Dubstepforum.com

Top 5 Simpsons moment wub.

wub wrote:

magma wrote: For instance, there appears to have been a marked reduction in crime following Roe Vs Wade effectively legalising abortion in the United States. Babies that are unwanted or unable to be cared for properly seem far more likely to find themselves on the wrong side of the tracks in later life.

Been reading Freakonomics?

Not recently, but quite. It's amazing how often chapters from that book pop into my head, tbh.

Pedro Sánchez wrote:

m8son wrote:The arguments against abortion pretty much all stem from religion, valuing a life further than the bundle of cells that it really is.

If anything abortion should be encouraged imo.

So you are suggesting that wire coat hangers should be given as wedding gifts? You sick fuck.

Knitting needles. That way if they want to keep it, they can knit booties. If not, they can do the needful.

Pedro Sánchez wrote:

m8son wrote:The arguments against abortion pretty much all stem from religion, valuing a life further than the bundle of cells that it really is.

If anything abortion should be encouraged imo.

So you are suggesting that wire coat hangers should be given as wedding gifts? You sick fuck.

yeah that would be a step in the right direction lol

m8son wrote:The arguments against abortion pretty much all stem from religion, valuing a life further than the bundle of cells that it really is.

If anything abortion should be encouraged imo.

That's not actually true. there are plenty of people who are against abortion who aren't religious. There are plenty of arguments derived from potentiality and the idea of the embryo having the same human rights as a person.

I'm not against religion because i believe a persons right to autonomy is their biggest right.

djredi2step wrote: That's not actually true. there are plenty of people who are against abortion who aren't religious. There are plenty of arguments derived from potentiality and the idea of the embryo having the same human rights as a person.

Yeah but imo seeing the embryo as a human being and valuing 'life' was originally born from religious ideas, in the same way many non religious people follow morals that were set out by religion.

^true, is funny that some of this people that considder an embryo as a living being don´t doubt in crashing a cockroach when they see it in their house floor. an early embryo has preference than a true living organism??

DiegoSapiens wrote: an early embryo has preference than a true living organism??

yea

I don't feel guilty eating chicken, I would feel guilty eating a baby, especially if I slaughtered it myself

naa, eating babies>>>>>>>>

one difference between a cockroach and a human embryo is potentiality to become a human being and a person with a concept of self and so moral value. It is morally wrong to kill a person as they are aware of themselves as a person and want to live.

(I've got a bioethics exam tomorrow so this is quite a good discussion to have)

another reason, for example if choosing between saving a human and a pregnant human, why would most people choose to save the pregnant human?

If you don't feel guilty for the chicken do you feel guilty for something less sentient?

Up to a certain point a foetus is a glorified growth. Something that if found anywhere else on/in the body would be removed and discarded without a second thought.

djredi2step wrote:one difference between a cockroach and a human embryo is potentiality to become a human being and a person with a concept of self and so moral value. It is morally wrong to kill a person as they are aware of themselves as a person and want to live.

(I've got a bioethics exam tomorrow so this is quite a good discussion to have)

exactly potentlially but not atm, we all think that is wrong naturally because our survivance instinct but tell me why having another human in this world with fathers that don´t want the baby is a positive thing, in fact is a negative thing beacuse they are to much people for this small world.

Laszlo wrote:If you don't feel guilty for the chicken do you feel guilty for something less sentient?

Up to a certain point a foetus is a glorified growth. Something that if found anywhere else on/in the body would be removed and discarded without a second thought.

djredi2step wrote:another reason, for example if choosing between saving a human and a pregnant human, why would most people choose to save the pregnant human?

because is more painful to loose your son for some one that wants it.

DiegoSapiens wrote:

djredi2step wrote:one difference between a cockroach and a human embryo is potentiality to become a human being and a person with a concept of self and so moral value. It is morally wrong to kill a person as they are aware of themselves as a person and want to live.

(I've got a bioethics exam tomorrow so this is quite a good discussion to have)

exactly potentlially but not atm, we all think that is wrong naturally because our survivance instinct but tell me why having another human in this world with fathers that don´t want the baby is a positive thing, in fact is a negative thing beacuse they are to much people for this small world.

ultimately i agree (playing devils advocate)

tell me why having another human in this world with fathers that don´t want the baby is a positive thing?
almost a utilitarian argument here.

We all have a basic right to life, so why doesn't the unborn have a right to life, at what point do you start having a right to life and why? And if we've established a right to life shouldn't a persons right to life take precedent over a father's or society's wants? its not right for a father or mother to kill an infant so why is it right that a fetus can be killed?

wub wrote:

magma wrote: For instance, there appears to have been a marked reduction in crime following Roe Vs Wade effectively legalising abortion in the United States. Babies that are unwanted or unable to be cared for properly seem far more likely to find themselves on the wrong side of the tracks in later life.

Been reading Freakonomics?

I've not read Freakonomics but we had to read about that case in our stats class.. I think they got a lot of shit for their findings lol.. you could probably find a lot of Economics data to back some grey area things, abortion/legalising drugs ect.

I think we live in a quitters society, things get a bit tough and people wanna just back out and leave it to someone else.

Muncey wrote:I think they got a lot of shit for their findings lol.. you could probably find a lot of Economics data to back some grey area things, abortion/legalising drugs ect.

It's fucking ATROCIOUS in places, some real elastic interpretations.

djredi2step wrote:We all have a basic right to life, so why doesn't the unborn have a right to life, at what point do you start having a right to life and why? And if we've established a right to life shouldn't a persons right to life take precedent over a father's or society's wants? its not right for a father or mother to kill an infant so why is it right that a fetus can be killed?

Forgive the stupidity but can you briefly explain this 'right to life' for me. I don't really understand it.
If we presume this 'right to life' then the foetus/baby gains it when it becomes a sentient being. I'll not argue for when that is.

The right to life is the philosophical idea that a human (although some say any entity) that has a concept of self as a continuing subject of experiences and other mental states and believes that it is itself such a continuing entity has a serious right to life and that to kill this entity is morally wrong and unjust.

There are various ways of extending this concept to a foetus through potentiality, some philosophers such as Michael Tooley have even argued that this can allow for infanticide to be permissable.

To allow for abortion to be permissable, you have basically to prove that the foetus does not have this right to life or that the mother's right to autonomy (right to control what goes on in her body) is greater than the foetus's potential to a right of life or the foetus's right of life.

That is the philosophical/bioethical viewpoint