Ethical Dilemma

JohnnyGreenfingers said:

That, my friend, was money! I'm letting you know right now that I fully intend to plagiarize this the next time I'm in a similar discussion.

Click to expand...

Dully noted. All rights released.

OGEvilgenius said:

No one here argued that it should be that way...



Are you an anarchist? It's a legitimate thing, just curious. I've always felt laws should protect people from others. What we define as people is where our disagreement lies (unless you're an anarchist).

Click to expand...

Nobody argued it should be that way? I could be mistaken but I thought that your opinion was that abortion should be outlawed in general, and your reasoning was because you think a fetus is a human being with the same (or in this case, more) rights than the bearer of said fetus.
I don't know what I would be labeled as, but anarchist is not one of them. That could change though, given the right situation.
I agree with laws protecting people (and property) and I do see your point.

No real disprespect intended (although I was extremely close to attempting to pay for an abortion in your honor), but I'm going to stick with "have your kid in the amazon and explain to the wildlife your fetus' right to live"

I stated multiple times that I thought abortion was fine in the case where the mother's life was in danger or where she was raped and able to make the choice herself. I don't see how you can possibly say I'm giving the fetus more rights than the mother or father either. All I want to do is protect those who cannot yet protect themselves.

And no one has a "right" to live, as you cannot guarantee anyone's life. That point isn't exactly relevant to the discussion we are having. You can't guarantee someone won't steal something from you, but we still have laws against it.

OGEvilgenius said:

I stated multiple times that I thought abortion was fine in the case where the mother's life was in danger or where she was raped and able to make the choice herself. I don't see how you can possibly say I'm giving the fetus more rights than the mother or father either. All I want to do is protect those who cannot yet protect themselves.

And no one has a "right" to live, as you cannot guarantee anyone's life. That point isn't exactly relevant to the discussion we are having. You can't guarantee someone won't steal something from you, but we still have laws against it.

Click to expand...

"Abortions should be at Walmart for free."

"All teenage girls should get required to get an abortion."

I HAD TO!

[youtube]FMEe7JqBgvg[/youtube]

I feel it is the choice of the mother. The motivation for the abortion is irrelevant. Furthermore, any legislation controlling woman's rights, should be voted on by women only. As a man, I will never know what I'm talking about. Only what I think it's like. The sad truth is, unless that girl has educated parents, and a support structure, modern society will riddle her with guilt, forcing it to go to term.

I'm just glad that this will never be anything but discussion. We've moved far enough out of the caves that a law like this would never pass. If they just failed in Mississippi, how would it ever pass anywhere?

I think your position is disgusting to be honest. If the reasons for the abortion fit what you think is right, fine kill a fetus, but if not there should be a law (laws come with penalties if you break them, friend) to penalize the mother and champion the mighty and all important "OGevil approved" fetuses!

This is really old for me, you'll never change my mind and I won't change yours. Thankfully this isn't China so you're fucked if you think it will ever happen. Just sayin'

My point about giving the fetus more rights than the mother is fairly obvious. You're taking a fetus, which is hotly debated as a life or not a life, and saying that because you are on the side of "it's alive!!!!!1!!!one!!", that if the pregnancy evolved from a situation other than what is on your approved list, the mother would then be bound by law (or pay the consequences for breaking it) to carry the child to term.

Beyond that, man has proven time and again that he cannot be trusted in matters of control. You give them (us) the right to start legislating what happens with your own body and how long before it's illegal to be fat? To be ugly? Gay? Ducy?

Your right should only be to have an opinion if you don't like abortion. And oddly enough, that's exactly how it is!

JustCoasting said:

I think that if any other species was doing to the planet what we (as humans) are doing, we would be hunting it down and eradicating it.

So, I think we (as humans) are not doing right by our planet.

Click to expand...

One of our biggest threats are viruses and bacteria. I have always wondered if this is mother earths little control switch. Sometimes a virus pops up and wipes out shit tons of us, yes with our keen intellects and technology we have a fighting chance... but even in this day and age it is the one thing we are always looking over our shoulder for.

When Mother Earth has had enough of us, she'll shake us off of her back like the pesky little fleas we are.

Idk about you, but I'm looking over my shoulder for niggaz! (<----joke loosely quoted from Chris Rock)

afrawfraw said:

His reasons for getting an abortion or not does NOT matter. My reasons for being an Atheist or a Catholic do NOT matter. A fetus has no rights. It is a growth. The question is at what point to we consider this fetus a citizen. Then it gets rights. Have your kid in the Amazon, and explain to the wildlife your fetus' right to live.

Click to expand...

His reasons absolutely do matter. His opinion of whether society can make a law against something should be directly related to whether he thinks it is wrong. I don't see how you can separate the two.

If you feel it is not wrong, how could you justify making a law against it?
If you feel it is wrong, how could you justify not making a law against it?

What does the amazon have to do with your right to life? You do know i'm not talking about god given rights or a guarantee of life? I'm talking about the right to life extended to all humans that we decided on as a civilized society.

If you guys will stop arguing I promise I will never post another thread in toke and talk. I'll stick to replying to other people's posts, scouts honor.

guy incognito said:

His reasons absolutely do matter. His opinion of whether society can make a law against something should be directly related to whether he thinks it is wrong. I don't see how you can separate the two.

If you feel it is not wrong, how could you justify making a law against it?
If you feel it is wrong, how could you justify not making a law against it?

What does the amazon have to do with your right to life? You do know i'm not talking about god given rights or a guarantee of life? I'm talking about the right to life extended to all humans that we decided on as a civilized society.

Click to expand...

Laws should NOT be written based on personal beliefs. Laws should be written for the protection of every one. Abortion should be legal to all for any reason because WHO THE FUCK AM I to tell another women what to do when I wasn't there and don't even know her? This is about rights for EVERY one, not just people you accept. Laws should reflect logic and reason, not personal opinion, crazy man.

THIS IS EXACTLY why I said in an earlier post, the real issue is when does this fetus become a CITIZEN of a country. These are the only "RIGHTS" a life has. The amazon reference was to illustrate that rights to life are a societal thing, not a natural thing. Which society? Who agreed? By your definition, Marijuana should remain illegal because people are ignorant and "FEEL" it is dangerous. That's what's wrong.

Population size is already being controlled in a lot of countries due to high amounts of people. The average family has 2.5 children, meaning population is steadily increasing. In some areas you are not allowed to have children, They have things similar to lotteries and if you win you are able to have a child. I believe its in china your only allowed to have one child per family? The amount of children you have is already being controlled in certain areas, and that is just a glimpse as to what is to come. If the world continues to overpopulate imagine what will happen, the entire earths natural resources will be used up, no room to farm or produce food. Dying of starvation is a big enough issue right now, what about when half the worlds population will not be able to have food. The earth will be only be able to sustain so many people.

stonerman said:

Population size is already being controlled in a lot of countries due to high amounts of people. The average family has 2.5 children, meaning population is steadily increasing. In some areas you are not allowed to have children, They have things similar to lotteries and if you win you are able to have a child. I believe its in china your only allowed to have one child per family? The amount of children you have is already being controlled in certain areas, and that is just a glimpse as to what is to come. If the world continues to overpopulate imagine what will happen, the entire earths natural resources will be used up, no room to farm or produce food. Dying of starvation is a big enough issue right now, what about when half the worlds population will not be able to have food. The earth will be only be able to sustain so many people.

Click to expand...

interestingly, studies suggest that there is in fact NO food shortage. the problem is with the distribution of the food. in america we throw more food in the trash in a day than 3rd world citizens see in a month. food shortage my ass.

i might have mentioned this on here before, but i remember a section in one of my sociology books that explained what happens to a lot of vegetable crops that don't get harvested "in time". an entire field of carrots had gotten "too big" to fit in the company's carrot bags, so what did they do? they fucking destroyed the carrots. acres of them. do you know why? because it was cheaper to destroy the carrots than it would have been to harvest them for donation. this is not an anomaly. this is how things work in a capitalist society.

THAT sir, is the problem. i'm not anti-capitalist but that shit sickens me. if i had a magic wand and instantly teleported every bit of wasted food from the US to the rest of the globe, every person in the world would be fed and fat. this was true when there were 3 billion people, and 5 billion, and 7 billion, and it will continue to be true for several years. there may be a food shortage one day, but today ain't that day.

It is sickening. Are you aware that a child dies every 3 seconds from starvation alone. 1...2....3...and another death could have been prevented. There is currently more then enough food to feed the entire world so nobody would starve.

i think it would be better for society to do good sex education, hand out condoms, etc. make it a big campaign that shows people how population growth works and how they can help slow it down. forcing people to be sterile will just make them leave the country or resent their government even more.

Total Head said:

interestingly, studies suggest that there is in fact NO food shortage. the problem is with the distribution of the food. in america we throw more food in the trash in a day than 3rd world citizens see in a month. food shortage my ass.

i might have mentioned this on here before, but i remember a section in one of my sociology books that explained what happens to a lot of vegetable crops that don't get harvested "in time". an entire field of carrots had gotten "too big" to fit in the company's carrot bags, so what did they do? they fucking destroyed the carrots. acres of them. do you know why? because it was cheaper to destroy the carrots than it would have been to harvest them for donation. this is not an anomaly. this is how things work in a capitalist society.

THAT sir, is the problem. i'm not anti-capitalist but that shit sickens me. if i had a magic wand and instantly teleported every bit of wasted food from the US to the rest of the globe, every person in the world would be fed and fat. this was true when there were 3 billion people, and 5 billion, and 7 billion, and it will continue to be true for several years. there may be a food shortage one day, but today ain't that day.

Click to expand...

hmm... maybe someone could start a program that pays for the expense of harvesting, as long as they donate everything to the program. even if it still costs too much to ship it to africa, we could still give it to prisoners or the poor in our own country

Many many charities already, like 2nd Harvest. cn

cannabineer said:

Many many charities already, like 2nd Harvest. cn

Click to expand...

good, i did not know that

Luger187 said:

i think it would be better for society to do good sex education, hand out condoms, etc. make it a big campaign that shows people how population growth works and how they can help slow it down. forcing people to be sterile will just make them leave the country or resent their government even more.

Click to expand...

Not really. While education is the key, unless we kill religions, we will be running in circles. How many religions on earth promote birth control?

afrawfraw said:

Not really. While education is the key, unless we kill religions, we will be running in circles. How many religions on earth promote birth control?

Click to expand...

Well there was that lovely comet cult. Or the community in Texas somewhere, now where was that ... oh yes. Corpus Crispi. Kool-Aid, anyone? cn

cannabineer said:

Well there was that lovely comet cult. Or the community in Texas somewhere, now where was that ... oh yes. Corpus Crispi. Kool-Aid, anyone? cn

Click to expand...

Which is why I chuckle every time I drink a "JONES" Soda!