| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Slartibartfast 
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
|
 Posted: February 02 2012 at 17:52 |
|
It still boils down to me that you've got a developed living person carrying a person who hasn't developed yet... If you feel you or the state has the right to dictate, fine.
Don't be surprised if 5-10 years down the line from now it could be possible for the man to carry the baby to term and even required to be carried by law in some instances. This will change things a lot.
Edited by Slartibartfast - February 02 2012 at 18:04
|
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
 |
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 17:33 |
 Negoba wrote:
OT Räihälä wrote:
I find a great paradox there.
.
.
.
Of course they are different issues, one is about ending a life that isn't independent yet, and the other is ending one that is very independent.
|
Then no great paradox? |
The paradox lies in defending life in one case, and not doing it in the other. It's made more of a paradox by the alleged fact that in the first case the life being defended is that of a blob, a collection of cells, in the other of a full human. So, as always, it all ends up going again to the debate as to when the blob of cells becomes human and thus worthy of defense.
|
|
|
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 16:48 |
Negoba wrote:
OT Räihälä wrote:
I find a great paradox there.
.
.
.
Of course they are different issues, one is about ending a life that isn't independent yet, and the other is ending one that is very independent.
|
Then no great paradox? |
That is the paradox of the paradox. Yes there be no bananas today.
|
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
|
Negoba
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 16:05 |
OT Räihälä wrote:
I find a great paradox there.
.
.
.
Of course they are different issues, one is about ending a life that isn't independent yet, and the other is ending one that is very independent.
|
Then no great paradox?
|
|
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
|
|
OT Räihälä
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 09 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 514
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 13:55 |
Negoba wrote:
OT Räihälä wrote:
Just out of curiosity: I suppose those people who are most anti-abortion are more often pro-death sentence. Do you agree?
I find a great paradox there. |
First...I do not support the death sentence and I'm would like to see abortion limited or eliminated.
Second...they are two different issues. |
Of course they are different issues, one is about ending a life that isn't independent yet, and the other is ending one that is very independent.
Negoba wrote:
To be clear, my preference would be to see abortion eliminated by lack of need. Better sex ed, easily available, effective contraception, more mindful sexuality. |
Who wouldn't agree with you? The problem is, people's lives are not always easy to control, and the least they can be controlled by legislation. Accidents happen.
Negoba wrote:
The way the death penalty is conducted in the United States, there is too much error, too much inequality. I also believe that when the more we sanction killing in any form, it affects us as members of society.
|
Perhaps. However, killing someone who's already got a name and a life in the name of law is different from stopping a pregnancy in its early stages.
|
|
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 13:17 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
But they are, it's undeniable, the three countries in Latin America who have this policies are the ones that have the lowest rate.. |
Actually, not only is the statement deniable, you have provided absolutely zero evidence to support it. You've shown a correlation in 3 countries between two variables among literally thousands of possible variables. You haven't even taken the time to examine rates in other countries that have policies like this or similar ones. You haven't shown anything. It's ludicrous to suggest otherwise. Reasoning from the converse can be helpful when only a handful of variable exist, but it becomes literally worthless for applications to sociological phenomena. You've pointed out a very, stress of the very, weak observational correlation which in no way amounts to proof anything. The most you have shown is that it could be beneficial to examine why this correlation exists. The process you're describing isn't science, it's just a random error of perception. You're trying to reason scientifically using a brain process adapted for quick predator-prey reactions of our prehistoric ancestors. It's not science, and any attempt to say that you've proven anything, or even suggesting that you have alleviated any of your burden of proof, does a complete disservice to the very idea of science. [/quote]
Ivan wrote:
We have a different perception of rights, if a person is sick (AIDS, TBC, STD, etc), can't be allowed to marry a person who doesn't have the disease. We think in the babies that are going to be born with the disease, the wife/husband who is going to be infected.
Yes, the people with a disease have rights, but also the people who don't have it and a baby that is going to be born with the disease also (BTW: We can inform the sexual partner or spouse if a person has AIDS -If the patient refuses- and the spouse can file a divorce if his/her partner gonorrhea, syphilis, genital herpes, VHI (AIDS) ). |
Then why not simply outlaw them from procreating? Or why not just require the test but not forbid the marriage? It does not make any sense. It completely ignores extra-marital activities. Don't try to make it about rights. It's a system of social-engineering.
Ivan wrote:
If two persons with Tay-Sachs gen marry, they will have kids with the disease, I know a couple that had 3 babies who died in the first week and they still are trying to have another one...That's not their right, they are bringing kids who will die in horrendous pain in the first week (average), in their case, they can marry any person who doesn't have the gen and will have normal kids, why in hell insist in marrying the person (less than 1% of incidence). |
Again, why not just forbid them from having children then? You also ask an absurd question in my mind. Maybe the two people with Tay-Sachs happen to want to marry each other? It's Tay-Sachs affects <1% of the population this is going to happen <.01% of the time anyway.
Ivan wrote:
Don't you isolate people with contagious diseases, we protect unborn children and healthy people from being infected.
Iván
|
Not the place for this, but your policy isn't protecting anything. [/QUOTE]
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 13:14 |
|
How is it undeniable? Can you provide some scientific evidence? Not statistics.
For me such a law is disgusting and inhuman. But as I said before, marriage is an institution governed by the state these days, so I guess the state can do as it pleases with it. But no, laws don't solve social problems. They can't.
Edited by The T - February 02 2012 at 13:16
|
|
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 12:53 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
LOL, you don't live in Perú is obvious.
There's no stigma against Pre-Merital sex, but normally people take care of using a condom, something that doesn't happen inside marriage.
BTW: T, the sexual education in schools is incredibly basic
Iván |
It's obvious that I don't live in Peru because I said that one of its policies doesn't work? I never said that there was a stigma against it in Peru. I just said that there's no reason to suggest that your laws against granting marriage licenses are attributing to the low disease rate.
|
But they are, it's undeniable, the three countries in Latin America who have this policies are the ones that have the lowest rate..
We have a different perception of rights, if a person is sick (AIDS, TBC, STD, etc), can't be allowed to marry a person who doesn't have the disease. We think in the babies that are going to be born with the disease, the wife/husband who is going to be infected.
Yes, the people with a disease have rights, but also the people who don't have it and a baby that is going to be born with the disease also (BTW: We can inform the sexual partner or spouse if a person has AIDS -If the patient refuses- and the spouse can file a divorce if his/her partner gonorrhea, syphilis, genital herpes, VHI (AIDS) ).
If two persons with Tay-Sachs gen marry, they will have kids with the disease, I know a couple that had 3 babies who died in the first week and they still are trying to have another one...That's not their right, they are bringing kids who will die in horrendous pain in the first week (average), in their case, they can marry any person who doesn't have the gen and will have normal kids, why in hell insist in marrying the person (less than 1% of incidence).
Don't you isolate people with contagious diseases, we protect unborn children and healthy people from being infected.
Iván
|
|
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 12:50 |
|
But Americans are stupid because European media says so just like Europeans are prissy just like American media says so.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
stonebeard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 11:56 |
CPicard wrote:
OT Räihälä wrote:
Just out of curiosity: I suppose those people who are most anti-abortion are more often pro-death sentence. Do you agree?
I find a great paradox there. |
Well, this thread is for Americans, not Europeans. Let's not try to find rationality in this continent.
|
Nevermind that the ones actually laying out the best arguments for and against here are American. (And Dean.  ) Matter of fact, I think Europeans should step up their game on the social side of things on PA. It's easy to come down on Americans without even debating anything. Maybe it's just in Europe or wherever it's so accepted that people don't think about it any more. Maybe they should....
Edited by stonebeard - February 02 2012 at 11:58
|
|
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 10:53 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
LOL, you don't live in Perú is obvious.
There's no stigma against Pre-Merital sex, but normally people take care of using a condom, something that doesn't happen inside marriage.
BTW: T, the sexual education in schools is incredibly basic
Iván |
It's obvious that I don't live in Peru because I said that one of its policies doesn't work? I never said that there was a stigma against it in Peru. I just said that there's no reason to suggest that your laws against granting marriage licenses are contributing to the low disease rate.
Edited by Equality 7-2521 - February 02 2012 at 12:46
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 10:51 |
CPicard wrote:
OT Räihälä wrote:
Just out of curiosity: I suppose those people who are most anti-abortion are more often pro-death sentence. Do you agree?
I find a great paradox there. |
Well, this thread is for Americans, not Europeans. Let's not try to find rationality in this continent.
|
I would say no it is not the case. Also, there's no reason that the two are contradictory.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 10:13 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
I can't think of a more asinine policy than withholding marriage licenses. I don't know what it's supposed to accomplish.
|
Well, Perú Bolivia and Nicaragua, the three countries that apply this limitations, have the lowest rate of AIDS in Latin America (Between 0.2 and 0.3), and it's mostly limited to gay communities where marriages are not allowed.
So maybe it works
Iván
|
I doubt it. The only way it would produce results would be because of its coupling with strong societal stigmas against pre-marital sex. In which case, the stigma itself would be producing the results.
|
LOL, you don't live in Perú is obvious.
There's no stigma against Pre-Merital sex, but normally people take care of using a condom, something that doesn't happen inside marriage.
BTW: T, the sexual education in schools is incredibly basic
Iván
|
|
|
|
Negoba
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 08:06 |
OT Räihälä wrote:
Just out of curiosity: I suppose those people who are most anti-abortion are more often pro-death sentence. Do you agree?
I find a great paradox there. |
First...I do not support the death sentence and I'm would like to see abortion limited or eliminated.
Second...they are two different issues.
To be clear, my preference would be to see abortion eliminated by lack of need. Better sex ed, easily available, effective contraception, more mindful sexuality.
The way the death penalty is conducted in the United States, there is too much error, too much inequality. I also believe that when the more we sanction killing in any form, it affects us as members of society.
|
|
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
|
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 07:01 |
OT Räihälä wrote:
Just out of curiosity: I suppose those people who are most anti-abortion are more often pro-death sentence. Do you agree?
I find a great paradox there. |
Not uniformly so but it is one of those criticisms that those of us who are pro choice have with those who aren't.
|
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
|
CPicard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10841
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 03:14 |
OT Räihälä wrote:
Just out of curiosity: I suppose those people who are most anti-abortion are more often pro-death sentence. Do you agree?
I find a great paradox there. |
Well, this thread is for Americans, not Europeans. Let's not try to find rationality in this continent.
|
|
OT Räihälä
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 09 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 514
|
Posted: February 02 2012 at 02:28 |
Just out of curiosity: I suppose those people who are most anti-abortion are more often pro-death sentence. Do you agree?
I find a great paradox there.
|
|
|
|
Negoba
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
|
Posted: February 01 2012 at 18:48 |
Gamemako wrote:
Negoba wrote:
I assume you are saying, then, that the sovereignty of the
body of the woman trumps the infant's right to life up until birth,
period, done.
|
I generally do agree with that statement, though I do not believe it is necessary to say that in the case above. Were it an adult in there mucking about, far fewer hesitate to agree. Regardless, once the individual has left the womb, there can be no question that there is no inherent right of sovereignty over it, and that precludes violence against it. There can certainly no longer be any conflict of rights to which to point. Whether the fetus has any rights at all at any point prior to birth is then moot.
|
Ok, here we have the crux of the issue.
But I don't follow completely.
"If a adult was mucking around in there, far fewer hesitate."
No. The woman (adult being infringed upon) would have the right to call the cops and get the other adult out of there, and possibly take some kind of civil damages. But she would NOT have the right to kill just because the other imposed on her bodily autonomy.
You also tossed out "Whether the fetus has any rights at all at any point prior to birth is then moot." as if it follows from previous statements. It does not at all.
Most pro-choice arguments try to ignore that fetus / child has any rights whatsoever. This is a fantasy game that even the Roe court did not play.
You must take both into account if you are going to seriously discuss this issue.
|
|
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: February 01 2012 at 17:50 |
|
|
|
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: February 01 2012 at 17:48 |
|
Ivan is a lawyer, aka the one profession where correlation = causation.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Abortion: Legal or Illegal
