Oppinions on abortion?

[Robert Magoo]

Of course not. I just always find it funny that the people who claim to believe in universal morality are also arrogant enough to believe that they are totally in tune with said objective morality.

See I'm weird. I only claim what I believe is right. I don't claim an objective/universal morality. Besides I have a hard time believing one size would fit all where morals are concerned.

I think the very concept of natural rights and limited government is dependent on universal morality. Without it, there is no non-utilitarian argument against fascism, for example. I believe fascism is not only ineffective, but wrong. I hold nothing against those with different ideas from myself, but I personally can't see things any other way.

[UCUMAY]

See I'm weird. I only claim what I believe is right. I don't claim an objective/universal morality. Besides I have a hard time believing one size would fit all where morals are concerned.

I think the very concept of natural rights and limited government is dependent on universal morality. Without it, there is no non-utilitarian argument against fascism, for example. I believe fascism is not only ineffective, but wrong. I hold nothing against those with different ideas from myself, but I personally can't see things any other way.

And that's where you will fail. I can play the devil's advocate on most issues. I argue with myself until I find the most practical, logical, humane political ideas possible.

[Robert Magoo]

I think the very concept of natural rights and limited government is dependent on universal morality. Without it, there is no non-utilitarian argument against fascism, for example. I believe fascism is not only ineffective, but wrong. I hold nothing against those with different ideas from myself, but I personally can't see things any other way.

And that's where you will fail. I can play the devil's advocate on most issues. I argue with myself until I find the most practical, logical, humane political ideas possible.

Right. I don't mean to say that I can't understand how a person would hold a different perspective, only that actually changing my own perspective on the matter would violate the understanding I have of myself and my place in the world.

[Wiztopia]

Isn't it easier for women to know what's right for women?

I guess the thing is that i see right and wrong as universal. Generally, I don't think government has the responsiblity to regulate moral issues, but when they have a direct impact on the rights of others, that changes things.

Fetuses don't deserve rights.

[Robert Magoo]

I guess the thing is that i see right and wrong as universal. Generally, I don't think government has the responsiblity to regulate moral issues, but when they have a direct impact on the rights of others, that changes things.

Fetuses don't deserve rights.

Okay. I still say otherwise, but whatever.

[UCUMAY]

I guess the thing is that i see right and wrong as universal. Generally, I don't think government has the responsiblity to regulate moral issues, but when they have a direct impact on the rights of others, that changes things.

Fetuses don't deserve rights.

It depends who you ask. A mother who wants her child and suffers an assault that results in the death of a fetus deserves rights in my opinion.

[Soviet Haaregrad]

Fetuses don't deserve rights.

It depends who you ask. A mother who wants her child and suffers an assault that results in the death of a fetus deserves rights in my opinion.

Yes, she deserves rights, not the fetus.

[Wiztopia]

Fetuses don't deserve rights.

It depends who you ask. A mother who wants her child and suffers an assault that results in the death of a fetus deserves rights in my opinion.

The woman does at least.

[UCUMAY]

It depends who you ask. A mother who wants her child and suffers an assault that results in the death of a fetus deserves rights in my opinion.

The woman does at least.

But at that point is it an assault, attempted murder, or murder?

[Wiztopia]

The woman does at least.

But at that point is it an assault, attempted murder, or murder?

Assault and attempted murder if they tried to kill the woman.

[UCUMAY]

But at that point is it an assault, attempted murder, or murder?

Assault and attempted murder if they tried to kill the woman.

If they didn't try to kill her, but tried to kill baby? Maybe assault with deadly force?

[Wiztopia]

Assault and attempted murder if they tried to kill the woman.

If they didn't try to kill her, but tried to kill baby? Maybe assault with deadly force?

They put that under the Fetal homicide law. It isn't murder though.

[The Evil Reich]

See I'm weird. I only claim what I believe is right. I don't claim an objective/universal morality. Besides I have a hard time believing one size would fit all where morals are concerned.

I think the very concept of natural rights and limited government is dependent on universal morality. Without it, there is no non-utilitarian argument against fascism, for example. I believe fascism is not only ineffective, but wrong. I hold nothing against those with different ideas from myself, but I personally can't see things any other way.

Why do you need a non-utilitarian argument against fascism? What is wrong with a utilitarian argument?

I don't want to completely derail the thread into a debate about fascism, but your argument is bunk. Just because you believe something is wrong doesn't mean it is. If you cannot provide a sound logical reason WHY it is wrong, then you have no right to expect other people to agree with you and you have no right to expect other people to live by your moral code.

[Robert Magoo]

I think the very concept of natural rights and limited government is dependent on universal morality. Without it, there is no non-utilitarian argument against fascism, for example. I believe fascism is not only ineffective, but wrong. I hold nothing against those with different ideas from myself, but I personally can't see things any other way.

Why do you need a non-utilitarian argument against fascism? What is wrong with a utilitarian argument?

I don't want to completely derail the thread into a debate about fascism, but your argument is bunk. Just because you believe something is wrong doesn't mean it is. If you cannot provide a sound logical reason WHY it is wrong, then you have no right to expect other people to agree with you and you have no right to expect other people to live by your moral code.

Why should I care what provides the most utility?

It's wrong because it takes away the God-given rights of property and life, among others. Don't like my reasoning, too bad. I'm not changing it for you.

[Wiztopia]

Why do you need a non-utilitarian argument against fascism? What is wrong with a utilitarian argument?

I don't want to completely derail the thread into a debate about fascism, but your argument is bunk. Just because you believe something is wrong doesn't mean it is. If you cannot provide a sound logical reason WHY it is wrong, then you have no right to expect other people to agree with you and you have no right to expect other people to live by your moral code.

Why should I care what provides the most utility?

It's wrong because it takes away the God-given rights of property and life, among others. Don't like my reasoning, too bad. I'm not changing it for you.

It doesn't take away any "God-given rights" since it is just a fetus that is killed. Now that you have revealed you are arguing from religion your argument is invalid.

[Robert Magoo]

Why should I care what provides the most utility?

It's wrong because it takes away the God-given rights of property and life, among others. Don't like my reasoning, too bad. I'm not changing it for you.

It doesn't take away any "God-given rights" since it is just a fetus that is killed. Now that you have revealed you are arguing from religion your argument is invalid.

Nope.

[The Evil Reich]

Why do you need a non-utilitarian argument against fascism? What is wrong with a utilitarian argument?

I don't want to completely derail the thread into a debate about fascism, but your argument is bunk. Just because you believe something is wrong doesn't mean it is. If you cannot provide a sound logical reason WHY it is wrong, then you have no right to expect other people to agree with you and you have no right to expect other people to live by your moral code.

Why should I care what provides the most utility?

It's wrong because it takes away the God-given rights of property and life, among others. Don't like my reasoning, too bad. I'm not changing it for you.

I didn't ask why fascism was wrong. I asked why you need a non-utilitarian argument.

[Wiztopia]

It doesn't take away any "God-given rights" since it is just a fetus that is killed. Now that you have revealed you are arguing from religion your argument is invalid.

Nope.

Yep. Arguing from religion to say abortion is wrong is a shitty argument so it is invalid.

[Robert Magoo]

Why should I care what provides the most utility?

It's wrong because it takes away the God-given rights of property and life, among others. Don't like my reasoning, too bad. I'm not changing it for you.

I didn't ask why fascism was wrong. I asked why you need a non-utilitarian argument.

Because there's no clear basis for why utility matters. I'm not saying utility is worthless, only that it alone doesn't really make the case.

[Robert Magoo]

Nope.

Yep. Arguing from religion to say abortion is wrong is a shitty argument so it is invalid.

Argument from secular humanism to say that abortion is acceptable is a shitty argument so it is invalid.

[Wiztopia]

Yep. Arguing from religion to say abortion is wrong is a shitty argument so it is invalid.

Argument from secular humanism to say that abortion is acceptable is a shitty argument so it is invalid.

Except I don't. Unless you think arguing from logic and science is secular humanism. Any time religion is used in an argument such as to be against abortion or gay marriage is invalid. Especially when the bible or such other books don't even mention abortion.

[Robert Magoo]

Argument from secular humanism to say that abortion is acceptable is a shitty argument so it is invalid.

Except I don't. Unless you think arguing from logic and science is secular humanism. Any time religion is used in an argument such as to be against abortion or gay marriage is invalid. Especially when the bible or such other books don't even mention abortion.

I'm not forcing my beliefs on you. But if they weren't my beliefs, I wouldn't use them. Since they are, it would require congitive dissonance for me to not rely on them.

Abortion is wrong because its the taking of innocent life. You're free to say otherwise, but don't expect me to follow your values.

[Wiztopia]

Except I don't. Unless you think arguing from logic and science is secular humanism. Any time religion is used in an argument such as to be against abortion or gay marriage is invalid. Especially when the bible or such other books don't even mention abortion.

I'm not forcing my beliefs on you. But if they weren't my beliefs, I wouldn't use them. Since they are, it would require congitive dissonance for me to not rely on them.

Abortion is wrong because its the taking of innocent life. You're free to say otherwise, but don't expect me to follow your values.

It isn't a person and is only killing a fetus.

[Robert Magoo]

I'm not forcing my beliefs on you. But if they weren't my beliefs, I wouldn't use them. Since they are, it would require congitive dissonance for me to not rely on them.

Abortion is wrong because its the taking of innocent life. You're free to say otherwise, but don't expect me to follow your values.

It isn't a person and is only killing a fetus.

Got it. Not changing my opinion, but I think you knew you wouldn't be able to.

[Wiztopia]

It isn't a person and is only killing a fetus.

Got it. Not changing my opinion, but I think you knew you wouldn't be able to.

I know I wouldn't. At least that time you didn't try the religion argument.