meegannie
Blue Crack Addict
Headache in a Suitcase said:you want justification? timothy mcveigh
The execution of Timoty McVeigh validates the execution of innocent people?
Headache in a Suitcase said:you want justification? timothy mcveigh
Headache in a Suitcase said:and just because they have a different opinion, i don't accuse them, unlike some people, of being morally bankrupt...
FizzingWhizzbees said:I think people shouldn't get to decide whether a person lives or dies in any case: I'm PRO-LIFE and ANTI-DEATH PENALTY!
I don't think humans should get to decide whether another human lives or dies. Please, tell me how that should work in practice? How do we decide when someone should be executed? Like I said - is it if they kill someone? But then, what about if it is in self-defence, what if the murderer is mentally ill, what if they didn't mean to kill the victim?
There aren't any moral absolutes there. You can't say if a person kills another person then they deserve the death penalty because there are SO many times when that won't be the case. Who should get to decide? What human is *good* enough to decide if another person lives or dies? We're all humans, we're all imperfect, none of us is infallible, so how on earth can we give one human the power to murder another one?
guaca said:being Pro-choice doesnt make you a murderer or an awful person for that matter..just makes you see that not everything is cut and dry.
diamond said:I will say this..
in the event of rape or incest..
I would b ok w/an abortion in the 1st trimester.
These types of pregnanies account for less than 2% of pregnancies, studies show..
db9
FizzingWhizzbees said:Isn't it true to say a person must believe either abortion is murder or it isn't, how can there be a middle ground?
Mrs. Edge said:
Well, I don't know if I agree with that. Because I don't think something is "murder" unless it is a fully fledged person. I think that a 1st trimeter fetus is a collection of cells, living cells yes, but certainly not a person. It's not pleasant or a nice concept, but I don't think it's murder.
So, our moral tendencies work on scale that goes not from good to evil, but from "be nice to others" to "be mean to others". Some things map to this just fine: murdering someone is obviously evil; conveniently, it also fits on our real moral scale (toward the "being mean" end), so no one really questions that it's a bad thing.
But what about abortion? Where does "killing one's own unborn child" fall on a scale from "be nice to others" to "be mean to others"? It's like comparing apples and, I don't know, avocados. An unborn child is not one of the "others" that we interacted with when our moral tendencies evolved.
To me, this explains why there is no clear concensus on abortion, and why many of us have mixed feelings about it - why it's such a "gray area" for us. Our evolved morality just isn't equipped to deal with the issue.
FizzingWhizzbees said:
That's kind of what I meant though - either abortion is murder or it's not, and you don't believe it is.
guaca said:
by the same token how can you take away the right to make a choice, whether you think it may be morally unjust or not, it is still a freedom that every human being should have...the choice to chose rather than have the choice made for you. The same argument can be made for euthenasia(sorry for the spelling)...in the case of terminally ill people who just wish to end their own suffering..is it someone elses right to say No you must continue to suffer, sorry I just dont understand the morality of that either...but I guess that is another topic altogether... being Pro-choice doesnt make you a murderer or an awful person for that matter..just makes you see that not everything is cut and dry.
StrangerTides said:Okay, FW, I'm going to say what you thought nobody could say: "There isn't a cut and dry answer about whether abortion involves murder or not."
Anoosh Vs. God said:Natural selection is merely a means of ensuring propagation of species. According to such logic, abortion is unnatural.
Impregnation due to incest or rape is a miniscule occurance and should not be used as a prochoice argument. The Circumstances leading to conception, especially ones almost nonexistent, are not justification for the termination of human life.
guaca said:In the case of a child, a teenager, a woman for that matter whose choice was taken away from them through no fault of their own, whether it be a case of incest, sexual abuse, rape of any kind, what happens to their life.
Anoosh Vs. God said:Natural selection is merely a means of ensuring propagation of species. According to such logic, abortion is unnatural.
...
FizzingWhizzbees said:
Guaca, I'm just using your post to explain what I mean here, I don't necessarily expect you to answer.
Anyway...people frequently use the argument that abortion must be available because of cases in which a woman gets pregnant after being raped. In that case, clealy it's through no fault of her own.
That said, doesn't that imply that in all other cases it is a woman's fault that she's pregnant? It doesn't take account of the fact that contraception isn't 100% effective (in fact the most effective forms of contraception are only 96%-98% effective) so a woman could still become pregnant whilst using contraception. Wouldn't it be true to say that she got pregnant through no fault of her own there too?
I guess I'm just wary of this idea that it's always a woman's fault if she gets pregnant - as though it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the man! It takes two people for someone to get pregnant and I think quite often this gets forgotten in the pro-life/pro-choice discussion.