WHAT WOULD KANT SAY ABOUT ABORTION ?

[Dachshund]

Oh fuck off. Women don't have to 'justify' it to you or anyone else.

I can't see how abortion is an issue for you at all, Veggie ? I mean abortions are things that pregnant women have and there's no chance of you ever getting pregnant is there girlie?. Because to get pregnant you would need to have sex with a male, and let's face it, no male in New Zealand is ever going to shag you are they? Why? Because after spending 2 minutes in your "charming" company they wouldn't be able to "get it up" and, you know, "do the business." Yuck (!) the very thought of it is grossing me out big time !! (They'd be striken with acute erectile dysfunction; i.e. "soft cock syndrome")


Regards


Dachshund

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Oh fuck off. Women don't have to 'justify' it to you or anyone else.

I can't see how abortion is an issue for you at all, Veggie ? I mean abortions are things that pregnant women have and there's no chance of you ever getting pregnant is there girlie?. Because to get pregnant you would need to have sex with a male, and let's face it, no male in New Zealand is ever going to shag you are they? Why? Because after spending 2 minutes in your "charming" company they wouldn't be able to "get it up" and, you know, "do the business." Yuck (!) the very thought of it is grossing me out big time !! (They'd be striken with acute erectile dysfunction; i.e. "soft cock syndrome")


Regards


Dachshund

Well I suppose you would know all about erectile disfunction.

So, abortion couldn't be 'an issue' for me, but it is for you? Stunning thought patterns you have there little weiner dog.

[-1-]

- 1-,

Just answer the simple question I put to you, - 1 - , re experiencing the sensation of negative affect. Did you or did you not FEEL such a sensation wrt the scenario I described involving a 5 week old foetus with a beating heart ? I'm betting you did, (because I believe you are basically a reasonable, normal, sane human being) And FYI, I can assure that this "test" never fails to accurately and clearly signal what is truly immoral... Take heed of the lesson you were taught, - A LOT -, more than you can possibly imagine - depends on it.


Regards,

Dachshund.

Thanks a lot for a loaded question, Dachshund. Ad Hominem at its best. If Iagree with your, I am a saint, a person better than yesterday; if I disagree with you, then the devil dwells within me.

And that's not even around the issue; it is around whether I disagree with you or not.

I have already answered the question, and offered my opinion. That was an exhaustive, well-thought out answer. If you can't read it, fine, just don't badger me to write an exact replica of your opinion, which is not mine.

==============================
That's A. B. is that your script was too long. I even quoted it saying "you must not exhaust yourself". I find it a bit selfish to feel you are so important that you expect others to wade through pages and pages of your writing which keeps saying the same thing.

I did not read your long post. Any reference to any part in it is lost on me, becasuse, frankly, it was way too long for the information it hoped to transmit to your readers.

[Gary Childress]

- 1-,

Just answer the simple question I put to you, - 1 - , re experiencing the sensation of negative affect. Did you or did you not FEEL such a sensation wrt the scenario I described involving a 5 week old foetus with a beating heart ? I'm betting you did, (because I believe you are basically a reasonable, normal, sane human being) And FYI, I can assure that this "test" never fails to accurately and clearly signal what is truly immoral... Take heed of the lesson you were taught, - A LOT -, more than you can possibly imagine - depends on it.


Regards,

Dachshund.

That is a salient point. However, the same can be said about almost any kind of surgery that anyone undergoes. Not a great percentage of human beings watch videos of doctors performing surgery out of a sense of fun or even curiosity. Most of us don't even like to think about surgery, especially on ourselves. Does that mean doctors performing any kind of surgery are performing a great evil? I think the answer is, "no". And if the answer is, "no", then doesn't that indicate that the mere fact that we are repulsed by something does NOT necessarily mean it is evil? I think there is more to it than simply, that which repulses us is evil.

Doesn't it ultimately come down to matters such as what is in the best interest of everyone involved and to matters such as whether a fetus has the ability to suffer and feel pain in the same way we do and whether a fetus is to be considered a full fledged human being with all the agreed upon "rights" and "entitlements" that go with being a full fledged human being?

When doctors/surgeons take the Hippocratic oath..."PRIMUM NON NOCERE", that is the most important promise they must make: It means "First (and foremost) do no harm." What I am referring to is NOT surgery, it is butchery. It is the crude hacking to pieces with an instrument like a scalpel of a foetus, a living thing that has a beating heart. It is, as far as I am concerned, the wilful destruction of a human life for profit. It is not merely harm that is being inflicted what is being enacted is murder. And no, it does not come down to some happy agreement about what is "in the best interests of everyone", it come down to the question of whether or not a human life is sacred. Nor is it a question of whether a 5 week old foetus can feel pain as it is being lethally dismembered. Bear in mind, BTW that Abortion Clinics in the US perform hundred of thousands of abortions every year and it is a fact that the majority of women who pay for them are at least 5 weeks pregnant.

I was trying to demonstrate an element of John Calvin's theology. Calvin believed that all men are born with an innate knowledge of what is truly morally right and wrong "Inscribed on their hearts." What he meant was that when you breach a universal moral law, you will know that what you have done (or contemplated) doing is WRONG (i.e. OUGHT/SHOULD/MUST not be done )because your heart will "tell" you. That is you will FEEL in your consciousness the sensation of negative affect. There are no words to describe in words exactly how this experience FEELS. That is, I am sure you have experienced the emotion of love for your wife and your children (if you have any ?), but even a master wordsmith like Shakespeare could not fully capture the feeling in words. He did a fantastic job trying and helped give us a better idea of what love feels like, but he could not completely "pin down" the emotion in mere words. Right? I'm no Shakespeare but I can try to give you some rough approximations of the "state of mind/psyche I'm alluding to by suggesting it is a feeling of co-mingled sorrow/tragedy/horror/despair/hopelessness/anger etc but the only way to know the feeling is to experience it for yourself. I guess that, in short, It "says" above all things NO ! NO! NO! - "WRONG ! WRONG 1 WRONG !

Why not try it for yourself...

Imagine a tiny 5 or 6 week-old foetus (in a lot of cases the foetus is considerably older), a tiny boy or girl with a beating heart being methodically torn to pieces by a surgeon's scalpel. His/her arms cut off, then legs and head so the dismembered pieces can be evacuated through the woman's cervix. You need to concentrate on envisaging the reality of this taking place. Use your imagination to be present while it is taking place. Meditate silently on the details and meaning of what is happening .

How do you FEEL as you envisage and meditate on my abortion scenario? Has your heart "spoken" to you (as Calvin would put it). Has it "told" in the language of phenomenal consciousness you that what you envisaged/meditated upon is something very WRONG - something profoundly IMMORAL. If it has, you will know. You cannot mistake the experience which I clumsily denote as the consciousness of "negative affect" And when your heart "tells" you what is the moral truth of the matter, you can trust it 100%. It never lies, it is never mistaken, and I am pretty well convinced that if you ignore it, if you flout its advice, you're are playing with spiritual fire of the most dangerous kind.

Regards


John.

Hi, John.

I hear you. It's not a pretty thought, the notion of that happening to a tiny, defenseless human fetus. I can only hope that such a being isn't fully aware of what is happening to it in the same way more fully matured humans are. But of course we all die someday too (sometimes at the hands of governments that launch missiles at people). HOWEVER, factor in global over-population. How many more people can our planet sustain without having a complete environmental catastrophe? Just think how even more overpopulated the world would be without some people having abortions? It would be fine if there were unlimited resources such as fresh water and unlimited room for more people in the world. But that doesn't appear to be the case.

What about quality of life? I mean, I have never impregnated a woman, but I've encountered quite a few people over the course of my life who have had children who probably weren't well prepared for it and their children ended up institutionalized for much of their lives. I think I'd rather never have been born than be institutionalized for most of my life (either in the prison system or else in the psychiatric system). Wouldn't it be more humane to have just had an abortion?

As far as suffering and ugly thoughts, I also feel much the same way about animals with regard to the meat industry. I've heard stories that animals probably go through hell over the course of being slaughtered for meat. However, I still eat meat. Do you eat meat?

There are lots of worthy causes in our world to take a stand on. Every day on this earth people in third world nations are starving and scraping for a living when many of us in Western nations live with excess. I believe it was Peter Singer who has suggested that it is morally inexcusable that any one of us has a single penny of excess when someone else in the world is starving and we could easily donate that excess to help them. I have more than a few single pennies of excess which I have not donated. Am I morally wrong for not donating it? Do you have any excess or do you donate it all?

The point is, you can probably fill volumes with causes I have not taken up (and at least people having abortions is maybe no worse than the alternative problem of accelerated overpopulation). But overall I obey laws and don't go around shooting people or causing unnecessary harm to others. Hopefully that's good for at least something.

[Walker]

Oh fuck off. Women don't have to 'justify' it to you or anyone else.

I can't see how abortion is an issue for you at all, Veggie ? I mean abortions are things that pregnant women have and there's no chance of you ever getting pregnant is there girlie?. Because to get pregnant you would need to have sex with a male, and let's face it, no male in New Zealand is ever going to shag you are they? Why? Because after spending 2 minutes in your "charming" company they wouldn't be able to "get it up" and, you know, "do the business." Yuck (!) the very thought of it is grossing me out big time !! (They'd be striken with acute erectile dysfunction; i.e. "soft cock syndrome")



Regards


Dachshund

That syndrome has hit Twitter executives like a case of PC measles.

Twitter executives cannot determine if this quote is hate speech, or not.

“Abortion is profoundly anti-woman.”
- Mother Theresa

Ethically, they need to publicaly define this quotation because of their power in society.


https://pjmedia.com/trending/facebook-a ... te-speech/

[Arising_uk]

Dachshund, you should be proud. You have just been compared to Shakespeare.

In what language did you get this from?

[Walker]

Would Kant call abortion advocates pro-abortion, or pro-choice?

When you think about it, there really is no choice about it.

If someone has an abortion, it's because that someone must have an abortion.
If someone refuses, it's because that someone must refuse.

Action is the determinant, not thinking.

The right to tell another, you can't have an abortion, is in the name of society and not directed* at the individual who must have an abortion, come hell or high water.

* Correction: the right is claimed by society for reasons, and directed to the individual.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Oh fuck off. Women don't have to 'justify' it to you or anyone else.

I can't see how abortion is an issue for you at all, Veggie ? I mean abortions are things that pregnant women have and there's no chance of you ever getting pregnant is there girlie?. Because to get pregnant you would need to have sex with a male, and let's face it, no male in New Zealand is ever going to shag you are they? Why? Because after spending 2 minutes in your "charming" company they wouldn't be able to "get it up" and, you know, "do the business." Yuck (!) the very thought of it is grossing me out big time !! (They'd be striken with acute erectile dysfunction; i.e. "soft cock syndrome")



Regards


Dachshund

That syndrome has hit Twitter executives like a case of PC measles.

Twitter executives cannot determine if this quote is hate speech, or not.

“Abortion is profoundly anti-woman.”
- Mother Theresa

Ethically, they need to publicaly define this quotation because of their power in society.


https://pjmedia.com/trending/facebook-a ... te-speech/

Who cares what that vicious old thieving sadistic bat said?

[Walker]

Would Kant call abortion advocates pro-abortion, or pro-choice?

When you think about it, there really is no choice about it.

If someone has an abortion, it's because that someone must have an abortion.
If someone refuses, it's because that someone must refuse.

Action is the determinant, not thinking.

The right to tell another, you can't have an abortion, is in the name of society and not directed* at the individual who must have an abortion, come hell or high water.

* Correction: the right is claimed by society for reasons, and directed to the individual.

One wonders, does this qualify under the infamous Lacewing rules for, "balanced"?

[Dachshund]

Thanks a lot for a loaded question, Dachshund. Ad Hominem at its best. If Iagree with your, I am a saint, a person better than yesterday; if I disagree with you, then the devil dwells within me.

And that's not even around the issue; it is around whether I disagree with you or not.

I have already answered the question, and offered my opinion. That was an exhaustive, well-thought out answer. If you can't read it, fine, just don't badger me to write an exact replica of your opinion, which is not mine.

==============================
That's A. B. is that your script was too long. I even quoted it saying "you must not exhaust yourself". I find it a bit selfish to feel you are so important that you expect others to wade through pages and pages of your writing which keeps saying the same thing.

I did not read your long post. Any reference to any part in it is lost on me, becasuse, frankly, it was way too long for the information it hoped to transmit to your readers.

Dear - 1 - ,

I requested a simple answer to the question I put to you because I was sincerely, genuinely interested to know what you thought. This, for a number of reasons (1) you are a woman and perhaps you have experienced being pregnant; maybe you have your own children ? (2) you are evidently well read and intelligent/reflective (3) I am extremely interested in the kind of innate, psychic morality I described - the "inarticulate speech of the heart" that Is believe is the ultimate moral arbitor and moral authority we can trust to guide us in pondering questions of what is right and what is wrong; which behaviours/attitudes are good and which are bad. Various theologians (Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin) and philosophers have affirmed the mysterious moral epistemology to which I refer. Although I dislike Rousseau because he was a utopian socialist (a political fool) , he is correct I think, when he claims:

"There is, at the bottom of one's heart an innate principle of justice and virtue by which in spite of our maxims we judge our own actions and those of others to be either good or evil."

To continue. I was certainly not, - in asking you to respond to the question I put to you -, playing some childish game the object of which was to out-smart you, or embarrass you, or trounce you in some ridiculous contest of wits, or prove that I am right and you are wrong. (And therefore you are inferior and I am the triumphant, male Ubermench !) I was animated solely by a good will.

Why exactly are you so fearfully paranoid wrt to this matter ? And how is it you conceive I had launched an ad hominem attack against your good self ? (I'm baffled ?!) Moreover, In what sense was the question I put you "loaded" ? Do you think I was cooking up some kind of wicked trap for you to blunder into, so that I could gloat over your moral shortcomings ?

Or is it the case that providing an open and honest disclosure would demand your sharing something that you feel is too personal/intimate ?

Thank you for your advice regarding the inappropriate length of some of my posts on this thread. You are right of course, and my only excuse is that I tend to get carried away by certain subjects which I find particularly interesting or important. I will endeavour to be mindful of this in future and limit what I write to a less self-indulgent word count.


Regards


John

[vegetariantaxidermy]

The ego has landed

[Dachshund]

The ego has landed

Are you referring to me, Veggie ?

Regards

Dachshund

[Walker]

Who cares what that vicious old thieving sadistic bat said?

The reason to care is:

If they have the power to define the intent of her words, they have the power to define the intent of your words.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

- 1-,

Just answer the simple question I put to you, - 1 - , re experiencing the sensation of negative affect. Did you or did you not FEEL such a sensation wrt the scenario I described involving a 5 week old foetus with a beating heart ? I'm betting you did, (because I believe you are basically a reasonable, normal, sane human being) And FYI, I can assure that this "test" never fails to accurately and clearly signal what is truly immoral... Take heed of the lesson you were taught, - A LOT -, more than you can possibly imagine - depends on it.


Regards,

Dachshund.

That is a salient point. However, the same can be said about almost any kind of surgery that anyone undergoes. Not a great percentage of human beings watch videos of doctors performing surgery out of a sense of fun or even curiosity. Most of us don't even like to think about surgery, especially on ourselves. Does that mean doctors performing any kind of surgery are performing a great evil? I think the answer is, "no". And if the answer is, "no", then doesn't that indicate that the mere fact that we are repulsed by something does NOT necessarily mean it is evil? I think there is more to it than simply, that which repulses us is evil.

Doesn't it ultimately come down to matters such as what is in the best interest of everyone involved and to matters such as whether a fetus has the ability to suffer and feel pain in the same way we do and whether a fetus is to be considered a full fledged human being with all the agreed upon "rights" and "entitlements" that go with being a full fledged human being?

When doctors/surgeons take the Hippocratic oath..."PRIMUM NON NOCERE", that is the most important promise they must make: It means "First (and foremost) do no harm." What I am referring to is NOT surgery, it is butchery. It is the crude hacking to pieces with an instrument like a scalpel of a foetus, a living thing that has a beating heart. It is, as far as I am concerned, the wilful destruction of a human life for profit. It is not merely harm that is being inflicted what is being enacted is murder. And no, it does not come down to some happy agreement about what is "in the best interests of everyone", it come down to the question of whether or not a human life is sacred. Nor is it a question of whether a 5 week old foetus can feel pain as it is being lethally dismembered. Bear in mind, BTW that Abortion Clinics in the US perform hundred of thousands of abortions every year and it is a fact that the majority of women who pay for them are at least 5 weeks pregnant.

I was trying to demonstrate an element of John Calvin's theology. Calvin believed that all men are born with an innate knowledge of what is truly morally right and wrong "Inscribed on their hearts." What he meant was that when you breach a universal moral law, you will know that what you have done (or contemplated) doing is WRONG (i.e. OUGHT/SHOULD/MUST not be done )because your heart will "tell" you. That is you will FEEL in your consciousness the sensation of negative affect. There are no words to describe in words exactly how this experience FEELS. That is, I am sure you have experienced the emotion of love for your wife and your children (if you have any ?), but even a master wordsmith like Shakespeare could not fully capture the feeling in words. He did a fantastic job trying and helped give us a better idea of what love feels like, but he could not completely "pin down" the emotion in mere words. Right? I'm no Shakespeare but I can try to give you some rough approximations of the "state of mind/psyche I'm alluding to by suggesting it is a feeling of co-mingled sorrow/tragedy/horror/despair/hopelessness/anger etc but the only way to know the feeling is to experience it for yourself. I guess that, in short, It "says" above all things NO ! NO! NO! - "WRONG ! WRONG 1 WRONG !

Why not try it for yourself...

Imagine a tiny 5 or 6 week-old foetus (in a lot of cases the foetus is considerably older), a tiny boy or girl with a beating heart being methodically torn to pieces by a surgeon's scalpel. His/her arms cut off, then legs and head so the dismembered pieces can be evacuated through the woman's cervix. You need to concentrate on envisaging the reality of this taking place. Use your imagination to be present while it is taking place. Meditate silently on the details and meaning of what is happening .

How do you FEEL as you envisage and meditate on my abortion scenario? Has your heart "spoken" to you (as Calvin would put it). Has it "told" in the language of phenomenal consciousness you that what you envisaged/meditated upon is something very WRONG - something profoundly IMMORAL. If it has, you will know. You cannot mistake the experience which I clumsily denote as the consciousness of "negative affect" And when your heart "tells" you what is the moral truth of the matter, you can trust it 100%. It never lies, it is never mistaken, and I am pretty well convinced that if you ignore it, if you flout its advice, you're are playing with spiritual fire of the most dangerous kind.

Regards


John.

You obviously don't know much about human biology. At six weeks a human EMBRYO is the size of a lentil, so it might be a tad difficult for a surgeon to go slashing bits off it (not to mention unnecessary). You've been looking at too much lying christian porn. A pill and a sanitary pad generally does the trick

[DPMartin]

abortion isn't a moral struggle, its a legal/political/social struggle. and really, Kant is dead, who cares. he's not a justification for yea or nay on the subject.

the justification is whether or not it becomes law one way or the other via the agreed method of making or rescinding law.

(1): If you don't understand how abortion is a moral issue, you shouldn't be wasting your time on a philosophy forum. Best stick to something more commensurate with your IQ like Batman Comics or such like.

(2): Just because Kant is dead, it doesn't mean that his ethical theory is of no value in helping us think more rationally about human morality in 2019. (Quite the opposite, in fact). It's like saying that because Shakespeare is long dead, we shouldn't bother to use the texts of his dramas and poetry to help us justify/evaluate what is, or is not, exemplary use of the English language.

Regards


Dachshund

nope, the law is the set of morals agreed on, the struggle (in this case) is what that law should be, or shouldn't be, in accordance to the agreed method of establishing law. where have you been, listing to TV and religious rhetoric and believing what they tell you?