If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(IHT)   Bush pushing "abstinence-only" programs at the expense of family planning & contraceptives   (iht.com) divider line 154
    More: Stupid  
•       •       •

1010 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Aug 2001 at 8:28 AM (13 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



154 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
Rei
2001-08-01 03:26:15 PM  
MJC:

I was opening up a new vial of one of one of my injectables, and I noticed that the tab on the top says, in big letters, "Flip Off". I did, but nothing happened ;) I kept it, right next to the "I Am Washable" tag a friend gave me, which I wear occasionally ;)

-= rei =-
 
2001-08-01 03:34:27 PM  
Ahh Rei, I fear you may be too smart for your own good ;)
 
2001-08-01 03:35:39 PM  
I must agree Transactoid.... baffles me how much she knows
 
MJC
2001-08-01 03:36:16 PM  
Rei - Glad to see you are ok. I though Daz's remarks were going to give you a coronary - Jeezzz, the 'arguments' some people make - Nuf said.
 
Rei
2001-08-01 03:38:53 PM  
Hehe, thanks everyone :)

Oh, and I just noticed a typo:

"So was the world being round, but its not true" should have been "So was the world being flat, but its not true". I just passed over it when proofreading ;)

-= rei =-
 
2001-08-01 04:15:50 PM  
i love bush

i hate Bush
 
2001-08-01 04:34:11 PM  
Rei, Don't take this the wrong way;)

Was it harder to tell your parents that you were gay or that you were a Democrat?
 
Rei
2001-08-01 04:55:35 PM  
I think they think I'm an independant currently ;)

-= rei =-
 
2001-08-01 05:10:43 PM  
Charlie: to conservative Republicans, being gay and a Democrate goes hand in hand :P

I must eat the brains of Rei to get her power and intellect!
 
2001-08-01 05:25:08 PM  
She (Rei) is a power to be reckoned with, is she not? I'm just glad that I agree with her on most things.
 
2001-08-01 05:25:37 PM  
Bush is merely trying to force his "morals" on other people, thus ensuring another generation which will "donate" 10% a week to a Christian church. Hell, this is almost like a Dogma sequel. Hang on, let me get Waters on the phone, he might be interested!
 
2001-08-01 05:26:31 PM  
Yes, World Citizen. We all ph34r R31.
 
2001-08-01 05:31:28 PM  
There are actually Abstinence courses that that say if you have have sex before you're married, you get a tumor in hoo-ha and you die. They even had a quack docter (got his PHD from the University of Kabul) who tried scared us with thes made up STD's
 
2001-08-01 05:39:29 PM  
Hey I didn't read this or the posts either-but....Abstinence is illogical. Bush is an idiot. The fundies are idiots. I am sick of those in power subjugating the rest of the population to their morality. The constitution guarantees freedom of religion which also entails freedom from religion. If you don't like freedom and want a fundamental christian church state, leave this country and do us all a favor. Reminds me, CC haven't seen you for a while, here is your bait, here troll, here troll, I have some nice billy goats for you.
 
2001-08-01 05:39:47 PM  
Wow, that was some thread Rei, Daz and a supporting cast of others put together. Impressive.

My two cents: Being a upstanding young catholic man (hehe) and being raised by a mother who is on the Caotholic Diocise (spelling??) board of directors for abortion in the state I'm in, even SHE realizes that abortion in the instance of rape/incest is appropraite, or in the case of medical complications for the child or mother. However, abortion as a contraseptive (I suck at spelling) is just wrong. In my opinion, do it if you are inclined to do so, I'm not your judge, what goes around will come around. The lack of accountability in this country is slipping, at least in my humble opinion.

I think the dumbing down of "kids" with sex ed is a step in the wrong direction. I don't believe in "if you hide the problem or situation, it will go away." Huh uh, that's not how it works in this country. It's just like if you were to take away abortion. That would be great! Silly people, nothin like a back alley abortion to get the heart pumpin!

Rei, keep up the good fight, people that blow hot air with nothing to back it up should come into the arena.
 
2001-08-01 05:43:57 PM  
First there is the Mexico City Policy.

Now there is this abstinence over contraception policy.

Bush is going to be one of the greatest threats to world health that we have ever seen. Condoms are not just for the prevention of pregnancy but they are also to prevent the spread of disease.

And frnakly, I grew up in the Old Mother Reagan's era and have seen the "Just Say No" stance is when you are trying to keep young people away from things that can harm them. It doesn't farking work.

They told me don't do drugs. No reason why, just don't do them because they are bad. Well I being a teenage kid decide that I can not condemn anything unless I understand it and now I see nothing really wrong with some drugs like pot but know why you don't do heroin or coke.

They told me don't have sex till I am married. Well I had already discovered beating the meat and if that was good with just me doing it... imagine what it would be like to have a girl do it. Or what if I put it in that warm little wet hole they have. woo hoo... this is great. Telling kids who have raging hormones to remain abstinent is like telling a starving man not to eat anything.
 
2001-08-01 05:51:44 PM  
It always amuses me when people talk about they have a greater right to discuss abortion than someone else because they know/are someone who had/considered an abortion.

The lie my mother told me when I was little, and that I according told to strangers, was that she and my father had divorced before I was born. As I found out later, my mom wasn't married, but my father was. My mom had a boyfriend I can vaguely remember being around until I was five or six, and when it eventually occurred to me to think about it, I (mistakenly) assumed that he was my real father.

When I was 15 or so, I was bored one day, and started poking around in old boxes in closets around the house. I came across a piece of notebook paper with my mom's handwriting on it. On it were two columns:

REASONS NOT TO HAVE THE BABY

and

REASONS TO KEEP THE BABY.

In the first column were ten or twelve items, including:
"I can't afford to have a baby."
"My own mother thinks I'm a slut."
and
"I make [her boyfriend] physically sick. He vommited when I told him."

In the second column was only one.
"The only reason to keep the baby is that I would love it and care for it."

I'll let you all wonder where I stand on the issue for a while. I'll tell you, and why, later tonight, when I have more time to write.
 
2001-08-01 05:57:32 PM  
Hey Rei, remember the other day when you were asking for liberal news sources? You just linked to one.
 
Rei
2001-08-01 06:00:57 PM  
I have some catching up to do on this thread, but I just saw this. You know that 100-million-dollar missile test, the first one out of 4 to work? Well, guess what - it had a GPS beacon in it which transmitted its coordinates at all time! Amazingly our missile dodged the "chaff" it sent off (needless to say, the chaff had no GPS broadcasting its coordinates on it ;) ).

-= rei =-
 
2001-08-01 06:01:15 PM  
Jclark666:

It's situations like yours that equate this thread of dribble down to specific, first hand examples. Reading your post gave me goosebumps. If I were involved with my girlfriend in a situation like this, I would object to an abortion. Of course, I don't have to worry about that since she feels the same way, but I'm getting off the subject.

I just can't begin to feel what you must have felt when you found that notebook...
 
2001-08-01 06:07:43 PM  
Pbsaurus:
I am sorry to inform you that CC (aka Christian Conservative) is dead.
He died a couple of weeks ago.
It was all over Fark.
 
Rei
2001-08-01 06:16:22 PM  
Jclark666:

I understand where you're coming from. You should also understand where the infinite number of children who were never concieved would feel the same way. Everyone who's not born would feel the same way. Every pregnancy where the egg wasn't ready, either due to birth control or "natural" factors could have been a child. Every time the "rythem" method was practiced, a child could have been born if the people involved hadn't tried to avoid it. Every person who has taken a vow of celebacy and followed it in history has destroyed potential lives that would have occured had they not. The reality is that these people did not exist, and do not have remorse about their nonexistance as such.

Kind of a hard topic to debate, because consciousness itself and existance are fairly abstract topics. :)

Benjamin:
And that is a general liberal new source... how? That compares to newsmax... how? That tries to look like a non-biased source when its actually highly biased... how? They discuss religious topics only. It doesn't venerate or demonize people simply because of their party affilation, only venerates those who fight forcing of religious morals on others and demonizes those who force religious morals on others. It most certainly doesn't try to pass as an unbiased paper, in the least. Finally, can you even dispute anything presented there?

Sorry, I'm still looking for something that compares to Newsmax, in its tactics of trying to pass as a legitimate news site, while giving highly political news. (Btw, Newsmax isn't the only conservative group doing that... the common tactic for hardcore right-wing groups like the AFA and FOTF is to post a disguised PR Newswire article out there in hopes that a legit paper will pick it up and think it is from a legitimate source.)

-= rei =-
 
2001-08-01 06:45:32 PM  
JClark666,

I have to agree with Rei on this one. But your story also highlites one thing for me, at the time your mother had a choice one way or the other. She chose to have you, because she decided that she could overcome all the shiat she was having to go through to have something that she could love. Not all women in the same situation have the same resolve that your mother did or the same force of will. Some women in the situation will end up becoming lousy mothers. You were lucky. Most children born in the same situation are not.
 
2001-08-01 07:55:14 PM  
Sigh, this abortion argument is such a stupid one. Here are the 2 sides.

1) KILLING IS WRONG!!!!

Well yeah, killing a human being IS wrong.

2) WOMEN SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE WHAT TO DO WITH THEIR OWN BODIES!!!!

Well yeah, thats true too, if a woman wants to pull something out of her body that she doesn't want there, she should be able to do it.

Therefore, both sides are right, the big question is when does the fetus become *alive*? Quite frankly, thats a great question, and right now, nobody can answer that. Until we are actually able to figure out what life IS, we won't know, argument over :)
 
2001-08-01 08:07:44 PM  
CC was crucified, what a waste.
 
Rei
2001-08-01 08:26:33 PM  
Tarl3k:

Its alive the whole time. Every cell in the body is too, though - life isn't the definition we're looking for here. We're looking at the scale of complexity, of individuality of the being.

There are no binary systems in the real world.

-= rei =-
 
2001-08-01 08:29:40 PM  
REI: Nice use of the term "straw man".

OK, people, here it is:
If you want welfare, you must be sterilized.

("Flame-on!")
 
2001-08-01 08:33:34 PM  
"There are no binary systems in the real world."

I concur. Bipolar thinking was the 'original sin'.

Nothing is either good or bad
but thinking makes it so
William Shakespeare (Hamlet)
 
2001-08-01 08:38:29 PM  
Oops, that is:

There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.
Hamlet. Act ii. Sc. 2.

("I hate it when that happens.")
 
2001-08-01 08:46:07 PM  
Uh . . that should, also, be "bilateral" not "bipolar"

Maybe I should call it a day, and quit while I'm behind.
 
Rei
2001-08-01 09:06:03 PM  
Nanookanano:

Don't worry, we'll catch down with you sooner or later ;)

-= rei =-
 
2001-08-01 09:33:37 PM  
I've got my daughter for two weeks.
She is six.
I am tired.
(But, it's a *good* tired.)
 
2001-08-01 10:18:58 PM  
I'm tempted to wait a while for a few more "I'm so with you, abortion is evil!" and "Your story was moving, but I've got to say something to negate its evil anti-abortion message!" responses. As entertaining as that might be, my story was true and not just a troll, although I posted it knowing full well the assumptions people would make.

Before continuing, let me respond to a couple things:

Rei:
A quick reductio ad absurdum: Murder is perfectly acceptible because once they're dead, the victims don't care anymore. I'll address this further in a minute.

Code_Archeologist:
You've made assumptions about both me and my mother. The assumptions about me, I'll get to in a second. About my mother: I was born over 10 weeks premature, and spent many many months in an incubator. It's possible that my mother had not decided before she went into labor. It's also possible that she _had_ decided, and that I was born anyway. It's not something I've discussed with her.

Nevertheless, I can't complain about her parenting. I've seen the way other families act together and I'm always amazed how these people fight and scream at each other and can't have rational arguments about anything. I never felt that my mother resented my presence, or that she didn't love me, or that she felt she had made a mistake by keeping me.

All of which is more personal than I really wanted to get in to. I merely wanted to establish my credibility to discuss the issue, to fight the "you're male" argument against what I'm about to say.

Burt:
Thank you for your sympathy. The experience was rather upsetting, and not something I'd wish on anyone. It has, however, led me to look at the abortion issue from a perspective that is usually represented by pro-life ads featuring dialog like, "I could have been a baseball star, but Mommy killed me." I know for a certainty I could have been aborted, not as an intellectual abstraction, but as a concrete fact that affects me personally. And I'm sorry that I'm about to disapoint you.

I told you I'd tell you where I stand, and why. So here goes.



First, I can't support the complete abolition of abortion. There are times when abortions are necessary and ethical. Sometimes, of course, these ethics are relative, and some might disagree about specific instances, but even filtering to any specific set of reasonable morals, there always seem to be *some* cases where abortion is justified.

Second, I am opposed to offering abortion only in cases of rape or incest (or incestuous rape).

Rape, because I believe there would be a greater incidence of falsely reported rapes if that was the only way to obtain abortions. This would lead to a stigma of women only reporting rape because they want an abortion, and therefore a reduction in genuine rapes being reported.

Incest, for two reasons. First, because of the relative morality of consensual incest. I'm an only child, so fortunately I'm immune to cheap shots on this account. (But I would like to say that if I had a sister as good-looking as me, I'd do her. I'm one fine-looking man.) Joking aside, incest is taboo, but not a moral crime. The only legitimate issue with consensual incest is the increased danger of producing offspring with birth defects, which leads to my second reason. I don't think it's right to say "this fetus *might* produce a defective child, so it's OK to abort *this* one." And limiting availability to cases where clear genetic problems exist is a solution that leads to Fascism. What constitutes a "clear genetic problem"? Being blind? Deaf?

Incestuous rape, because it discriminates against women who were raped by non-relatives, but were no less victimized.

From my first two points, comes my third; I can't support anything that says "abortions are OK in this instance, but not in this one." Abortion is a touchy subject, and one that relies on relative morals more than almost any other. It is therefore impossible to mark a black-and-white boundary around when abortions are and are not permissible.

This brings me to where I stand on abortion:

I 100% believe any woman, of any age, should have the right to have an abortion for any reason, at any time during her pregnancy.

Of course, it's not that simple. One can not walk into and out of this dilemma without it affecting them.

My stance is based on a strong belief in personal freedom. With that belief comes an equally strong belief in personal responsibility, and duty to the society that provides this freedom. (Although I admit I fail in acting on this sometimes. I'm not a complete hypocrite.) So I must include a few more slightly wacko points in my manifesto here.

Government should not subsidize abortion. The whole relative morals thing comes in to play again. (I'm all for a "faith-based" program to fund abortions, however, and would demand it get equal time with any faith-based anti-abortion program. I have no problem with private organizations funding abortions or opposition to abortions, but I can't agree with forcing either side to fund something they're so passionately opposed to.) However, if you got pregnant, or got someone pregnant, _you_ have a responsibility. It doesn't matter if you were using condoms, depo, the rhythm method, and the anal-sex-only method all at once. You had sex, you fertilized an egg, now you have to deal with the consequences. Yes, I understand rape is different. Most pregnancies, even the unwanted ones, are not the result of rape (unless you're a really hard-core rhetorical feminist, in which case all hetero sex is rape.) If you're _not_ using condoms, the pill, depo, or some other reliable method of birth control, and you don't want a child, you're an idiot, a fool, or a nihilist who just doesn't care. Doesn't matter, you're still responsible.

Late-term abortion, when the fetus is viable, should only be performed via a method that gives the fetus a chance of survival. At this point, six months or more have passed to make a decision. Soul, no soul, able to live without a respirator and incubator or not, it's one of us now, and deserves a fighting chance. The parents should be responsible for the cost, and the child, if it survives, should be placed into adoption. Feminists will hate me for this. "How dare a man suggest I should be cut open or forced into labor and have to pay for it! That's patriarchal and Fascist!" Fundies will hate me for this, too. "If those children were kept in their mothers just a couple weeks longer, they'd be born and happy! That's evil!" I disagree. I see it as preserving a woman's right to choose not to continue to carry a parasite around in her abdomen while simultaneously doing my best to preserve the child's chance to live, and maintaining the parents' responsibility. Sorry, there has to be a compromise somewhere.

I support an individual's right to choose. But I can't support that person's right to choose without consequence. You cannot have the right to free speech without accepting the obligation to use it properly, you cannot have the right to bear arms without accepting the obligation not to shoot people, and you should not have the right to an abortion without accepting the responsibility for getting pregnant.

Abortion as contraception is wrong. Abortion for the sake of convenience is wrong. These are my beliefs. Yet still I support the right to choose.

This issue revolves around life. I only have one, and it's not going to last forever. I'm here right now, and this is the only place I have been or will ever be. My life, and any life, is precious because it only has one chance to exist. Life should not be created lightly, because then it is equally lightly destroyed. Life should not be destroyed lightly, because if life is worthless, then I am worthless, and there is no point in contuing living.

So there you have it, my atheistic, pro-choice, pro-life stance on abortion.

Flame on, Wayne! Flame on, Garth!
 
2001-08-01 10:53:11 PM  
The story was true.

15 years later I still have nightmares about it, and I still find myself fixated on that moment whenever the abortion question comes up.

Mme.Mersault owes me an apology in a very large way.
 
2001-08-01 11:45:22 PM  
Strider: You definitely going to hell for that picture.
I will be the one with the huge bong and the John Lennon glasses. See you there.

Mibbees:
"Everytime I hear anything about your new prez I get more and more worried....... "
Hey Dubya is just not our Bush, He is your Bush too.

And for my part, saying condoms don't work is a lie. By the time I get one on... well I am either 'done' or not interested.

Latex does nothing for me. Sorry.

-----------------

Smell my finger?

~ Pinky ~
 
2001-08-01 11:48:40 PM  
Damn. Did anyone here watch Southpark tonight?

The whole episode sounded like it was based on this string.

Those guys are quick if nothing else.

~ Pinky ~
 
2001-08-02 12:04:23 AM  
Rei--

This is an odd place to extend this thread... but:

I don't think NewsMax attempts to pass itself off as unbiased at all. Their featured selling point is their editorializing and right wing slant. I don't see how any reasonable person could look at the site and come to any other conclusion. They are quite deliberate about it.

I should point out that most of the articles linked to here seem to come off the editorial column (the column on the left-- look at the NewsMax front index layout directly to see this). All that stuff on the left hand column is investigated, reported, editorialized directly from the NewsMax staff.

There's also a column on the right that links to right-wing pundits employed across the country (radio personalities, columnists, essayists, etc.)

But that column down the middle with the big headlines... NewsMax basically does the same thing Fark does, which is to collect news articles from various sources and link to them. Obviously they just collect stuff that's of interest to their right wing audience.

But every article is clearly labeled at the top as to its source. If it comes directly from the NewsMax staff or NewsMax "wires," as opposed to an article from another news source-- various papers, periodicals, etc.-- it will say so.

More and more lately they've gotten into the habit of throwing advertisements down that center column, and usually very near the top headlines. Although clearly labeled as such, this really annoys the crap out of me.

I do get a lot of my news-entertainment from NewsMax but try never to link to it here to support any position. Far better to link to the original "unbiased" source.

Ah, in answer to your question about your link, the "article" stopped being news and became op-ed when in the opening paragraphs it referred to the pro-life movement as the "compulsory pregnancy movement."

What do I dispute about that? Nothing, I don't know anything about the site or the "facts" it presents. But it is rather disingenuous for you to link to that site to support your arguments here when it is obviously no more a "news" site than NewsMax; and you'd rake an opponent over the coals for doing something similar.

benjamin
 
2001-08-02 12:40:16 AM  
I stated earlier that if for some reason my parents had some sort of problem (i.e. not enough money so our lives would be miserable, me having some horrible defect, risk to my mother's life, etc...) that I would have wanted them to abort me. Why? Why not? I would not have known. If they aborted me early enough, I would have had no conscious brain function. I would not have known the difference. I wouldn't be here to argue and type this, but I would have never known that to be possible, therefore not missed it. If someone murdered me now, they would be robbing my conscious mind of its thought about future. I'm not sure I explained that right.
 
2001-08-02 12:47:35 AM  
Its only a matter of time until kids start suing their parents for not aborting them (ala, that one deaf, blind, paralyzed kid who sued his parents and won because he should have been aborted). If there is one thing that will put an even greater fear in a fundie more-so than God's wrath, it is being farked over 6 six ways from Sunday by a hound of blood-thirsty satanic lawyers bitter at the world for having to go to law school for 7 years.
 
2001-08-02 12:52:34 AM  
Our definition of life also has to be redefined, because technically (according to current definition), infertile humans are not alive (since they can not reproduce on with another partner of their kind. Ala, virii which are also not considered alive for the same reason).

So one could say people aren't alive until they can procreate using our current biological definitions (although pushing it to an extreme).

On a side note, I had an odd feeling of DeJa Vu after watching South park tonight. Its like they are... reading what we type... hmm. Ok, so how is Ms. ChoksonDik, and who is Mr. Garrison?
 
2001-08-02 12:53:05 AM  
Er.. "how is ms. Choksondik" should read "who is ms. Choksondik"
 
2001-08-02 04:51:48 AM  
WorldCitizen - I'm not sure it CAN be explained right. Not-being is inconceivable. Well, for me, anyhow. S'what's scary 'bout death, I guess. If it is death that's scary, and not just the process of dying.

Oh yeah - something that hasn't been mentioned so far, as far as I can tell: fatih. People of faith (or what other term anyone wants to use) believe in (as in "are convinced of", a.k.a. "know of") the existence of the soul. The missionary reflex sets in, and they start playing "kids" (of god), teaching us other "kids" what our benevolent "parent" wants - just so we won't be punished when god finds out, kind of thing.
What gets me, is when they start knocking off doctors in the name of the cause - even if it is "kill one (evil) doc, save dozens of (innocent) souls", which strikes me as very old-testament.
My point is that they aren't simply psycho farkbrains, but for them, the world looks *completely* different than it does to me - and from within that world, I look like the guy who doesn't "get it".

Hey, shoot me down in flames, tar me and feather me, read my profile and mock me, but:
one: "I would like to be a fish. I would enjoy that."
two: "But you cannot know what it is like to be a fish."
one: "Then - you cannot know what it is like to be me. You cannot know what I can and cannot know."

<sticks head in pail of water>
 
2001-08-02 05:09:40 AM  
<pulls head out again>

Kids, don't try this at home.

<drips, rather pathetically>
 
2001-08-02 11:38:13 AM  
I didn't sleep well last night. I'm still upset enough to be trembling this morning. But I'll take a moment to respond.

My mom's a low-key Baptist fundie. She's not vocal about it, and I don't think she's been to church outside of funerals in ten years (although we used to go every Sunday, and I went to church youth groups until I started high school), but she regularly listens to religious radio and maintains a subscription to Focus on the Family.

It's possible what I found was part of a fundie anti-abortion campaign, something my mother saw and copied for herself, to meet her needs and help her make her decision. It's even possible that it was something printed in a handwriting font that I, in the trauma of reading it, mistook for my mother's handwriting, and somehow mentally transposed Angelo's name onto it.

What it was, where it came from, why it was written - to me these are irrelevant. It doesn't negate the trauma I experienced, nor alter the way I reflect upon it now. The fact is, I found it, read it, and haven't been able to mentally put it down. As a teenager, self-worth is often hard to come by; something like this sticks with you forever. To you it's an urban legend. To me it's a farking nightmare.
 
Rei
2001-08-02 12:06:46 PM  
Jclark666:

A quick reductio ad absurdum: Murder is perfectly acceptible because once they're dead, the victims don't care anymore. I'll address this further in a minute.

Ah, but you have to throw away half of my argument to reach that point ;) I've made two primary points throughout this debate that relate to this:

1) If something has human DNA, its a human, right? Ok, than I am 50 million humans. I'm committing mass murder just by sitting here, as some die off. Oh, wait, so we don't care about human DNA being destroyed? Well, perhaps its *unique* DNA that we care about! But, wait, we destroy unique organisms all the time, for food, just by walking and breathing and existing. So, its not unique organisms? Well, why would you all of the sudden combine two "I don't care"'s into an "I care enough to force my beliefs on others!"?

In reality, the only thing that makes killing a human a tragedy is destroying their humanity, their uniqueness of massively complex thoughts. A human born with no brain, people would have no trouble killing that. In fact, hospitals give up when the brain dies. DNA dying is not a tragedy. A complex human mind dying is a tragedy.

2) Everyone who's not born would feel the same way. Every
pregnancy where the egg wasn't ready, either due to birth control or "natural" factors could have been a child. Every time the "rhythm" method was practiced, a child could have been born if the people involved hadn't tried to avoid it. Every person who has taken a vow of celebacy and followed it in history has destroyed potential lives that would have occured had they not. The reality is that these people did not exist, and do not have remorse about their nonexistance as such.

You see, you only took argument (2) into account. Murder destroys something that *did* exist, a complex human mind, in violation of (1). For your argument to make sense, I would have to believe that even the immediate past has no meaning, which I think is something you'll find very few people believe (there are some atheist/non-existentialists who believe that, mind you, but not many at all). In this case, there is no past - there never was the mind, as described in (1). You might as well claim that destroying a rock is murder, too - no mind there either.

-= rei =-

P.S. - I have to agree with Mme.Mersault. Either you have an amazing coincidence there (down to the last word, in some cases), or you're staying in character well. I'm not going to speculate on which one is which, of course :) Another not-proposed possibility is that your mother used to circulate anti-abortion letters. That is a really old story; unless the letter is ancient, it probably was circulating around back then.
 
2001-08-02 12:28:56 PM  
Rei-

Your agrument still allows for infanticide. There's no "complex human mind" being destroyed there. If you argue that there is a mind there, then you either have to say there's a magical moment that happens when a child is born that gives it a mind, or you have to accept that a mind develops at some point before birth. If you accept that, then where do you draw the line - how do you pinpoint where the mind develops?

You do have a point, my mother could have been part of a fundie letter-writing mill, and I hadn't considered that. Again, at this point it's irrelevant.
 
2001-08-02 12:42:08 PM  
You know, when Bush first won the election, I guess I was like more than half of Americans (The ones that didn't vote for him) in that I said to myself, "O.K. things are going good, he can't do too much damage in 4 years".
Oh My God. He is really scaring me. Pissing off the Russians and Chinese over a Missile Defense system that is expensive and will never work. Starting Government funding of Faith based charities. Depleting the Treasury to the point that the government has to start borrowing money again to pay it's bills. Giving the green flag to drilling for oil in the Alaskan wildlife refuge. Refusal to ratify the Kyoto agreement on Carbon Dioxide emissions and managing to make the US look arrogant to the rest of the world. Sacrificing the California economy in favor of his Texas energy buddies. Turning back to clock on what little gun policy there is in this country.
It has only been 6 months. Lord Help Us All.
 
Rei
2001-08-02 02:02:27 PM  
Jclark666:

Rei-

Your agrument still allows for infanticide. There's no "complex human mind" being destroyed there. If you argue that there is a mind there, then you either have to say there's a magical moment that happens when a child is born that gives it a mind, or you have to accept that a mind develops at some point before birth. If you accept that, then where do you draw the line - how do you pinpoint where the mind develops?


Jclark: You don't draw the line. There is no "magical moment", as I've said, and as you pointed out. Birth is not a magical moment, either. The mind slowly develops before birth and after. That is why I support laws that steadily get make it harder to have an abortion as the pregnancy progresses, offbalanced by the risks to the mother. Yes, you'd probably have to have a graduated system, as laws don't work well with linear systems; this would mean you'd have to draw arbitrary lines; acknowledging that they are just that, arbitrary. For a certain length of time, a woman can have an abortion without even councelling; there's not even the beginnings of a mind, let alone a complex mind, etc, etc. Varying degrees of councelling are needed after that, offset by risk factors and psychological factors. At birth, the discussion ends, as there are other, more reasonable alternatives after birth if the mother doesn't think she can support the child, such as adoption.

What you have the whole time is a balance between individual rights of the mother and the rights of the embryo/fetus/child. You need to consider it as

Importance[mother]*complexity[mother] vs. Importance[fetus]*complexity[fetus]. Importance[fetus] will always be 100%, since it is all or nothing. However, complexity[mother] will also always be higher than complexity[fetus], though the latter will rise during pregnancy. Importance[mother] is the importance of getting an abortion, to the mother, taking all physical and psychological factors into account.

I know it probably seems rather cold and calculating to be representing things as numbers, and I'm certainly not advocating a number-based determination system, but this is what things really boil down to.

-= rei =-
 
2001-08-02 03:00:19 PM  
If your sister was actually "talked into" having an abortion, after 6 months, better watch her, she'll be in a cult soon if she's that influencable.

Varying degrees of councelling are needed after that, offset by risk factors and psychological factors.


Following Rei's logic, apparently we're just going to pay counsellors to be ignored.

I certainly hope we're paying those salaries with tax money.

benjamin
 
Rei
2001-08-02 04:25:10 PM  
Um?

You obviously don't know the purpose of councelling. And, if that's the best argument you can make against my case, that's pretty pathetic, you didn't even touch an issue.

And, OOC, are you just following me around to try and be a pain? It sure seems that way.

-= rei =-
 
Displayed 50 of 154 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report