Kansas to enact "Life starts at fertilization" abortion law

[Risottia]

...Here's the thread: Kansas to enact life begins at fertilization law.

Of course life begins at fertilization... well, shortly after (first mitosis, I'd say, just to check it's working).
Personhood, on the other hand, is another story. Humans don't even get near neurological personhood one year AFTER birth.

NS, your opinion on this?

Fuck this, and fuck Kansas. Let's get back to the Falklands thread.

[Seperates]

Because they are a sapient being having their freedom and happiness infringed upon needlessly.

Why is sapience special? Why is freedom special? Why is happiness special?

They aren't.

Why is 'life' special?

[Alowwvia]

Because they are a sapient being having their freedom and happiness infringed upon needlessly.

Why is being sapience special? Why is freedom special? Why is happiness special?

Because they are a fundamental part of our experience. Without them, the human animal is nothing more than a shit-chucking ape like its cousins.

Our ability to facilitate patterns of amino acid and proteins to copy and mutate en masse does not impress me so much as our ability to be intro and extrospective, to ponder the universe around us, or to feel and think like we do. At a more fundamental level, these things are special because they are all we have: Liberty, happiness, imagination, thought, philosophy... I would rather be a fish with these things, than a man-ape without them.

[Zweite Alaje]

Why is being sapience special? Why is freedom special? Why is happiness special?

Because they are a fundamental part of our experience. Without them, the human animal is nothing more than a shit-chucking ape like its cousins.

Our ability to facilitate patterns of amino acid and proteins to copy and mutate en masse does not impress me so much as our ability to be intro and extrospective, to ponder the universe around us, or to feel and think like we do. At a more fundamental level, these things are special because they are all we have: Liberty, happiness, imagination, thought, philosophy... I would rather be a fish with these things, than a man-ape without them.

Too bad none of that matters, since being human in the first place is irrelevant.

[Alowwvia]

Because they are a fundamental part of our experience. Without them, the human animal is nothing more than a shit-chucking ape like its cousins.

Our ability to facilitate patterns of amino acid and proteins to copy and mutate en masse does not impress me so much as our ability to be intro and extrospective, to ponder the universe around us, or to feel and think like we do. At a more fundamental level, these things are special because they are all we have: Liberty, happiness, imagination, thought, philosophy... I would rather be a fish with these things, than a man-ape without them.

Too bad none of that matters, since being human in the first place is irrelevant.

'Being human'. here meaning 'A rather specific order of proteins, sugars, acids, and other particulate matter arranged in a self-replicating way in such conditions...', which is exceptionally materialistic and shallow.

[Risottia]

'Being human'. here meaning 'A rather specific order of proteins, sugars, acids, and other particulate matter arranged in a self-replicating way in such conditions...', which is exceptionally materialistic and shallow.

Face it.
Laws are just applied politics, which is just applied sociology, which is just applied psychology, which is just applied neurology, which is just applied biochemistry, which is just applied chemistry, which is just applied physics. Anything below physics is materialistic and shallow.

Then there's maths.

[Seperates]

'Being human'. here meaning 'A rather specific order of proteins, sugars, acids, and other particulate matter arranged in a self-replicating way in such conditions...', which is exceptionally materialistic and shallow.

Face it.
Laws are just applied politics, which is just applied sociology, which is just applied psychology, which is just applied neurology, which is just applied biochemistry, which is just applied chemistry, which is just applied physics. Anything below physics is materialistic and shallow.

Then there's maths.

And then there is Anthropology.

[Alowwvia]

'Being human'. here meaning 'A rather specific order of proteins, sugars, acids, and other particulate matter arranged in a self-replicating way in such conditions...', which is exceptionally materialistic and shallow.

Face it.
Laws are just applied politics, which is just applied sociology, which is just applied psychology, which is just applied neurology, which is just applied biochemistry, which is just applied chemistry, which is just applied physics. Anything below physics is materialistic and shallow.

Then there's maths.

xkcd is bretty good

[Zweite Alaje]

Why is sapience special? Why is freedom special? Why is happiness special?

They aren't.

Why is 'life' special?

Life is special because it is the apex of all of nature's abilities and to toss that out for some hedonist individuals is evil.

You rob this new entity of its own experiences and its own spot in our society.

[Surfistan]

I like these pro-life agents, because, "Hey I like fetuses, fetuses are people

This is accurate.

No, it's not.

Vegetarian.

Good for you.

and the militairy

Not really.

Better.

and Jesus

He's alright.

Agreed, partly.

Your attempt at being witty and/or edgy has failed.

Fair enough

I do apoligize if I made a blunt generalisation of Pro-lifers, but really you must be one in a thousand who happens to be semi-irreligious, vegetarian and a pacifist.

[Alowwvia]

They aren't.

Why is 'life' special?

Life is special because it is the apex of all of nature's abilities and to toss that out for some hedonist individuals is evil.

You rob this new entity of its own experiences and its own spot in our society.

Fuck nature, nature has no personality or mind, so I could give a shit what is 'natural'.

There was never an entity. Until you have an 'experience', you are not. Cognito ergo sum. An 'entity' without thought or subjective experience is without worth.

[Absurdity]

I do apoligize if I made a blunt generalisation of Pro-lifers, but really you must be one in a thousand who happens to be semi-irreligious, vegetarian and a pacifist.

Your apology is acknowledged.

You assume that I am not religious because I said that Jesus is "alright"? Surely, one can be religious and not consider Jesus to be what Christians believe he is. Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists also believe that abortion is wrong; I could be any one of these.

[Condunum]

I do apoligize if I made a blunt generalisation of Pro-lifers, but really you must be one in a thousand who happens to be semi-irreligious, vegetarian and a pacifist.

Your apology is acknowledged.

You assume that I am not religious because I said that Jesus is "alright"? Surely, one can be religious and not consider Jesus to be what Christians believe he is. Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists also believe that abortion is wrong; I could be any one of these.

Oh come on. If you want to be deceptive, you have to be subtle. I would know.

[Alowwvia]

Buddhists also believe that abortion is wrong;

top lel

[Oppressorion]

I do apoligize if I made a blunt generalisation of Pro-lifers, but really you must be one in a thousand who happens to be semi-irreligious, vegetarian and a pacifist.

Your apology is acknowledged.

You assume that I am not religious because I said that Jesus is "alright"? Surely, one can be religious and not consider Jesus to be what Christians believe he is. Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists also believe that abortion is wrong; I could be any one of these.

Oh, my, another vegetarian anti-war prolifer? And here I was thinking I was unique.

[Othelos]

Then what is the point of bringing up anyone's rights? If being a human isn't special, why should I care about anyone having a pregnancy against their will?

Because they are a sapient being having their freedom and happiness infringed upon needlessly.

Just so you know, that's an appeal to emotion.

[Alowwvia]

Because they are a sapient being having their freedom and happiness infringed upon needlessly.

Just so you know, that's an appeal to emotion.

Saying that a thinking being is having its rights infringed upon is an 'appeal to emotion', then?

[Othelos]

Just so you know, that's an appeal to emotion.

Saying that a thinking being is having its rights infringed upon is an 'appeal to emotion', then?

Okay, maybe not freedom, but you gotta admit, happiness...

[Condunum]

Because they are a sapient being having their freedom and happiness infringed upon needlessly.

Just so you know, that's an appeal to emotion.

By a stretch of the imagination. I could call any human philosophy I want an appeal to emotion. I would not once be wrong.

[Surfistan]

I do apoligize if I made a blunt generalisation of Pro-lifers, but really you must be one in a thousand who happens to be semi-irreligious, vegetarian and a pacifist.

Your apology is acknowledged.

You assume that I am not religious because I said that Jesus is "alright"? Surely, one can be religious and not consider Jesus to be what Christians believe he is. Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists also believe that abortion is wrong; I could be any one of these.

My point exactly, religion is the only argument against abortion.

Not that I have anything against religion, it should only intervene with it's own members and not in any way with the state or question the morality of others.

[Absurdity]

Your apology is acknowledged.

You assume that I am not religious because I said that Jesus is "alright"? Surely, one can be religious and not consider Jesus to be what Christians believe he is. Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists also believe that abortion is wrong; I could be any one of these.

My point exactly, religion is the only argument against abortion.

Wrong. I never said that I was religious. Even so, how does that prove your "point"?

Buddhists also believe that abortion is wrong;

top lel

There is no single Buddhist view concerning abortion. Yet, all traditional sources, such as the Buddhist monastic code, hold that life begins at conception and that abortion, which would then involve the deliberate destruction of life, should be rejected. Most Buddhists also subscribe to this view.

[Risottia]

Face it.
Laws are just applied politics, which is just applied sociology, which is just applied psychology, which is just applied neurology, which is just applied biochemistry, which is just applied chemistry, which is just applied physics. Anything below physics is materialistic and shallow.

Then there's maths.

And then there is Anthropology.

Which is another kind of applied sociology.

xkcd is bretty good

+1 for the reference.

[Republica Newland]

I consider myself to be largely atheistic. All of my opinions and views are based on nothing but freethought. Just something to bear in mind before reading this.

Poverty,rape and "unwantedness" are not considered viable justifications for killing a human being after birth,so why should they be considered as such before?

I'd rather people just used "early-stage" contraception such as condoms,pills,and what have you.

Just my personal moral standpoint,I'm not implying anything along the lines of "what should or should not be law?" here.

[Surfistan]

My point exactly, religion is the only argument against abortion.

Wrong. I never said that I was religious. Even so, how does that prove your "point"?

I really can't see any non-religious moral that says abortion is wrong, if so, say I'm a Secular Humanist and I am against abortion, it's my own view of it, but I stand directly against everything Secular Humanism stands for, that is, freedom to choose what to do with my life and my body without gods.
If my girlfriend keeps an embryo, she keeps it, if she doesn't want to, she should have the right to do so.

Also, denying someone else a basic right, getting an abortion, even morally questionable, is nothing more than opression and/or tyranny through religion, or a personal view, if anyone fails to see that, that person is willfully ignorant.

[Transnapastain]

What is Birth Control Failure, for a thousand?

How often does that happen, honestly?

Judging by your presence, at least once.

Thats pretty much flamebaiting right there. Its mild, but it is.

Your record is short, and a bit dated, so I'm hoping a simple unofficial warning for flamebaiting will suffice to convince you to continue keeping your nose clean on the forums.