On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Abortion, euthanasia, genetic engineering, Just War theory and other such hot topics.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8043
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:58 am

Walker wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:19 am
Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote:
Sat Mar 24, 2018 3:19 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Thu Mar 22, 2018 10:02 pm
Because it's none of your damn business, that's why.
What's your opinion of child support? Not asking as a way to make an argument against that, by the way, because I more or less agree with that sentiment. I'm very pro-choice myself. I'm just genuinely curious.
If the pregnancy is a consequence of a woman’s sole autonomous control and say over her body, then why is the man obligated to pay any support at all? Ethically, autonomous control and say comes at the price of responsibility for the consequences.
So then you agree that if a woman must give birth at the behest of those who are 'pro life' then it is ony right that those who are 'pro life' should support the 'life' throught to its complete independence.

User avatar
Sir-Sister-of-Suck
Posts: 918
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 4:09 am

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by Sir-Sister-of-Suck » Mon Mar 26, 2018 8:12 am

To be on the topic of abortion and then just randomly say 'what do you think of child support' is a bit ridiculous don't you think?
Well yes, but more precisely that was a response to "Because it's none of your damn business". I didn't think it would take too much imagination to see where I was going with what I said, but now that I've clarified a few times, I don't understand what you're not understanding.

You claim that a woman's decision on abortion is no one else's business, yet (perhaps) want the other parent to help pay for it as soon as it's born. These two ideas aren't consistent with each other because the woman's decision to keep the baby directly affects someone else, financially. This is my objection. If a father doesn't want to give up his money, it would be in the fathers best financial interest for the woman to get an abortion, and prevent the child from ever existing. By definition, it becomes someone else's business with child support.
Child support concerns children and not foetuses right? Or does it start at conception in your country?
No, child support starts at birth in the US. I still believe my point stands.
Walker wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:19 am
If the pregnancy is a consequence of a woman’s sole autonomous control and say over her body, then why is the man obligated to pay any support at all? Ethically, autonomous control and say comes at the price of responsibility for the consequences.
I think that's a pretty good way of putting it, and sort of conveys the idea I'm laying out. Except what I'm not saying is that abortion alone makes child support non-sensical, I think it's non-sensical specifically under the principle that a pregnancy is 'no one else's business'.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8043
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:50 am

Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 8:12 am
To be on the topic of abortion and then just randomly say 'what do you think of child support' is a bit ridiculous don't you think?
Well yes, but more precisely that was a response to "Because it's none of your damn business". I didn't think it would take too much imagination to see where I was going with what I said, but now that I've clarified a few times, I don't understand what you're not understanding.

You claim that a woman's decision on abortion is no one else's business, yet (perhaps) want the other parent to help pay for it as soon as it's born. These two ideas aren't consistent with each other because the woman's decision to keep the baby directly affects someone else, financially. This is my objection. If a father doesn't want to give up his money, it would be in the fathers best financial interest for the woman to get an abortion, and prevent the child from ever existing. By definition, it becomes someone else's business with child support.
Child support concerns children and not foetuses right? Or does it start at conception in your country?
No, child support starts at birth in the US. I still believe my point stands.
Walker wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:19 am
If the pregnancy is a consequence of a woman’s sole autonomous control and say over her body, then why is the man obligated to pay any support at all? Ethically, autonomous control and say comes at the price of responsibility for the consequences.
I think that's a pretty good way of putting it, and sort of conveys the idea I'm laying out. Except what I'm not saying is that abortion alone makes child support non-sensical, I think it's non-sensical specifically under the principle that a pregnancy is 'no one else's business'.
I'm sorry that you don't know the difference between a pregnancy and a birth.

Walker
Posts: 6688
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by Walker » Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:06 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:50 am
I'm sorry that you don't know the difference between a pregnancy and a birth.
You write something silly like that, then I write something silly, then a little escalation and the next thing you know discussion becomes a matter of repartee, wit and insult, which can be fun but it can also escalate to hurtful words and then we’re both wallowing in umbridge, which has effects maybe not immediately discerned because the accumulation of little toughening cuts forms scars coating intelligence that are tougher and more impenetrable than the specs at birth.

The perpetuation of the species is a powerful force when considering just how autonomous anyone actually is. When in the grip of the species imperative to perpetuate, a woman has no autonomous control over the release of the egg, hormones set behaviors in motion that rationality justifies, pregnancy has a causal and not just a correlative relationship to birth, as does sex, which in a romantic, consensual situation results in the willing surrender of autonomy.

Actually,abortion is less an exercise in autonomy ...

... and is more an attempt to reclaim the autonomy that has already been taken away by the species imperative that began with the release of the egg and culminated in the surrender of the autonomy during sex.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8043
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Mon Mar 26, 2018 7:34 pm

So, no argument then.

User avatar
Sir-Sister-of-Suck
Posts: 918
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 4:09 am

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by Sir-Sister-of-Suck » Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:43 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:50 am
I'm sorry that you don't know the difference between a pregnancy and a birth.
I see the point that you're trying to make by differentiating the two, but I think it lacks any real adhesive to my objection. I already said they aren't the same thing, but it doesn't matter. The decision to keep the pregnancy affects the birth, in fact it's the only decision that does affect it in the way we're discussing. You don't grant anyone the right to act in a preventive way by pretending that the actual act of it occurring is the only thing that's relevant to you, because by then it's already happened.

If someone calls me to let me know that the password and user ID to my online bank account has been stolen, and he's going to withdrawal all the funds tomorrow, then that wouldn't be 'my business,' either, under the assumption that only the act of it presently occurring makes it relevant to my concern, and no preventive action is expected to be taken on my part because it's not yet relevant to me. Do you see why I've given you this absurd example? If event A is directly linked to event B, and you don't want event B to happen, then by proxy, event A is relevant because your intention is still focused on preventing event B.

User avatar
Sir-Sister-of-Suck
Posts: 918
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 4:09 am

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by Sir-Sister-of-Suck » Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:47 pm

Walker wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:06 pm
... and is more an attempt to reclaim the autonomy that has already been taken away by the species imperative that began with the release of the egg and culminated in the surrender of the autonomy during sex.
...So, you're making a case for those who believe in evolutionary ethics?

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8043
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:54 pm

Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:43 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:50 am
I'm sorry that you don't know the difference between a pregnancy and a birth.
I see the point that you're trying to make by differentiating the two, but I think it lacks any real adhesive to my objection. I already said they aren't the same thing, but it doesn't matter. The decision to keep the pregnancy affects the birth, in fact it's the only decision that does affect it in the way we're discussing. You don't grant anyone the right to act in a preventive way by pretending that the actual act of it occurring is the only thing that's relevant to you, because by then it's already happened.

If someone calls me to let me know that the password and user ID to my online bank account has been stolen, and he's going to withdrawal all the funds tomorrow, then that wouldn't be 'my business,' either, under the assumption that only the act of it presently occurring makes it relevant to my concern, and no preventive action is expected to be taken on my part because it's not yet relevant to me. Do you see why I've given you this absurd example? If event A is directly linked to event B, and you don't want event B to happen, then by proxy, event A is relevant because your intention is still focused on preventing event B.
This is tedious. Please refer to my previous posts on this thread.

User avatar
Sir-Sister-of-Suck
Posts: 918
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 4:09 am

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by Sir-Sister-of-Suck » Tue Mar 27, 2018 12:58 am

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:54 pm
This is tedious. Please refer to my previous posts on this thread.
I've told you why those posts don't really address the substance of what I'm talking about. I know that a fetus and a child are two different things, but they're not two unrelated things. The topic of abortion is someone else's business by potentially intruding on someone else's literal business. That couldn't be more crystal clear, though I guess I can just assume you'd let the thief steal all your bank funds because you only live in the omnipresent, where preceding events leading to a problematic one aren't to be trifled with.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8043
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:19 am

foetus

Walker
Posts: 6688
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by Walker » Tue Mar 27, 2018 12:43 pm

Is that pronounced foe-eat-us, or is it pronounced fee-tus, or something else?

Walker
Posts: 6688
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by Walker » Tue Mar 27, 2018 12:44 pm

Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:47 pm
Walker wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:06 pm
... and is more an attempt to reclaim the autonomy that has already been taken away by the species imperative that began with the release of the egg and culminated in the surrender of the autonomy during sex.
...So, you're making a case for those who believe in evolutionary ethics?
What's that?

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8043
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:44 pm

Walker wrote:
Tue Mar 27, 2018 12:43 pm
Is that pronounced foe-eat-us, or is it pronounced fee-tus, or something else?
It's pronounced the way it's spelt (or to translate for Americans: 'pronounciated the way it's spelled').

Walker
Posts: 6688
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by Walker » Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:15 pm

So, you’re saying it looks like it sounds.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8043
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: On the topic of abortion - an ethical issue

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Wed Mar 28, 2018 12:02 am

Odd that some words have escaped. Shouldn't it be 'Phenix Arizona'? Or 'ameba'? What about 'Edipus complex'?
The only reason the yanks changed foetus to 'fetus' was because it looked too 'Frenchy', not because it had its root in the old Latin 'fetus' for 'offspring' (supposedly). I am sure the Romans would have had an actual word for 'foetus' but the internet is so blatantly biased towards Americanisms that it's virtually impossible to find the real origin. As I thought though, it has to do with pronunciation in late, or Mediaeval, Latin, and English. An 'e' on its own is still pronounced with a short 'e' as in 'pet', 'wet','met', 'Pegasus', 'medical' etc. etc. Hence the pronunciation of foetus as 'feetiss' (so you can see the inconsistency and silliness of pronouncing 'fetus' as 'feetiss').
Not to mention (but I will) the fact that the misogynistic god-bothering tossbuckets are trying to use the tenuous 'old Latin' connection as some sort of anti-choice 'argument'.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest