08-11-2003 01:08									#61
	Support Apolyton

quote: Like not getting on a space ship in the first place, without knowing I'll have some method of support.

To continue Elok's analogy further, abortion is like someone shoving you out the airlock. Of course, you would want to have the choice to prepare, but that's exactly what we deny the unborn child.

	08-11-2003 01:10									#62
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: A fetus is not a person. A person is sentient, a fetus, embryo, or zygote is not. So lets stick to facts, 'k?

UR:

So an infant is not a person? How can an infant possibly be sentient?

	08-11-2003 01:12									#63
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: And I'd rather have these things decided by a democratic process than by a ruling minority (or singularity), since the few can make sweeping and irresponsible alterations to society.

Theben:

I agree, however that is exactly what happened during Roe v. Wade, in that a small majority of judges decided the policy for the entire country.

So if you are in favour of democratic process, than we ought to put this matter to a referendum, rather than allowing the courts to oppose the will of the people.

	08-11-2003 01:16									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Azazel Ethics, on the other hand, aren't about conformity, but about reason. And if you think that morality is fluid, etc. why do you think slavery should've been abolished? why you think that segregation should've been abolished? most people supported it.

Slavery came under attack after the ratification of the U.S. constitution (in the U.S.) and the spread of French concepts of personal liberty and rights of men from the elite to the common people. Now while most whites didn't think of blacks (or any non-whites) as true equals, they were beginning to think that they should have self-determination. By the time of the civil war, a majority of people in fact thought slavery should be abolished.

As for morality be fluid, you answered your own question.

	08-11-2003 01:20									#65
	Suffering from ads?

Rogan Josh:

quote: Now I don't think a newly fertilised egg is any more 'life' than the guy on life support,

What is a fertilised egg? There is no such thing. Sperm and egg cease to be at conception, so the union of the two form a zygote.

quote: Now we define the guy on life support as 'alive' if he has significant brain activity. I don't see anything wrong with this definition - if the fetus has no significant brain activity then it is not aware and not conscious.

Actually, the biomedical definition of brain death is not the current lack of brain function, but the irreverseable cessation of brain activity. For if we were to gage the current lack of brain function, a person during open heart surgery would not be considered a person.

The key is in that one word, as to where we define personhood, at the end of life, 'irreverseable' cessation of brain activity.

quote: So my opinion is that abortion is OK (but should not be encouraged) until the fetus has significant brain activity. Does anyone know when this is? (Pretty early I would think.)

Okay, Rogan, why should we not encourage a woman to have an early abortion if there is nothing wrong with abortion at that period in time?

	08-11-2003 01:27									#66
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Ned:

quote: After that period of time, the viable human has rights that cannot be removed, but must be "balanced" against the rights of the mother to life and health. If the pregnancy has no hope but would only kill the mother, it should be terminated. If the mother could potentially die or suffer some serious health risks, she has the superior right.

There are some problems with your definition. 'If the mother could potentially die' is very poorly worded, since all pregnancies carry a marginal risk. Therefore your ban would allow abortions throughout all nine months of any pregnancy.

quote: Then there is the issue of deformity, genetic disease and the like. Terminating a pregnancy under these circumstances should also be permitted if not required.

What is wrong with genetic deformity? If we allow people to kill these children before they are born, why can the not do so afterwards? The same for genetic disease. Why should anyone be permitted to kill someone just because they are considered to be 'genetically defective?'

quote: Such a birth can catastrophically affect families or society in addition to the pain and suffering to the infant

Catastrophically affect? Again, see my previous answer. If these children are so expensive, and such a burden on their parents and society, why should we kill them before birth and not after?

	08-11-2003 01:32									#67
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Theben Slavery came under attack after the ratification of the U.S. constitution (in the U.S.) and the spread of French concepts of personal liberty and rights of men from the elite to the common people. Now while most whites didn't think of blacks (or any non-whites) as true equals, they were beginning to think that they should have self-determination. By the time of the civil war, a majority of people in fact thought slavery should be abolished. As for morality be fluid, you answered your own question.

Slavery came under attack during the Roman Empire with the dawn of Christianity and never subsided. It grew in force in England and America not by any kowtowing to "French" ideas but at the behest of the so-called religious right who now lead the fight against abortion.

More revisionist history.

	08-11-2003 01:39									#68
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by GePap There is no such thing as a right to life. Every day we define people in different groups, and a fetus is not defined as a person, so this notion that this is about taking a human life to me can only be backed by religious conviction mostly. I agree with Freako, the either or arguement is absurd: abortion is a legislative issue, not a constitutional one, or an either or one.

I presume from this that you would agree that the current legislation banning partial birth abortion is constitutional?

	08-11-2003 02:02									#69
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

BenK:

quote: I agree, however that is exactly what happened during Roe v. Wade, in that a small majority of judges decided the policy for the entire country. So if you are in favour of democratic process, than we ought to put this matter to a referendum, rather than allowing the courts to oppose the will of the people.

Sure why not. I'm positive that the majority will ask for what I believe in: no interference with 1st trimester abortions, 2nd trimester abortions requriing some oversight, and no 3rd, unless the life of the mother is in danger, or in case of rape. Would you and all other Christians be satisfied with that result?

Ned:

quote: Slavery came under attack during the Roman Empire with the dawn of Christianity and never subsided.

Okay, Ned. I meant slavery in America, which I'm sure you could've figured out had you tried. But even you're wrong, since the Bible tells of the slaves fleeing the Pharoh in Egypt. Well before Christ.

quote: It grew in force in England and America not by any kowtowing to "French" ideas but at the behest of the so-called religious right who now lead the fight against abortion.

Does your hatred of the French extend to denying history? Why do you think England and America started attacking slavery as an institution? And yes, religious groups did attack slavery, but bear in mind 1)the church was the main focal point of the community back then, and the best way to meet others and spread ideas, 2) those people weren't the "religious right". They came from all points on the spectrum, although most were what you would've called, had you been alive then, "leftists".

quote: More revisionist history.

Next time you should put that at the start of your tirade so everyone knows that's what you'll post. Not that we don't already.

	08-11-2003 03:12									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Ned Slavery came under attack during the Roman Empire with the dawn of Christianity and never subsided. It grew in force in England and America not by any kowtowing to "French" ideas but at the behest of the so-called religious right who now lead the fight against abortion.

Read "The Autobiography of Frederick Douglass" if you want evidence that by no means did all members of the religious right oppose slavery. (Link is to a free online version of the book.)

Here a key quote

quote: In August, 1832, my master attended a Methodist camp-meeting held in the Bay-side, Talbot county, and there experienced religion. I indulged a faint hope that his conversion would lead him to emancipate his slaves, and that, if he did not do this, it would, at any rate, make him more kind and humane. I was disappointed in both these respects. It neither made him to be humane to his slaves, nor to emancipate them. If it had any effect on his character, it made him more cruel and hateful in all his ways; for I believe him to have been a much worse man after his conversion than before. Prior to his conversion, he relied upon his own depravity to shield and sustain him in his savage barbarity; but after his conversion, he found religious sanction and support for his slaveholding cruelty.

http://www.galileolibrary.com/ebook...ass_page_12.htm

	08-11-2003 03:16									#71
	Tired of ads?

my views on abortion change on a case by case basis. yet, I think if abortion is legal it should be made legal at every stage until the child is fully independent... you know, like 18 or so...

	08-11-2003 03:27									#72
	Increase Your PM Length

There are always ethical arguments against abortion, from the perspective that the fetus is a potentially thinking, living, air-breathing human being. Personally, I would argue all of these things, but I believe only women (at least at this point, we are physiologically limited) should have the right to say what can live in her body and what can't.

If it were solely the man's decision, he would be forcing a woman to endure 9 months of physical suffering and encumberment for his benefit only, especially if the woman bearing the child has expressed the desire to terminate the pregnancy. This is like a mandatory jail sentence for the mistake of letting some a55hole shoot off inside, and is completely unfair to the woman. Why should the man get a say in how that woman's life will progress for the next 9 months? Women don't necessarily have a say in the man's life, and he bears none of the responsibility or burden.

From a woman's point of view, abortion should be a non-issue. If women started letting other people dictate what goes into her body, what stays, and what leaves, she might as well go get that lobotomy, work for Heidi Fleiss and then hire herself out as a human incubator, because that's all she'd have left.

I think when men decide that it is their right to determine the fate of abortion, it is a case of how much of a control freak that man is trying to be.

Furthermore, there are almost never any proponents for the children's welfare when they are born. The US education system is a farce, adoption is not nearly as accessible nor publicised as it should be to compensate for the number of unwanted children in the world, not to mention the social stigma for having given a child up in the first place. But that's neither here nor there - the world's already as f'd up as it's going to get.

	08-11-2003 03:30									#73
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I am not sure why Methodists would sanction slavery. But the beginning of the end of slavery as an institution began in the Roman Empire when Christians adhered to the concept that all men were created equal before God. I presume that the Christians in the South had to define the black man has "subhuman" to maintain their belief that slaves had no rights as human beings. One can see echoes of this depraved concept in today's abortion advocates who to declare the fetus as something other than a human being. Indeed there is much in common with some abortion advocates and Confederate slaveowners.

Last edited by Ned on 08-11-2003 at 04:06

	08-11-2003 03:35									#74
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Also, Theban et al., I will concede to the idea that America freed it slaves based on ideas flowing from French humanists if you can cite one speech by Lincoln that made any reference to them.

	08-11-2003 03:38									#75
	Inflate your Upload Space

I think abortion, in general, denies ones right to LIFE, and that is immorally(which are subjective by the way) wrong.

My analogy? You are standing at the edge of a cliff. You grab a child and a rope and you tell the child to hold on to the rope and then throw that child of the cliff. You are now standing on the side of the cliff holding onto that rope. All you have to do is hold on until that child climbs up, letting go would be abortion.

	08-11-2003 03:38									#76
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Maybe men could force women to have babies if women could force men to have vasectomies.

	08-11-2003 03:39									#77
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: I guess if the state would be governed by laws that say to ... kill all black people, for example, you'd be ok with it, too? and if not why not?I am sorry, but that's bull. you have to solve a moral issue here. Or do you think that murder should be a legislative matter, either?

This always come up, and as far as this arguement goes, it is only tangetially applicable. At the base, yes, it would be legal to kill black people if the law said "it is OK to kill black people". IN Sparta weak babies had to be exposed to death to keep the city strong: the fact is that today's morality is not absolute, simply becuase morality is a human invetion, a social convention, unless you claim one from God. Sentience can not grant special rights..from whom? (again, only a god or gods could?).

And murder is a legislative matter, since the legislature gets to say what is murder and what is not. Until 20 or less years ago, hitting someone while drunk was not murder but manslasughter..but then a new class of murder was introduced..where was the morality of that? So yes, murder is regulated and legislated, and thus, so is abortion.

quote: Once upon a time, slavery was legal, and noone questioned it Does that mean that it was right?

Lets put it simply, explain to me the basis of your moral absolutism..on what ground can a pronoucment of the rightness or wrongness of something stand? Untalitarianism? well, then, some slavery should be had, no?

	08-11-2003 03:46									#78
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Theben Maybe men could force women to have babies if women could force men to have vasectomies.

Ever considered a career in diplomacy?

	08-11-2003 03:46									#79
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Ned Also, Theban et al., I will concede to the idea that America freed it slaves based on ideas flowing from French humanists if you can cite one speech by Lincoln that made any reference to them.

Can you find any examples of a Lincoln speech where he says he freed the slaves for political gain? No? Does that mean it didn't happen?

The ideas of the humanists originally influenced the thoughts and writings of our forefathers, the drafters of the constitution. You can find citations of both Jefferson and Franklin regarding the French. The effects of this have been felt for over 200 years, if not directly mentioned in speeches.

	08-11-2003 03:48									#80
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by st_swithin Ever considered a career in diplomacy?

Yeah, but I've also considered a career in saying whatever I thought it would take to get into a woman's panties.

	08-11-2003 03:52									#81
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I think we have had a discussion about the slaves before. We noted that slaves, in the north, were already be "free", and the reason for the EP was to encourage southern slaves to come north to join the armies during a time of Yankee shortages. I don't think the end of slavery had any thing to do with any moral agenda on Lincolns part, and that the movement that ended slavery was already in motion far before Lincoln was probably even born.

Was it French ideals? I don't know. Chances are it was more due to the lack of need for them. Industry no longer needed "free" labor as machines were performing most of the deeds that were demeaning enough to watch them do... It became more the fashion to have children do them

	08-11-2003 04:04									#82
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi There are some problems with your definition. 'If the mother could potentially die' is very poorly worded, since all pregnancies carry a marginal risk. Therefore your ban would allow abortions throughout all nine months of any pregnancy.

Ben, I hope you would agree that no human as an absolute right to life regardless of circumstances. A person forfeits is is right to life for example when he takes up arms against you and tries to kill you. There are circumstances during a pregnancy where the pregnancy actually threatens the life of the mother. Here we have a choice, do we not? One of the two must die. The choice is which one. Under the circumstances, I think the balance of rights favors preserving the life of the mother.

quote: What is wrong with genetic deformity? If we allow people to kill these children before they are born, why can the not do so afterwards? The same for genetic disease. Why should anyone be permitted to kill someone just because they are considered to be 'genetically defective?'

This raises the whole concept of whether euthanasia is acceptable. Can one kill a human being to put that human being out of its misery?

The answer of courses is complicated. If the person requests assistance in dying, I think there is no serious ethical question involved. If the person however is unable to communicate, we allow the guardian to make the decision. In the case of an infant, that guardian normally is the mother and father who should be able to make the choice.

Did you know that one of the 10 laws inscribed in stone in the Roman forum around 500 B.C. enjoined the Romans to kill deformed infants? I think we Americans will eventually end up at the same place and permit horribly deformed infants to die on birth.

quote: Catastrophically affect? Again, see my previous answer. If these children are so expensive, and such a burden on their parents and society, why should we kill them before birth and not after?

Same answer. I think will eventually permit deformed and genetically diseased infants to die rather than to allow them to suffer horribly until they do die. Not pulling the plug under these circumstances in my view is inhumane.

	08-11-2003 04:12									#83
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Theben Yeah, but I've also considered a career in saying whatever I thought it would take to get into a woman's panties.

Same thing.

Hey, look, H.L. Mencken predicted the uselessness of the argument for/against abortion:

"There is, in fact, no reason to believe that any given natural phenomenon,
however marvelous it may seem today, will remain forever inexplicable.
Soon or late the laws governing the production of life itself will be
discovered in the laboratory, and man may set up business as a creator
on his own account. The thing, indeed, is not only conceivable; it is
even highly probable."
-- H.L. Mencken, 1930

	08-11-2003 04:38									#84
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Japher I think we have had a discussion about the slaves before. We noted that slaves, in the north, were already be "free", and the reason for the EP was to encourage southern slaves to come north to join the armies during a time of Yankee shortages. I don't think the end of slavery had any thing to do with any moral agenda on Lincolns part, and that the movement that ended slavery was already in motion far before Lincoln was probably even born. Was it French ideals? I don't know. Chances are it was more due to the lack of need for them. Industry no longer needed "free" labor as machines were performing most of the deeds that were demeaning enough to watch them do... It became more the fashion to have children do them

Japher, the war started because Lincoln was elected president. He fully intended to confine or abolish slavery. He did not free the slaves only to destabalize the South.

The Republican party was formed as a merger of Whigs and Abolistionists. The Abolistion of slavery was a major purpose of the party.

	08-11-2003 04:50									#85
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: The ideas of the humanists originally influenced the thoughts and writings of our forefathers, the drafters of the constitution.

My man, Theben, is 100% correct on this point. The French humanists, such as Voltaire and Rousseau were very, very influential on the American revolutionaries.

quote: He did not free the slaves only to destabalize the South.

If that is true, he should have freed slaves everywhere, right? However, the Emancipation Proclimation ONLY freed slaves in the areas where the Confederacy still ruled. Slaves in areas of Union rule were SOL.

	08-11-2003 05:04									#86
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Japher Was it French ideals? I don't know. Chances are it was more due to the lack of need for them. Industry no longer needed "free" labor as machines were performing most of the deeds that were demeaning enough to watch them do... It became more the fashion to have children do them

I never meant to imply that it was solely French ideals that ended slavery. As always, it's a number of reasons: ideals, increased industrialization in the North AND South, the cost of owning slaves vs. hiring workers, political expediency.

	08-11-2003 05:06									#87
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by st_swithin Hey, look, H.L. Mencken predicted the uselessness of the argument for/against abortion

Mencken couldn't have predicted the internet.

	08-11-2003 12:39									#88
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi To continue Elok's analogy further, abortion is like someone shoving you out the airlock. Of course, you would want to have the choice to prepare, but that's exactly what we deny the unborn child.

You are begging the question, because you are already assuming the "unborn child" is a person.

	08-11-2003 12:40									#89
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi So an infant is not a person? How can an infant possibly be sentient?

Why not? Have you tried to put a mirror in front of an infant? It recognises itself.

	08-11-2003 21:14									#90
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Why not? Have you tried to put a mirror in front of an infant? It recognises itself.

When it's first out of the womb it can't recognize anything; it barely sees any shades other than black and red. To put it another way, what makes the child out of the womb worthy of full protection under the law-in fact, anybody who took to killing newborns for money or expediency would probably get a lot worse than a normal murderer-whereas a fetus a few days/months younger has no rights at all? There's no pat analogy here, but nobody's ever explained to me why it doesn't matter that one becomes the other.