Ethical Dilemma

[neosapien]

We still have plenty of oil. Everyone says we are running out, and we will eventually, but not in our life times. We have plenty of time to solve the problem.

And why do we need paleowater? Water falls from the sky all the time. I have never spent significant amounts of time concerned with water. I live in michigan though, surrounded by the largest source of fresh water on earth, so maybe i'm biased on this issue. Now if you'll excuse me I need to go turn some faucets on for awhile.

According to Planet Earth, The Amazon is the largest source of fresh water.

 

[guy incognito]

Regardless, the great lakes have 5,439 cubic miles of fresh water. That's a lot of water.

 

[JohnnyGreenfingers]

What if I want to murder my neighbor? Is that nobodies business but my own? What if I am a siamese twin? It's MY body my bro is attached to, I can do what I like with it, and if I want to cut my bro off then its MY decision. Never mind that he will die without my heart.

At some point the mass of cells in the uterus becomes a human and deserves all natural rights that humans get. I don't know exactly when it goes from a lump of YOUR cells to a human being that deserves to not be murdered, but that is the main problem I have with the "my body" argument. It's IN MY body, but it is not MY body; it is a completely different human that is not me.

I'm sorry, but this is an absolutely ignorant response. We were speaking strictly of someone's right to tell another person what they can do with something inside that person's body based on the first person's "beliefs" about what is or isn't life. Life is everywhere. The life that's inside my body isn't your business until it comes out.
Aborting an unborn fetus is the same as killing your neighbor? Well played sir, someone here might think you're serious...

This has given me an idea that I love. And I'm dedicating it to the original clownshoes from last night and you. Thank you, kind sir.

 

[guy incognito]

I'm sorry, but this is an absolutely ignorant response. We were speaking strictly of someone's right to tell another person what they can do with something inside that person's body based on the first person's "beliefs" about what is or isn't life. Life is everywhere. The life that's inside my body isn't your business until it comes out.
Aborting an unborn fetus is the same as killing your neighbor? Well played sir, someone here might think you're serious...

This has given me an idea that I love. And I'm dedicating it to the original clownshoes from last night and you. Thank you, kind sir.

And this is what I have a problem with. As long as it is still inside your body YOU don't consider it human (or give it any humans rights).

What about stabbing a fetus in the head through the vagina during labor? Is that murder since it was still technically inside the body, even if it was 10 months old? What about a birth that was 2 months premature? Can you murder that baby since it will be less developed than the previous example?

Is your distinction between human and non human (and by this I mean it has the right to life, and extinguishing that life would be considered murder) literally whether it is just inside your body or not?

 

[medicalmaryjane]

they say a baby can survive outside the uterus after 25 weeks but even at that age, they dont have fully developed organs and need a lot of medical intervention - often times they end up with major longterm complications. brain activity doesn't occur until around that age as well. it's sort of like asking if you would take somone off of a respirator if they were laying in the hospital for months without any brain activity. it's not a nice thought but sometimes it's necessary. most abrotions happen within the first 10 weeks. A embryo isn't technically a fetus until 10 weeks. it has no human features, no organs, no brain, no spine, nothing. it's a fertilized egg.

i wish some of these prolifers would put some energy into humane treatment of animals. i think we kill way too many animals.

 

[JohnnyGreenfingers]

And this is what I have a problem with. As long as it is still inside your body YOU don't consider it human (or give it any humans rights).

What about stabbing a fetus in the head through the vagina during labor? Is that murder since it was still technically inside the body, even if it was 10 months old? What about a birth that was 2 months premature? Can you murder that baby since it will be less developed than the previous example?

Is your distinction between human and non human (and by this I mean it has the right to life, and extinguishing that life would be considered murder) literally whether it is just inside your body or not?

You should go back and re-read. I said that I consider it life or independently alive at the point in time that it could survive on it's own if removed from someone's body. Whenever that is in medical terms is where I would draw the line for abortions. The great thing about this is, if you don't like abortion, you don't have to have one. If I do, I am free to do so. Case closed.

 

[guy incognito]

You should go back and re-read. I said that I consider it life or independently alive at the point in time that it could survive on it's own if removed from someone's body. Whenever that is in medical terms is where I would draw the line for abortions. The great thing about this is, if you don't like abortion, you don't have to have one. If I do, I am free to do so. Case closed.

I did read it. I also read this which directly contradicts:

I'm sorry, but this is an absolutely ignorant response. We were speaking strictly of someone's right to tell another person what they can do with something inside that person's body based on the first person's "beliefs" about what is or isn't life. Life is everywhere. The life that's inside my body isn't your business until it comes out.
Aborting an unborn fetus is the same as killing your neighbor? Well played sir, someone here might think you're serious...

This has given me an idea that I love. And I'm dedicating it to the original clownshoes from last night and you. Thank you, kind sir.

And to say "The great thing about this is, if you don't like abortion, you don't have to have one. If I do, I am free to do so. Case closed. " completely skirts the moral issue. That's like saying slavery is legal, so if you don't like slavery you don't have to own any. If I do, I am free to do so. Case closed. Do you see how it would be wrong of me to enslave people regardless of whether I am legally allowed to or not? And that it would absolutely be the business of other non slave owning people to protect their basic human rights to not be slaves?

 

[JohnnyGreenfingers]

A cool thing about this country is the fact that you can be redonkulously wrong about everything and for the most part nobody kills you for it. I cannot help you comprehend plain English. Anyway, I'm inspired to post some intarwebz ads offering to pay for a couple of abortions as a charitable donation, I just need to check the legalities of doing it in the name of a couple people itt. Looks like you and OGwhatever have just made the life of a couple unhappily pregnant females a little bit brighter today. Isn't the internet powerful? Who knew?

 

[Total Head]

You should go back and re-read. I said that I consider it life or independently alive at the point in time that it could survive on it's own if removed from someone's body. Whenever that is in medical terms is where I would draw the line for abortions. The great thing about this is, if you don't like abortion, you don't have to have one. If I do, I am free to do so. Case closed.

for the record, i am staunchly pro-choice even though i don't at all like the idea of abortion as birth control, but your reasoning intrigues me.

you consider it a "life" at the point at which it could survive on its own. let's suppose that tomorrow a new medical technology came out and this technology verified without a doubt that a fetus or cells or whatever you want to call it is capable of experiencing consciousness at say, 5 months. not that it could survive outside the womb, just that it was conscious of its surroundings. would this change your threshold or no?

the reason i ask is that my personal threshold for becoming uncomfortable is if/when the fetus is aware of what's happening to it. since medical science can't actually tell us with certainty at what point in development this occurs, i'm not too bothered by it. just wondering what you think.

 

[JohnnyGreenfingers]

for the record, i am staunchly pro-choice even though i don't at all like the idea of abortion as birth control, but your reasoning intrigues me.

you consider it a "life" at the point at which it could survive on its own. let's suppose that tomorrow a new medical technology came out and this technology verified without a doubt that a fetus or cells or whatever you want to call it is capable of experiencing consciousness at say, 5 months. not that it could survive outside the womb, just that it was conscious of its surroundings. would this change your threshold or no?

the reason i ask is that my personal threshold for becoming uncomfortable is if/when the fetus is aware of what's happening to it. since medical science can't actually tell us with certainty at what point in development this occurs, i'm not too bothered by it. just wondering what you think.

Let me start by saying that I don't think I would want an abortion if I got a girl pregnant. I'm strictly arguing the fact that other people should have no say in my body or yours.
I think the way it's done now is fair, they have limits on how far along you can be and still get an abortion. I know there are late term abortions, that's pretty bad imo. Further, I personally would not want to abort anything that was conscious of it's surroundings, etc, even if that started from day one. BUT, I would probably rail hard against anyone making a law telling other people that they couldn't. Each individual has to decide what they can or cannot live with, but nobody else should ever be able to decide that for you if you have the capacity to do so yourself.

 

[guy incognito]

A cool thing about this country is the fact that you can be redonkulously wrong about everything and for the most part nobody kills you for it. I cannot help you comprehend plain English. Anyway, I'm inspired to post some intarwebz ads offering to pay for a couple of abortions as a charitable donation, I just need to check the legalities of doing it in the name of a couple people itt. Looks like you and OGwhatever have just made the life of a couple unhappily pregnant females a little bit brighter today. Isn't the internet powerful? Who knew?

I don't know why you think I don't understand english. Did you post those two contradictory sentences I quoted? Because i'm looking at them right now, and they are not compatible with each other. Makes me wonder if you in fact understand english.

Also I don't have a problem with abortion. I think in certain situations it really is the best option. Also if something is just a lump of cells with no consciousness then I don't see how you can consider them human.

I do have a problem with the way you presented your arguments, and the arbitrary distinctions you use to differentiate between what is acceptable and not. Specifically the whole "my body" argument. I think it is an absolutely terrible and thoughtless argument and ignores the fact that even though it is inside your body it is actually a separate person with a separate brain and nervous system with separate thoughts and experiences. While it is inside your body, in no way is it actually YOUR body.

I don't know the exact moment a fetus becomes human, or deserves the right to life. I don't know that anyone can nail down exactly when that happens, but I think it's clear that it is sometime between conception and delivery. At some point in that time frame it ceases to be "your body" and starts to be the body of a different person.

 

[JohnnyGreenfingers]

What if there were a law forcing every pregnant female to carry the child to full term, and the mother died from complications of childbirth or something? Who would be responsible then, if a law forced someone to do something that could potentially shorten or end their life and it actually did?
I don't know, I'm not a tree hugger or anything but at this point in history it sure seems like people are obsessed with telling other people what to do. You have to draw a line somewhere, and for me this is my line. Man's law stops (in my mind) and becomes my choice once it reaches my skin.

 

[JohnnyGreenfingers]

I don't know why you think I don't understand english. Did you post those two contradictory sentences I quoted? Because i'm looking at them right now, and they are not compatible with each other. Makes me wonder if you in fact understand english.

Also I don't have a problem with abortion. I think in certain situations it really is the best option. Also if something is just a lump of cells with no consciousness then I don't see how you can consider them human.

I do have a problem with the way you presented your arguments, and the arbitrary distinctions you use to differentiate between what is acceptable and not. Specifically the whole "my body" argument. I think it is an absolutely terrible and thoughtless argument and ignores the fact that even though it is inside your body it is actually a separate person with a separate brain and nervous system with separate thoughts and experiences. While it is inside your body, in no way is it actually YOUR body.

I don't know the exact moment a fetus becomes human, or deserves the right to life. I don't know that anyone can nail down exactly when that happens, but I think it's clear that it is sometime between conception and delivery. At some point in that time frame it ceases to be "your body" and starts to be the body of a different person.

No. No I didn't. I posted two entirely different sentences. One having to do with when I personally consider it a life, and one having to do with when I would consider it fair for YOU to tell me what I can or cannot do with it by law. Can you comprehend this?

 

[guy incognito]

What if there were a law forcing every pregnant female to carry the child to full term, and the mother died from complications of childbirth or something? Who would be responsible then, if a law forced someone to do something that could potentially shorten or end their life and it actually did?
I don't know, I'm not a tree hugger or anything but at this point in history it sure seems like people are obsessed with telling other people what to do. You have to draw a line somewhere, and for me this is my line. Man's law stops (in my mind) and becomes my choice once it reaches my skin.

Like I said i'm not anti-abortion. Especially in the case that carrying could potentially be fatal to the mother.

 

[guy incognito]

No. No I didn't. I posted two entirely different sentences. One having to do with when I personally consider it a life, and one having to do with when I would consider it fair for YOU to tell me what I can or cannot do with it by law. Can you comprehend this?

So you personally consider it a life at a certain point, yet you don't think it's anybodies business until it comes out of your body? How is that not contradictory? You are saying it is a life, that deserves human rights, but simultaneously no one but YOU is in charge of ensuring those rights until after it leaves your body?

Or are you saying you believe it to be a human, but it does NOT gain the rights other humans have (such as the right to life) until after birth?

 

[JohnnyGreenfingers]

Like I said i'm not anti-abortion. Especially in the case that carrying could potentially be fatal to the mother.

Every single pregnancy is potentially harmful or fatal to the mother. Just because we are medically capable of keeping that percentage low now, it doesn't erase the fact that she absolutely could die from it. Or it could take enough from her body to significantly shorten her life. These are the kinds of things people don't think about when they are busy telling others what to do. It should be up to the pregnant person and nobody else, again, assuming she is capable of having an opinion in the matter.

 

[wheels619]

i think if people just stopped being assholes and having 400 kids. or they just used fuckin condoms. and dont give me this they are expensive shit. cuz planned parenthood gives them away for free. big ass fuckin bags of them.

sorry. i think if our population stopped being so fuckin lazy and retarded and actually educated itself instead of dropping out of school and milking the system. we wouldnt have any issues at all. granted not everyone does this but most of the u.s. population is highly under educated. most people are so greedy and selfish that they tend to have their head so far up their asses to really give two shits and care. over population wont hurt them cuz they will be gone by the time it really effects the world in a seriously horrible way is the way most people think about it. i know becuz i used to think that way before and as ive grown older i have started to care more about what happens around me and what could potentialy happen to all of our kids in the future. i think after 2 kids a mother should be steralized or the father should be steralized. its not the kids fault the parents arent the brightest peeps and keep popping out kids. plus the french have perfected a method dear to my heart thats always worked for me. pull out and nut all over that bitch. lmao.

 

[JohnnyGreenfingers]

So you personally consider it a life at a certain point, yet you don't think it's anybodies business until it comes out of your body? How is that not contradictory? You are saying it is a life, that deserves human rights, but simultaneously no one but YOU is in charge of ensuring those rights until after it leaves your body?

Or are you saying you believe it to be a human, but it does NOT gain the rights other humans have (such as the right to life) until after birth?

Lol...dude. Listen. Think about this slowly, somehow you're missing a huge point. I offered two different things: One, how I, Johnnygreenfingers (Tony) feel about it, and the other, what my opinion is on other people's right to make laws that place their opinion on me. Do you see what I'm saying?
I believe that regardless of my personal opinion on when life begins, it is still your right to do as you choose within the law. I don't think that there should be laws telling you that you have to think or act like or agree with me. It's a slippery slope once people start governing the inside of other people's bodies.

 

[guy incognito]

Every single pregnancy is potentially harmful or fatal to the mother. Just because we are medically capable of keeping that percentage low now, it doesn't erase the fact that she absolutely could die from it. Or it could take enough from her body to significantly shorten her life. These are the kinds of things people don't think about when they are busy telling others what to do. It should be up to the pregnant person and nobody else, again, assuming she is capable of having an opinion in the matter.

I think people do think about those things. I would be 100% supportive of an abortion that saves the life of the mother, even if it was late term. Usually it's not a case of 100% you will or won't die though, so there needs to be some risk assessment and evaluation. All i'm saying is that at some point before birth that fetus becomes a human and someone needs to look out for the rights of that baby because it's not capable of speaking up for itself.

 

[Perfextionist420]

Y'all postin in a troll thread