Abortion

Being willing to die for something doesn't make what I said untrue. But it is still beside the point. Instead of "to me" I should have just said "in my opinion" and maybe it would be more clear. The guy I was responding to said "there are things worse than death" and then went on to talk about relatively superficial things like childhood education. Relative to the larger discussion of life and death, this sounds downright asinine to me. There is no existence I can imagine that would make me wish I had never existed, and I certainly wouldn't be so arrogant as to assume I should make that determination for others.

11 posts later and you almost identically repeat the statement that generated those 11 posts.

Where the hell is a_skeleton_03 when you need someone to tell America to not have premarital sex?

Selix_sl said:

11 posts later and you almost identically repeat the statement that generated those 11 posts.

Click to expand...

That's probably because you and your ideas are fucking retarded. I'd love to massacre all of the people here who latch on to one little piss-ant unimportant detail and try to make themselves look smart by misinterpreting it.

Learn to paint with broad stokes, the blood flows easier.

Abort and party

Selix_sl said:

Is there really nothing or no-one you value more then your own life? This is not an insult I am genuinely interested inpsychology of such a person.

Click to expand...

Category 1. Some questions should not be asked.
Category 2. Some statements should not be made.

In my opinion, your question fell into category 1. It seems to be peculiarly offensively intrusive.
Your following statement fell into category 2. It seems to be condescendingly demeaning in a rather nauseau-inducing way.

If those were your goals, then congrats.
If not. then........

chaos_sl said:

There is no existence I can imagine that would make me wish I had never existed

Click to expand...

Then you lack imagination.

chaos_sl said:

and I certainly wouldn't be so arrogant as to assume I should make that determination for others.

Click to expand...

Except the question has nothing to do with wiping out a life already lived (and the mind that has perceived it). That factor bears heavily on the "arrogance" of making the decision. Moreover, the potential life of the potential child is not the only factor. The actual life of the actual parents has some moral weight as well.

Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:

Then you lack imagination.

Except the question has nothing to do with wiping out a life already lived (and the mind that has perceived it). That factor bears heavily on the "arrogance" of making the decision. Moreover, the potential life of the potential child is not the only factor. The actual life of the actual parents has some moral weight as well.

Click to expand...

Whether the life has been lived already or has yet to be lived is beside the point. We don't consider killing children to be unconscionable due to the years they have lived, but the years ahead of them, the potential for life that they had that was cut short. This is no different. I'm not sure where you're going with "the actual life of the parents" either. Of course their lives factor into the decision, they are the ones making the decision. Can it be called a morally sound decision to abort a child over financial concerns or some kind of personal preference? I don't believe so. Or are you talking about health concerns? That is kind of a no brainer.

To address your first point, no I don't lack imagination, at the end of the day all I really have is existence and no, there is nothing I can think or that would make me want to give that up. It is a foreign concept to me. And I think a lazy argument, to try and bring up torture or something, and the implication is that this is somehow equivalent to what an aborted child might have experienced in his life. Just a silly argument all around.

if the only reason you have for not killing children is the potential good they might do, then you have no reason not to kill children for the potential bad they might do. (opens up thought crime, etc...)
Frankly, all you just argued is rich people shouldn't have abortions because they have the means, but the poor SHOULD have them . "Can it be called a morally sound decision to abort a child over financial concerns or some kind of personal preference?" YES, using your reasoning. you are required to, in fact. those that can't afford children, birth children into a poverty state. go look up some statistics on children, poverty and crime rates. Go look at 3rd world countries and birth control and the effects it has on crime.

The entire "potential" argument is a deadend. Everyone has potential. and those with more means, have greater potential.

I never said potential that they might do good, I said their potential life, the life that was cut short. I never argued that ANYONE should have an abortion. How the fuck do you use what I wrote to say that poor people should have abortions? God damn dude, it seems like people in this thread have a habit of reading one or two lines from a post and filling the rest in to support whatever bullshit they want to say.

chaos_sl said:

Whether the life has been lived already or has yet to be lived is beside the point. We don't consider killing children to be unconscionable due to the years they have lived, but the years ahead of them, the potential for life that they had that was cut short. This is no different.

Click to expand...

Actually the years ahead of them only have meaning because they have years behind them. To say otherwise is to condemn (among other things) birth control.

chaos_sl said:

I'm not sure where you're going with "the actual life of the parents" either. Of course their lives factor into the decision, they are the ones making the decision. Can it be called a morally sound decision to abort a child over financial concerns or some kind of personal preference? I don't believe so.

Click to expand...

Well I believe you're wrong (since the status as "child" doesn't really exist yet).

chaos_sl said:

To address your first point, no I don't lack imagination, at the end of the day all I really have is existence and no, there is nothing I can think or that would make me want to give that up.

Click to expand...

Well then you lack imagination. Lots of people have wanted to give up precisely that (including people who think that by doing so they're giving up "all they really have." An existence riddled with misery is not necessarily one worth maintaining, even when the alternative is non-existence.

chaos_sl said:

It is a foreign concept to me. And I think a lazy argument, to try and bring up torture or something, and the implication is that this is somehow equivalent to what an aborted child might have experienced in his life. Just a silly argument all around.

Click to expand...

That implication isn't necessary to establish the morality of abortion, but the claim that many people experience torturous lives isn't silly at all. Calling that notion silly is silly (and frankly, indicative of a kind of risible bubble world of relative comfort).

Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:

Actually the years ahead of them only have meaning because they have years behind them. To say otherwise is to condemn (among other things) birth control.

Well I believe you're wrong (since the status as "child" doesn't really exist yet).

Well then you lack imagination. Lots of people have wanted to give up precisely that (including people who think that by doing so they're giving up "all they really have." An existence riddled with misery is not necessarily one worth maintaining, even when the alternative is non-existence.

That implication isn't necessary to establish the morality of abortion, but the claim that many people experience torturous lives isn't silly at all. Calling that notion silly is silly (and frankly, indicative of a kind of risible bubble world of relative comfort).

Click to expand...

To you, the years ahead only have meaning in context of the years past. To you, a fetus is not a "child". To you, a life with misery would not be worth living. But no one is suggesting that you be aborted. Well, actually they are because you do stupid shit like break posts up to reply line by line. But in general, the concept of abortion is that you are making a determination for another being. I never said that many people don't "experience torturous lives", I said that to use that as the go-to argument in support of abortion is asinine. Definitions on all of this shit are so nebulous that it can mean anything to anyone. The guy a couple of posts up is trying to use crime to justify abortion, how far should you take this? I really hate beets, would it be better to have children be aborted rather than subject them to beets? You are using your perception to make a very final decision for another living being. There is no possible way to moralize that. Look, I'm pro-choice. Abortion happens, and access to it is absolutely necessary to our society, and the concept of a woman's choice is likewise essential. But the act itself is immoral in most cases. It is what it is.

chaos_sl said:

To you, the years ahead only have meaning in context of the years past.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's just "to me." That argument would serve as a condemnation of literally anything that reduces the fertility rate below the fecundity rate. That's clearly not the argument you intend to make but that is a direct implication of what you are saying.

chaos_sl said:

To you, a fetus is not a "child".

Click to expand...

Because "to me" not every collection of human cells constitutes a human being. "To me" a human mind is the only non-theological distinction that exists. That test isn't great because it's not a bright line but that's why we consider other factors as well.

chaos_sl said:

To you, a life with misery would not be worth living.

Click to expand...

"To me" a lifeofmisery would not be worth living. That's not the same thing at all.

chaos_sl said:

But no one is suggesting that you be aborted. Well, actually they are because you do stupid shit like break posts up to reply line by line.

Click to expand...

Yeah, you're right. This clusterfuck of a paragraph composed of line-by-line responses that you've shat out like some constipated context-free turd ismuchless stupid. Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you people?

chaos_sl said:

But in general, the concept of abortion is that you are making a determination for another being.

Click to expand...

Well by the time they're in a position to make that determination, it's already too late. The damage has already been done to their lives and the lives of their parents.

chaos_sl said:

I never said that many people don't "experience torturous lives", I said that to use that as the go-to argument in support of abortion is asinine.

Click to expand...

What is asinine about it? The fact that you can't comprehend how someone would wish they had never been born? Guess what, douchebag: that means you live in a silly, simple, easymode bubble world.

chaos_sl said:

Definitions on all of this shit are so nebulous that it can mean anything to anyone. The guy a couple of posts up is trying to use crime to justify abortion, how far should you take this? I really hate beets, would it be better to have children be aborted rather than subject them to beets?

Click to expand...

Yeah that's why people are getting abortions. Good thing that you're not being asinine. Otherwise this conversation might take a ridiculous turn.

chaos_sl said:

You are using your perception to make a very final decision for another living being. There is no possible way to moralize that.

Click to expand...

Sure there is. It's pretty easy in this case.

chaos_sl said:

Look, I'm pro-choice. Abortion happens, and access to it is absolutely necessary to our society, and the concept of a woman's choice is likewise essential. But the act itself is immoral in most cases. It is what it is.

Click to expand...

So women should be able to get abortions, they're just scum for doing it. Yeah you're super enlightened. Seriously, save that dumb fucking preamble for someone who's idiotic enough to fall for it.

I never called anyone scum. You are projecting. Aside from that, I'm not reading your bullshit. The composition of your post is almost as grating as your personality.

chaos_sl said:

I never called anyone scum. You are projecting.

Click to expand...

Yeah it's a huge leap from "immoral" to "scum." I should get a job at a movie theater with how much I'm projecting.

chaos_sl said:

Aside from that, I'm not reading your bullshit. The composition of your post is almost as grating as your personality.

Click to expand...

So you just happened to read the last line and none of the others? Yeah that sounds likely. Well here's some highlights:

This is where I explain why your dipshit conception of potential life as having equivalent value to existing life is moronic:

Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:

I don't think that's just "to me." That argument would serve as a condemnation of literally anything that reduces the fertility rate below the fecundity rate. That's clearly not the argument you intend to make but that is a direct implication of what you are saying.

Click to expand...

This is where I imply that you're resorting to a theological distinction to call a fetus a child:

chaos_sl said:

Because "to me" not every collection of human cells constitutes a human being. "To me" a human mind is the only non-theological distinction that exists. That test isn't great because it's not a bright line but that's why we consider other factors as well.

Click to expand...

This is where I point out how my mode of posting provides a context that's critically important for complicated discussions:

chaos_sl said:

Yeah, you're right. This clusterfuck of a paragraph composed of line-by-line responses that you've shat out like some constipated context-free turd ismuchless stupid. Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you people?

Click to expand...

This is where I destroy your dumbfuck argument about actual people making determinations about the fate of potential people = immoral.

chaos_sl said:

Well by the time they're in a position to make that determination, it's already too late. The damage has already been done to their lives and the lives of their parents.

Click to expand...

This is where I call into question the life experience of anyone who's so fucking out of it that they think existence (under any circumstances) is the only thing that matters.

chaos_sl said:

What is asinine about it? The fact that you can't comprehend how someone would wish they had never been born? Guess what, douchebag: that means you live in a silly, simple, easymode bubble world.

Click to expand...

This is where I make fun of you for using the word "asinine" and then directly following it with the most asinine argument I've ever heard.

chaos_sl said:

Yeah that's why people are getting abortions. Good thing that you're not being asinine. Otherwise this conversation might take a ridiculous turn.

Click to expand...

And this is where I respond to your dumb fuck naked assertions in kind.

chaos_sl said:

Sure there is. It's pretty easy in this case.

Click to expand...

Jesus man, can you please respond to a post and not every sentance of a post.

Yeah Draegan already warned you about that shit and I am tired of your threadshitting. Die.

To somewhat answer your horrible shitpost diatribe, this shit is not black or white. Much like most of life. People do immoral shit all the time, ALL people. A woman getting a baby vacuumed out of her so she can party or because she doesn't want to spend the money or whatever, that is immoral. That isn't a judgement on her, but on her single action. She might be Mother Theresa, who the fuck knows?

Wtf you ban someone for multiquote? Guy might have had crazy ideas but shit...

That's a temp ban, right?