Re: HUMAN PERSONHOOD - THE CASE AGAINST ABORTION
Posted: Sat Oct 12, 2019 3:13 pm
Well, what are they ? Speak up, I'm all ears.
Dachshanud (Der Uberweiner)
For the discussion of all things philosophical, especially articles in the magazine Philosophy Now.
https://forum.philosophynow.org/
They're nothing compared to the ramblings about substances and absolute identity though.
Prevention is better than cure!Atla wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:21 pmIt doesn't matter what kind of global birth control will become necessary, under no circumstances should abortion be seen as immoral. At all. But a solipsist like you wouldn't care about making women feel guilty about such an important, sometimes life-changing thing.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 8:55 am Fundamentally, abortion is immoral.
In theory if abortion is made universal, the human species would be threatened.
Thus the absolute moral rule is 'No Abortion is permitted', ZERO Abortion.
But this is merely a guide for improvement, it should not be enforced.
The abortion equation is;
Humans + sex + lust + bad impulse controls = unwanted conception or babies.
Humans + sex + good impulse controls = no unwanted conception or babies.
Thus to achieve ZERO Abortion, humanity need to deal the loose variables of lust and impulse control. Humans and sex are permanent variables but lust and impulse control can be improved.
The above are the major variables and there are minor ones to be considered.
At present we cannot expect nor demand no abortion.
At present with the current state of the average humans, the lust would be great and impulse controls are weak.
Thus instead of passing legal laws on abortion, humanity must set to modulate the lust factor with improving impulse control.
The improvement in these two variables will be slow and thus we can only expect the number of abortions to reduce gradually.
The question is how to implement the above efficiently which will be another topic.
And one way you want to prevent it is by making woman feel guilty, because you are a solipsistic moron.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 5:40 amPrevention is better than cure!Atla wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:21 pmIt doesn't matter what kind of global birth control will become necessary, under no circumstances should abortion be seen as immoral. At all. But a solipsist like you wouldn't care about making women feel guilty about such an important, sometimes life-changing thing.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 8:55 am Fundamentally, abortion is immoral.
In theory if abortion is made universal, the human species would be threatened.
Thus the absolute moral rule is 'No Abortion is permitted', ZERO Abortion.
But this is merely a guide for improvement, it should not be enforced.
The abortion equation is;
Humans + sex + lust + bad impulse controls = unwanted conception or babies.
Humans + sex + good impulse controls = no unwanted conception or babies.
Thus to achieve ZERO Abortion, humanity need to deal the loose variables of lust and impulse control. Humans and sex are permanent variables but lust and impulse control can be improved.
The above are the major variables and there are minor ones to be considered.
At present we cannot expect nor demand no abortion.
At present with the current state of the average humans, the lust would be great and impulse controls are weak.
Thus instead of passing legal laws on abortion, humanity must set to modulate the lust factor with improving impulse control.
The improvement in these two variables will be slow and thus we can only expect the number of abortions to reduce gradually.
The question is how to implement the above efficiently which will be another topic.
The long term solution is to ensure no women would put themselves in such a predicament
and dilemma of deciding to abort or not. Also we need to ensure man do not put woman into such a dilemma.
Dachshund wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 2:04 pm This thread has gone completely off track: carnal lust; "self-cherishing" ; God; positive law; poor impulse control; the "biological imperative" (whatever that means); contraception; the overpopulation/depopulation of the planet, etc; - none of this has any bearing on the content of my OP (?)
I posted the OP to argue that abortion in fundamentally a moral issue that is grounded in whether the conceptus (fertilized ovum) bears the status of PERSONHOOD.
I argued that PERSONHOOD is a quality all human beings possess, and that A HUMAN PERON is the subject of certain rights and duties. Among the rights is possesses is the right to life.
In my post I explained what PERSONHOOD entails and why I believe PERSONHOOD is an attribute of the conceptus (which is biologically speaking a fully fledged Homo sapien)
So far there have been no posts that have responded to any of the points I made in my argument.
Therefore there have been no objections; and if I do not receive any, I will take it that as far as this forum is concerned my case against abortion is water-tight.
Dachshund (Der Uberweiner)
Strawman again.Atla wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 5:43 amAnd one way you want to prevent it is by making woman feel guilty, because you are a solipsistic moron.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 5:40 am Prevention is better than cure!
The long term solution is to ensure no women would put themselves in such a predicament
and dilemma of deciding to abort or not. Also we need to ensure man do not put woman into such a dilemma.
By making them avoid something "immoral", using guilt.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 5:55 amStrawman again.Atla wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 5:43 amAnd one way you want to prevent it is by making woman feel guilty, because you are a solipsistic moron.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 5:40 am Prevention is better than cure!
The long term solution is to ensure no women would put themselves in such a predicament
and dilemma of deciding to abort or not. Also we need to ensure man do not put woman into such a dilemma.
In the present state of humanity, there will be unwanted unborn due to various reasons.
Thus we need to take preventive step to reduce the number of unwanted unborn progressively.
I stated in the long term.
IF the solution is to ensure no women could put themselves in such a predicament
and dilemma of deciding to abort or not, how can that make anyone guilty.
Then there will be no question of abortion to be guilty of.
You are running out of arguments and is intellectual bankrupt, thus getting your knickers in a twist with all sort of emotional attacks.Atla wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 6:06 amBy making them avoid something "immoral", using guilt.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 5:55 amStrawman again.
In the present state of humanity, there will be unwanted unborn due to various reasons.
Thus we need to take preventive step to reduce the number of unwanted unborn progressively.
I stated in the long term.
IF the solution is to ensure no women could put themselves in such a predicament
and dilemma of deciding to abort or not, how can that make anyone guilty.
Then there will be no question of abortion to be guilty of.
I get it now, the pieces are falling into place, under all that pseudo-rational facade you really are a solipsist piece of shit. Unbelievable
Is what a solipsist would say whose irrational, solipsistic bullshit has been exposed.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 6:39 amYou are running out of arguments and is intellectual bankrupt, thus getting your knickers in a twist with all sort of emotional attacks.Atla wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 6:06 amBy making them avoid something "immoral", using guilt.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 5:55 am
Strawman again.
In the present state of humanity, there will be unwanted unborn due to various reasons.
Thus we need to take preventive step to reduce the number of unwanted unborn progressively.
I stated in the long term.
IF the solution is to ensure no women could put themselves in such a predicament
and dilemma of deciding to abort or not, how can that make anyone guilty.
Then there will be no question of abortion to be guilty of.
I get it now, the pieces are falling into place, under all that pseudo-rational facade you really are a solipsist piece of shit. Unbelievable
Why are you so obsessed with abortion you fucking weirdo? And this is so much bullshit. Why would they be 'reassembling' embryos? It's the most bizarre 'argument' you kunts have concocted yet. And who cares if it's a pea sized, fully formed fairy creature with wings? The fact is the woman doesn't want it in her body and she doesn't have to carry it until it's a fully formed, screaming, squirming, demanding, totally dependent entity. And most abortions take place in the first EIGHT weeks. Are you ok with those abortees, with their teeny tiny arms and widdle fingers and toes? (actually it's almost indistinguishable from a teeny weeny tadpole at that stage). All the males on here obsessing over women's concerns are a wonderful advertisement to promote abortion. Yuk yuk and yuk.Walker wrote: ↑Mon Oct 14, 2019 10:45 am Turning life into garbage.
This should end the abortion-justification myth that the first trimester abortion is simply excising a clump of cells.
The facts about first trimester abortion.
9:50 in the link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCnZOvjJgwo
Visually identifying the aborted, human parts:
“After all the parts were accounted for the POC (products of conception) lab technician would dump everything out into a glass baking dish that sat on top of an X-Ray light box and she would reassemble the parts of the baby. Please understand me, I’m talking about first trimester abortion. Yes, there are parts, yes they must be reassembled. The baby is fully formed, every internal organ is formed by twelve weeks gestation. So yes there are parts, even earlier than twelve weeks …”
- Abby Johnson