NATION

PASSWORD

[Abortion Thread] (POLL 4) A compromising position...

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

What would you consider to be the best 'compromise'?

Reduce abortions with welfare supports / other non-invasive measures, leave access untouched.
132
33%
Set conditions under which abortions can be accessed.
83
21%
Allow free access, under a given time limit.
38
9%
Allow free access, but give men an option to excuse themselves from child support.
40
10%
HELL WITH COMPROMISE, IT'S MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY!
86
21%
Look out! They're here! Pink Elephants on Parade! Here they come, hippity hoppity!
22
5%
 
Total votes : 401

User avatar
Godular
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11709
Founded: Sep 09, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Godular » Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:59 am

Sundiata wrote:
Neutraligon wrote:
Why are you pro-life?

Because I believe that life begins at conception.


So what?

Sundiata wrote:
Neuer California wrote:Even in cases where there is no way the zygote will ever develop into a baby? Ectopic pregnancies routinely end with the zygote/fetus dead or aborted because there's no way they'll become viable and having them continue to "develop" greatly endangers the mother for no benefit to her or the zygote.
Yes: the principle of double effect.

Doing something wrong for the right reason is still wrong.


Says the one who would literally let the whole world die just to assuage their personal morality.

Sundiata wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Yes they are, you are literally trying to ascribe guilt or innocence to what is essentially a bacterium.
Covid is not 'guilty' because it doesn't posses the capacity to make moral judgements, it does harm and must therefore be eradicated.
Try a less stupid argument.

You are literally trying to equivocate a human being and a virus. COVID doesn't undergo the same developmental stages as a human being. Even if a human being were to unintentionally cause harm or lack the capacity to make moral judgements they don't deserve to be killed.


But they can be defended against, with lethal force if necessary because it is unreasonable to expect a person facing such a threat to use deliberation in their response. A person is permitted to use such force as necessary to remedy the threat, and if that results in the death of the person who presents that threat--whether they actually intend harm or not--then that is an unfortunate consequence that in no way speaks against the one who used that force.

Your standards are unrealistic.
Last edited by Godular on Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
RL position
Active RP: ASCENSION
Active RP: SHENRYAX
Dormant RP: Throne of the Fallen Empire

Faction 1: The An'Kazar Control Framework of Godular-- An enormously advanced collective of formerly human bioborgs that are vastly experienced in both inter-dimensional travel and asymmetrical warfare.
A 1.08 civilization, according to this Nation Index Thingie
I don't normally use NS stats. But when I do, I prefer Dos Eckis I can STILL kill you.
Post responsibly.

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 69785
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:01 am

Sundiata wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Yes they are, you are literally trying to ascribe guilt or innocence to what is essentially a bacterium.
Covid is not 'guilty' because it doesn't posses the capacity to make moral judgements, it does harm and must therefore be eradicated.
Try a less stupid argument.

You are literally trying to equivocate a human being and a virus. COVID doesn't undergo the same developmental stages as a human being. Even if a human being were to unintentionally cause harm or lack the capacity to make moral judgements they don't deserve to be killed.

Try a less stupid argument.

You are literally trying to equivocate a human being and a virus

A zygote and a virus, reading is important.
And yes they are equatable because they lack the capacity to make moral judgements which makes terms like 'guilty' or 'innocent' irrelevant.
Your feigned moral outrage is not an argument.
Last edited by Genivaria on Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Anarcho-Communist, Democratic Confederalist
"The Earth isn't dying, it's being killed. And those killing it have names and addresses." -Utah Phillips

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9513
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:02 am

Genivaria wrote:
Sundiata wrote:You are literally trying to equivocate a human being and a virus. COVID doesn't undergo the same developmental stages as a human being. Even if a human being were to unintentionally cause harm or lack the capacity to make moral judgements they don't deserve to be killed.

Try a less stupid argument.

You are literally trying to equivocate a human being and a virus

A zygote and a virus, reading is important.

A zygote is a human being, reason is important.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 153108
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Ifreann » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:03 am

Sundiata wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Yes they are, you are literally trying to ascribe guilt or innocence to what is essentially a bacterium.
Covid is not 'guilty' because it doesn't posses the capacity to make moral judgements, it does harm and must therefore be eradicated.
Try a less stupid argument.

You are literally trying to equivocate a human being and a virus. COVID doesn't undergo the same developmental stages as a human being. Even if a human being were to unintentionally cause harm or lack the capacity to make moral judgements they don't deserve to be killed.

Try a less stupid argument.

If the unborn is to be treated as a moral actor then by their unwelcome presence inside another's body and their failure to leave promptly they are no longer innocent.
Mistake Not My Current State Of Regular Thorough Handwashing For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Mask Wearing That Are Themselves The Mere Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Social Distancing

no war but class war
He/Him

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 69785
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:04 am

Sundiata wrote:
Genivaria wrote:
A zygote and a virus, reading is important.

A zygote is a human being, reason is important.

Cool so are they a moral actor now and should be considered guilty? Or are they incapable of moral judgments and 'innocence' is irrelevant?
Your pick.
This is why your argument is bad.
Last edited by Genivaria on Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
Anarcho-Communist, Democratic Confederalist
"The Earth isn't dying, it's being killed. And those killing it have names and addresses." -Utah Phillips

User avatar
Godular
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11709
Founded: Sep 09, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Godular » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:06 am

Sundiata wrote:
Genivaria wrote:
A zygote and a virus, reading is important.

A zygote is a human being, reason is important.


Except a Zygote is incapable of reason. It is incapable of sensation. It is incapable of doing much other than absorbing nutrients and growing, which makes the comparison with a virus somewhat more apt than much of what you've put forward.
RL position
Active RP: ASCENSION
Active RP: SHENRYAX
Dormant RP: Throne of the Fallen Empire

Faction 1: The An'Kazar Control Framework of Godular-- An enormously advanced collective of formerly human bioborgs that are vastly experienced in both inter-dimensional travel and asymmetrical warfare.
A 1.08 civilization, according to this Nation Index Thingie
I don't normally use NS stats. But when I do, I prefer Dos Eckis I can STILL kill you.
Post responsibly.

User avatar
The New California Republic
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35392
Founded: Jun 06, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The New California Republic » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:09 am

Sundiata wrote:
Genivaria wrote:
A zygote and a virus, reading is important.

A zygote is a human being, reason is important.

Is there a reason you are mimicking the manner of speech of the person you are responding to? You've done that several times now. Just wondering, because it just looks very weird.
Last edited by Sigmund Freud on Sat Sep 23, 1939 2:23 am, edited 999 times in total.

The Irradiated Wasteland of The New California Republic: depicting the expanded NCR, several years after the total victory over Caesar's Legion, and the annexation of New Vegas and its surrounding areas.

White-collared conservatives flashing down the street
Pointing their plastic finger at me
They're hoping soon, my kind will drop and die
But I'm going to wave my freak flag high
Wave on, wave on
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9513
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:10 am

Ifreann wrote:
Sundiata wrote:You are literally trying to equivocate a human being and a virus. COVID doesn't undergo the same developmental stages as a human being. Even if a human being were to unintentionally cause harm or lack the capacity to make moral judgements they don't deserve to be killed.

Try a less stupid argument.

If the unborn is to be treated as a moral actor then by their unwelcome presence inside another's body and their failure to leave promptly they are no longer innocent.

I disagree, a zygote's existence is not an act of intrusion, unwelcome or not because that would be synonymous with its presence. A zygote has the right to life and for someone actively to violate that through killing would make them morally culpable and guilty.
Last edited by Sundiata on Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 69785
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:13 am

Sundiata wrote:
Ifreann wrote:If the unborn is to be treated as a moral actor then by their unwelcome presence inside another's body and their failure to leave promptly they are no longer innocent.

I disagree, a zygote's existence is not an act of intrusion, unwelcome or not because that would be synonymous with its presence. A zygote has the right to life and for someone actively to violate that through killing would make them morally culpable and guilty.

You are objectively wrong here.
The 'unwelcome' part is what makes its very presence an intrusion.
I don't believe you're actually this ignorant so why are you pretending to be?
Anarcho-Communist, Democratic Confederalist
"The Earth isn't dying, it's being killed. And those killing it have names and addresses." -Utah Phillips

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9513
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:15 am

Genivaria wrote:
Sundiata wrote:A zygote is a human being, reason is important.

Cool so are they a moral actor now and should be considered guilty? Or are they incapable of moral judgments and 'innocence' is irrelevant?
Your pick.
This is why your argument is bad.

A zygote is an innocent moral actor, free of legal guilt or fault on the basis of its existence alone.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 153108
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Ifreann » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:16 am

Sundiata wrote:
Ifreann wrote:If the unborn is to be treated as a moral actor then by their unwelcome presence inside another's body and their failure to leave promptly they are no longer innocent.

I disagree, a zygote's existence is not an act of intrusion, unwelcome or not because that would be synonymous with its presence. A zygote has the right to life and for someone actively to violate that through killing would make them morally culpable and guilty.

Whether the unborn's existence is an act of intrusion, whatever that's supposed to mean, is irrelevant. They are not welcome, and they are not leaving, therefore they are not innocent.
Mistake Not My Current State Of Regular Thorough Handwashing For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Mask Wearing That Are Themselves The Mere Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Social Distancing

no war but class war
He/Him

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9513
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:21 am

Ifreann wrote:
Sundiata wrote:I disagree, a zygote's existence is not an act of intrusion, unwelcome or not because that would be synonymous with its presence. A zygote has the right to life and for someone actively to violate that through killing would make them morally culpable and guilty.

Whether the unborn's existence is an act of intrusion, whatever that's supposed to mean, is irrelevant. They are not welcome, and they are not leaving, therefore they are not innocent.

No, the existence of the unborn, let alone the state of being welcomed, is not the fault of the unborn and no fault should be ascribed.

A zygote is an innocent human person.
Last edited by Sundiata on Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 69785
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:29 am

Sundiata wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Whether the unborn's existence is an act of intrusion, whatever that's supposed to mean, is irrelevant. They are not welcome, and they are not leaving, therefore they are not innocent.

No, the existence of the unborn, let alone the state of being welcomed, is not the fault of the unborn and no fault should be ascribed.

The very word 'fault' is ascribing moral agency to a non-thinking thing, and whether or not it's unwelcome presence it its 'fault' is irrelevant the presence is still unwelcome and will be ended.
You keep using the word 'existence' when we're talking about it's unwelcome presence.
Please keep up.
Last edited by Genivaria on Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
Anarcho-Communist, Democratic Confederalist
"The Earth isn't dying, it's being killed. And those killing it have names and addresses." -Utah Phillips

User avatar
The New California Republic
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35392
Founded: Jun 06, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The New California Republic » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:30 am

Sundiata wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Whether the unborn's existence is an act of intrusion, whatever that's supposed to mean, is irrelevant. They are not welcome, and they are not leaving, therefore they are not innocent.

No, the existence of the unborn, let alone the state of being welcomed, is not the fault of the unborn and no fault should be ascribed.

A zygote is an innocent human person.

Innocence is irrelevant here.
Last edited by Sigmund Freud on Sat Sep 23, 1939 2:23 am, edited 999 times in total.

The Irradiated Wasteland of The New California Republic: depicting the expanded NCR, several years after the total victory over Caesar's Legion, and the annexation of New Vegas and its surrounding areas.

White-collared conservatives flashing down the street
Pointing their plastic finger at me
They're hoping soon, my kind will drop and die
But I'm going to wave my freak flag high
Wave on, wave on
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9513
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:37 am

Genivaria wrote:
Sundiata wrote:No, the existence of the unborn, let alone the state of being welcomed, is not the fault of the unborn and no fault should be ascribed.

The very word 'fault' is ascribing moral agency to a non-thinking thing, and whether or not it's unwelcome presence it its 'fault' is irrelevant the presence is still unwelcome and will be ended.

Because fault cannot be ascribed to a zygote in the most limited sense of the word, it's an innocent human agent by default. And unwelcome or not, it has the right to life.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 69785
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:39 am

Sundiata wrote:
Genivaria wrote:The very word 'fault' is ascribing moral agency to a non-thinking thing, and whether or not it's unwelcome presence it its 'fault' is irrelevant the presence is still unwelcome and will be ended.

Because fault cannot be ascribed to a zygote in the most limited sense of the word, it's an innocent human agent by default. And unwelcome or not, it has the right to life.

Of course it has the right to life, elsewhere.
Anarcho-Communist, Democratic Confederalist
"The Earth isn't dying, it's being killed. And those killing it have names and addresses." -Utah Phillips

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9513
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:40 am

The New California Republic wrote:
Sundiata wrote:No, the existence of the unborn, let alone the state of being welcomed, is not the fault of the unborn and no fault should be ascribed.

A zygote is an innocent human person.

Innocence is irrelevant here.

It certainly is relevant when we're talking about killing human beings.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9513
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:41 am

Genivaria wrote:
Sundiata wrote:Because fault cannot be ascribed to a zygote in the most limited sense of the word, it's an innocent human agent by default. And unwelcome or not, it has the right to life.

Of course it has the right to life, elsewhere.

It has the right to life everywhere.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 69785
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Genivaria » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:42 am

Sundiata wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Of course it has the right to life, elsewhere.

It has the right to life everywhere.

Does it have the right to someone else's body?
Anarcho-Communist, Democratic Confederalist
"The Earth isn't dying, it's being killed. And those killing it have names and addresses." -Utah Phillips

User avatar
Godular
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11709
Founded: Sep 09, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Godular » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:44 am

Sundiata wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Innocence is irrelevant here.

It certainly is relevant when we're talking about killing human beings.


It isn't relevant in self-defense, as it is not reasonable to expect the defender to establish guilt or innocence when defending themselves.
RL position
Active RP: ASCENSION
Active RP: SHENRYAX
Dormant RP: Throne of the Fallen Empire

Faction 1: The An'Kazar Control Framework of Godular-- An enormously advanced collective of formerly human bioborgs that are vastly experienced in both inter-dimensional travel and asymmetrical warfare.
A 1.08 civilization, according to this Nation Index Thingie
I don't normally use NS stats. But when I do, I prefer Dos Eckis I can STILL kill you.
Post responsibly.

User avatar
Godular
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11709
Founded: Sep 09, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Godular » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:45 am

Sundiata wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Of course it has the right to life, elsewhere.

It has the right to life everywhere.


Then it is free to go live the remainder of its natural life elsewhere, outside the woman's uterus, once it is removed.
RL position
Active RP: ASCENSION
Active RP: SHENRYAX
Dormant RP: Throne of the Fallen Empire

Faction 1: The An'Kazar Control Framework of Godular-- An enormously advanced collective of formerly human bioborgs that are vastly experienced in both inter-dimensional travel and asymmetrical warfare.
A 1.08 civilization, according to this Nation Index Thingie
I don't normally use NS stats. But when I do, I prefer Dos Eckis I can STILL kill you.
Post responsibly.

User avatar
The New California Republic
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35392
Founded: Jun 06, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The New California Republic » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:45 am

Sundiata wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Innocence is irrelevant here.

It certainly is relevant when we're talking about killing human beings.

No it isn't. A person attacking me relentlessly who isn't compos mentis and in control of their actions is innocent, but if the only way to stop them is their death, then their innocence is irrelevant. Similarly, the innocence of the fetus is utterly irrelevant.
Last edited by Sigmund Freud on Sat Sep 23, 1939 2:23 am, edited 999 times in total.

The Irradiated Wasteland of The New California Republic: depicting the expanded NCR, several years after the total victory over Caesar's Legion, and the annexation of New Vegas and its surrounding areas.

White-collared conservatives flashing down the street
Pointing their plastic finger at me
They're hoping soon, my kind will drop and die
But I'm going to wave my freak flag high
Wave on, wave on
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9513
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:49 am

Genivaria wrote:
Sundiata wrote:It has the right to life everywhere.

Does it have the right to someone else's body?

Not anymore than the rights that someone else has to its body.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

User avatar
The New California Republic
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35392
Founded: Jun 06, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The New California Republic » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:51 am

Sundiata wrote:
Genivaria wrote:Does it have the right to someone else's body?

Not anymore than the rights that someone else has to its body.

The right to defend one's-self is a recognised right. The right to usurp the body of another against their will is not.
Last edited by Sigmund Freud on Sat Sep 23, 1939 2:23 am, edited 999 times in total.

The Irradiated Wasteland of The New California Republic: depicting the expanded NCR, several years after the total victory over Caesar's Legion, and the annexation of New Vegas and its surrounding areas.

White-collared conservatives flashing down the street
Pointing their plastic finger at me
They're hoping soon, my kind will drop and die
But I'm going to wave my freak flag high
Wave on, wave on
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

User avatar
Sundiata
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9513
Founded: Sep 27, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 10:52 am

Godular wrote:
Sundiata wrote:It has the right to life everywhere.


Then it is free to go live the remainder of its natural life elsewhere, outside the woman's uterus, once it is removed.

To remove it is actively choosing to kill it.
"Don't say, 'That person bothers me.' Think: 'That person sanctifies me.'"
-St. Josemaria Escriva

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aussie Australia, Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Duvniask, Forsher, Google [Bot], Ifreann, Kerwa, Majestic-12 [Bot], Nimzonia, Runice, Sairaz, The Archregimancy, Thomasi, United Provinces of Atlantica

Advertisement

Remove ads

cron