a soul is newly created within a developing child and others, especially in religions that believe in reincarnation, that the soul is pre-existing and added at a particular stage of development.

In the time of Aristotle, it was widely believed that the human soul entered the forming body at 40 days (male embryos) or 90 days (female embryos), and quickening was an indication of the presence of a soul. Other religious views are that ensoulment happens at the moment of conception; or when the child takes the first breath after being born;[1][2] at the formation of the nervous system and brain; at the first brain activity (e.g., heartbeat); or when the fetus is able to survive independently of the uterus (viability).[3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ensoulment

In practice it should be a completely moot point since the soul cannot be shown to exist, empirically or otherwise. Basing legislation on its presumed existence, derived only from religious beliefs, would be unacceptable in any reasonable country.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr
Arcade22 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 8th August 2019, 02:39 PM   #157
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,695
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
A cell. The religious argument is that a cell has a soul. Given that we all kill millions of our cells every day as a matter of course, that argument is specious.
Given that the DNA of a zygote is different to that of all the other cells in your body, your argument is specious.

If a woman wishes to terminate her pregnancy then I guess that it is usually best to allow her to do so but don't provide her with silly rationalizations for it.
__________________
"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 8th August 2019, 03:00 PM   #158
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,695
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
The judges in these cases are clearly law breakers. By law, a minor child is considered incapable of giving consent to a sex act. But because these victims were boys, the sexist judges said "**** the law" and ruled that they gave consent and were therefore liable.
__________________
"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 8th August 2019, 03:00 PM   #159
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 18,871
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Bwahahahahaha!

No. You're the one who won't discuss the actual argument about age discrimination.



You. Obviously.
Actually, SW was perfectly willing to engage in a rational discussion. It just wasn't what you wanted.

No discussion for you.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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 8th August 2019, 03:02 PM   #160
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 5,322
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
A cell. The religious argument is that a cell has a soul. Given that we all kill millions of our cells every day as a matter of course, that argument is specious.
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Given that the DNA of a zygote is different to that of all the other cells in your body, your argument is specious.

If a woman wishes to terminate her pregnancy then I guess that it is usually best to allow her to do so but don't provide her with silly rationalizations for it.

Huh!

I think you have to explain the speciousness in abaddon's statement psion.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is online now   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 02:56 PM.
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.