Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Peregrine wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Knockagh wrote:
Congrats to Poland, I hope you are given the strength to see this through. Stand against the tide of modernism. Soli Deo Gloria

Yeah, go Poland! Get back to the 15th century, refuse to join the modern world! Burn society to the ground and become hunter-gatherers again!

YAY! Let's pretend to be dumb and ignorant and shout nonsensical hyperboles!

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
so why would you think it is okay to kill a rapist's child?

Because it is not a child. It is a blob of cells with less capacity for thought/feeling pain/etc than the cockroach that you would squish without hesitation. Or the blob of cancer cells that you would have removed from yourself without hesitation, despite the fact that they are clearly "human life".

I disagree. It is a human being. Being a human being is not defined by the capacity to feel pain. Some people suffer a very serious serious disorder where they can't feel pain. Do you think it is okay to just kill those people too, since they can't feel pain?

Rather than picking up on the pain aspect (an extremely rare condition), how about brain dead people who cannot survive without machines to make them breathe/pump blood/etc?

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I disagree. It is a human being. Being a human being is not defined by the capacity to feel pain. Some people suffer a very serious serious disorder where they can't feel pain. Do you think it is okay to just kill those people too, since they can't feel pain?

I didn't say being human is only defined by being able to feel pain. A person who has a disorder that prevents them from feeling pain still has awareness, a sense of self, higher-level thoughts, etc. Being able to feel pain is just one of the tests for whether a being deserves protection (for example, which animals can we/should we kill for food).

 Knockagh wrote:
I don't know anybody opposed to abortion who would allow it for rape......

Sounds like you aren't paying much attention because "no abortion, except in cases of rape or medical problems" is a standard policy argument.

I also know many many people who have had miscarriages and view it 100% a death, many people carry metal scars and trauma as a result of miscarriage.

Yes, of course people are hurt by it. But it's treated as an individual tragedy. Nobody is saying "stop funding cancer research and use that money to deal with the more urgent problem of miscarriages" or "we can't afford that new military project, we have to pay for anti-miscarriage research" or whatever. It's just accepted that some percentage of women will lose a child they want, and very little effort is put into preventing it.

Opposing modernism is about modern values of intolerance, individualism and self centred lives. It's about promoting corporate societies and family centred lives, about living for others not just ourselves.

Great. So you oppose the intolerance of banning people from making their own decisions about abortion, self-centered beliefs about "my god said so therefore you must obey", etc. And you must then favor legal abortion.

Self centred beliefs like, your weaker and more vulnerable than me, I can kill you and create clever arguments to justify it because it suits my individual purposes.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I disagree. It is a human being. Being a human being is not defined by the capacity to feel pain. Some people suffer a very serious serious disorder where they can't feel pain. Do you think it is okay to just kill those people too, since they can't feel pain?

I didn't say being human is only defined by being able to feel pain. A person who has a disorder that prevents them from feeling pain still has awareness, a sense of self, higher-level thoughts, etc. Being able to feel pain is just one of the tests for whether a being deserves protection (for example, which animals can we/should we kill for food).

Self-awareness and higher-level thoughts are also not found in young infants and many handicapped people. So you would argue those are not human? Tell me, where do you draw the line of what is human and what is not?
In my opinion, there is only one criterion for being human, and that is being a member of the genus Homo. All those who belong to that genus are human.

 Knockagh wrote:
Self centred beliefs like, your weaker and more vulnerable than me, I can kill you and create clever arguments to justify it because it suits my individual purposes.

So you would not kill a cockroach in your house because it suits your individual purposes?

 Peregrine wrote:

 Knockagh wrote:
Self centred beliefs like, your weaker and more vulnerable than me, I can kill you and create clever arguments to justify it because it suits my individual purposes.

So you would not kill a cockroach in your house because it suits your individual purposes?

So now you compare human life to cockroaches....

Psalm 14

1The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”
They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds;
there is none who does good.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Self-awareness and higher-level thoughts are also not found in young infants and many handicapped people. So you would argue those are not human? Tell me, where do you draw the line of what is human and what is not?
In my opinion, there is only one criterion for being human, and that is being a member of the genus Homo. All those who belong to that genus are human.

Are you insinuating that infants aren't sentient?

 Knockagh wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Knockagh wrote:
Self centred beliefs like, your weaker and more vulnerable than me, I can kill you and create clever arguments to justify it because it suits my individual purposes.

So you would not kill a cockroach in your house because it suits your individual purposes?

So now you compare human life to cockroaches....

Psalm 14

1The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”
They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds;
there is none who does good.

I killed God, Nietschze told me.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Self-awareness and higher-level thoughts are also not found in young infants and many handicapped people. So you would argue those are not human? Tell me, where do you draw the line of what is human and what is not?

There is no clear line, but that doesn't matter. The gray area exists far, far away from the state of mental development where virtually all voluntary abortions occur. To give a 40k analogy, if your opponent isn't perfectly accurate in moving their models at what point do you call it cheating? 0.0001" of extra distance? 0.5" of extra distance? Regardless of what small number you personally favor everyone can agree that a player moving their models an extra 24" to get into range is cheating.

In my opinion, there is only one criterion for being human, and that is being a member of the genus Homo. All those who belong to that genus are human.

Do you support immediate cuts to everything else to solve the urgent crisis of miscarriages, which result in the death of vastly more "humans" per year than any other cause? There are ~130 million miscarriages per year, and ~50 million deaths of people that have been born. So, for example, would you support ending all work on cancer research in favor of trying to prevent miscarriages?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Knockagh wrote:
So now you compare human life to cockroaches....

And the cockroach wins. It has much greater capacity for suffering, more ability to think, etc, than the blob of human cells with no brain. Sorry if the comparison makes you uncomfortable, but having an emotional problem with where a developing fetus falls on the brain function scale doesn't make the argument wrong.

Psalm 14

1The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”
They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds;
there is none who does good.

Psalm 69

1 The fool says in his heart, "There is a God."
They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds;
there is none who does good.

Personally I have a test for all those apposed to abotion.

a. Will you support government support for the woman you have forced to have their fetus become a baby?

b. Are you willing to fun real, practical sexual education (as in not abstinence only bs) and give government assistance to groups that provide contraception?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Personally I have a test for all those apposed to abotion.

a. Will you support government support for the woman you have forced to have their fetus become a baby?

b. Are you willing to fun real, practical sexual education (as in not abstinence only bs) and give government assistance to groups that provide contraception?

Absolutely! What great ideas. I would also like to see a funded hospice for unborn children who may not survive the pregnancy, giving care and support to the family through the traumatic events they face with good after care.

Properly funded sex ed is vital from an early age with realistic advice on contraception.

 Knockagh wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Personally I have a test for all those apposed to abotion.

a. Will you support government support for the woman you have forced to have their fetus become a baby?

b. Are you willing to fun real, practical sexual education (as in not abstinence only bs) and give government assistance to groups that provide contraception?

Absolutely! What great ideas. I would also like to see a funded hospice for unborn children who may not survive the pregnancy, giving care and support to the family through the traumatic events they face with good after care.

Properly funded sex ed is vital from an early age with realistic advice on contraception.

And now I'm completely OK with you

. I find far too many anti-abortion people here in the US seem to care deeply about babies until they are born, and then go defund welfare again. And real sex ed will stop more abortions than any law.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Knockagh wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Personally I have a test for all those apposed to abotion.

a. Will you support government support for the woman you have forced to have their fetus become a baby?

b. Are you willing to fun real, practical sexual education (as in not abstinence only bs) and give government assistance to groups that provide contraception?

Absolutely! What great ideas. I would also like to see a funded hospice for unborn children who may not survive the pregnancy, giving care and support to the family through the traumatic events they face with good after care.

Properly funded sex ed is vital from an early age with realistic advice on contraception.

And now I'm completely OK with you

. I find far too many anti-abortion people here in the US seem to care deeply about babies until they are born, and then go defund welfare again. And real sex ed will stop more abortions than any law.

i think if we start to think more radically as a society we can come up with more compassionate solutions to many aspects of modern life human life, if we believe that we have a responsibility to each other in society then we should educate, support and care for each other using our financial, physical and mental abilities. Cruel and cheap solutions are the lazy way out, kindness, compassion and true care are radical approaches that require hard work, that if a society puts its mind to it can heal in more ways than one.

 Knockagh wrote:
i think if we start to think more radically as a society we can come up with more compassionate solutions to many aspects of modern life human life, if we believe that we have a responsibility to each other in society then we should educate, support and care for each other using our financial, physical and mental abilities. Cruel and cheap solutions are the lazy way out, kindness, compassion and true care are radical approaches that require hard work, that if a society puts its mind to it can heal in more ways than one.

And the way of kindness, compassion, and true care is to allow abortion and not force a woman who doesn't want a child to go through the misery of being pregnant with one (or have a more dangerous illegal abortion). The cheap and cruel way is to impose that suffering for the sake of protecting a blob of cells that compares unfavorably to a cockroach.

I got sucked in...

Just wanted to point out that the miscarriage tangent of the coversation is classic Strawmanning.

Miscarriage is simply an unwillful natural abortion. There should never be any laws/punishment/scarlette A when this occurs.

Abortion is a willful unnatural procedure. The two couldn't be more different.

Okay... I'll try to stay out of it again.

 whembly wrote:
Just wanted to point out that the miscarriage tangent of the coversation is classic Strawmanning.

It wasn't until you showed up to straw man it.

Miscarriage is simply an unwillful natural abortion. There should never be any laws/punishment/scarlette A when this occurs.

And nobody is suggesting otherwise. The argument is not that miscarriages should be punished, it's that they should be treated as a massive health crisis if you genuinely believe that the fetus is a full "person". Three times more "people" die from miscarriages than from all other causes combined. So if you genuinely believe that a fetus is a "person" like any other person you should be in favor of a massive investment in research to stop miscarriages from happening. Forget cancer research, cancer is trivial in comparison. Our entire medical and scientific budgets should go to this much more important cause. And throw in the military budget, funding to stop terrorism, Trump's border wall budget, etc. Nothing can possibly be more important than finding a cure for miscarriages.

Of course nobody actually supports that kind of plan, because nobody believes that a miscarriage is the same as a real death. That's why research to cure cancer is treated as a top priority, while miscarriages are considered a personal tragedy that is just an inevitable outcome sometimes. It's only in the context of abortion that the fetus is considered a full person.

 whembly wrote:
There should never be any laws/punishment/scarlette A when this occurs.

Like these?

Utah: http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/blogs-main/advocates-blog/1568-utah-defines-some-miscarriages-as-qcriminal-homicideq-
Georgia: http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/02/miscarriage-death-penalty-georgia
Tennessee: http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/arrested-having-miscarriage-7-appalling-instances-where-pregnant-women-were

1. A critically ill, 27-year-old Washington D.C. woman was 26 weeks pregnant when a judge ordered her to have a Cesarean section. He did so with the understanding that the procedure would very likely kill her. It did. The baby died as well.

There are more examples in the article.

That type of overreaching feticide laws (apparently available in 38 States) can land you in prison on a technicality or somebody's opinion. Another example:
http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/04/01/three-important-things-know-about-feticide-laws

I'm delighted you feel miscarriages are tragedies, I knew there was a soft centre under that hard man persona. Your just a big softy at heart really.

 Knockagh wrote:
I'm delighted you feel miscarriages are tragedies, I knew there was a soft centre under that hard man persona. Your just a big softy at heart really.

And what about you? Do you consider miscarriage prevention to be the single greatest problem we are faced with today, or do you admit that a fetus isn't really a person after all?

O.o

There are MASSIVE funding and research in ob/gyn field that touches on all the development phases of the fetus AND the mother. Mostly in genetic defects and cancer research. So, I'm not so sure that's a valid argument Peregrine.

The question remains, and will always remain so, that since there's no more denying the humanity of the preborn at any stage... the only thing abortion supporters can do now is claim that a human life only has value if they say so.

So these debates will devolve in expressing this value one way or another. THAT is why it's a challenging and often times heated discussion.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Knockagh wrote:
I'm delighted you feel miscarriages are tragedies, I knew there was a soft centre under that hard man persona. Your just a big softy at heart really.

And what about you? Do you consider miscarriage prevention to be the single greatest problem we are faced with today, or do you admit that a fetus isn't really a person after all?

Something something God's will something?

Mario wrote:

 whembly wrote:
There should never be any laws/punishment/scarlette A when this occurs.

Like these?

Utah: http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/blogs-main/advocates-blog/1568-utah-defines-some-miscarriages-as-qcriminal-homicideq-
Georgia: http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/02/miscarriage-death-penalty-georgia
Tennessee: http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/arrested-having-miscarriage-7-appalling-instances-where-pregnant-women-were

1. A critically ill, 27-year-old Washington D.C. woman was 26 weeks pregnant when a judge ordered her to have a Cesarean section. He did so with the understanding that the procedure would very likely kill her. It did. The baby died as well.

There are more examples in the article.

That type of overreaching feticide laws (apparently available in 38 States) can land you in prison on a technicality or somebody's opinion. Another example:
http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/04/01/three-important-things-know-about-feticide-laws

The legal terms of 'miscarriage' could also fall under, "taken some meds and drinking alcohol to force a miscarriage".

They do make distinctions between a natural one v. a wilful one.

It nearly midnight here in the old UK and harvest is drawing to an end so I've just turned off the tractor and I'm off to get into bed beside my wife, who's belly has a lovely little 23 week old baby inside it. We see it kick everyday we have had two wonderful scans showing us the little wonder. It's part of my family no matter what happens.

I would dearly love to see more research into the causes of miscarriages. I'm knackered gents.

 whembly wrote:
There are MASSIVE funding and research in ob/gyn field that touches on all the development phases of the fetus AND the mother. Mostly in genetic defects and cancer research. So, I'm not so sure that's a valid argument Peregrine.

Of course it's a valid argument. Is money being spent on something besides miscarriage prevention? If so, we have a problem. Three times as many "people" die in miscarriages vs. all other deaths combined, so no possible investment in medicine/safety/etc could outweigh the need to find a way to prevent miscarriages. Cancer research is a complete failure of priorities, spending money on preventing terrorism is a waste, etc. We need to stop doing all of that and put the resources to better use.

Now, you could easily resolve the problem by admitting that the fetus is not really a person, but until you do you'd better not be advocating investing in anything other than miscarriage prevention.

The question remains, and will always remain so, that since there's no more denying the humanity of the preborn at any stage... the only thing abortion supporters can do now is claim that a human life only has value if they say so.

Define "humanity". And it's not just having no value if I say so, it's having no value if you say so. The actions of virtually all people who oppose abortion clearly demonstrate that they do not sincerely believe that the fetus is a full person, because those actions only make sense based on the premise that the fetus is not. If you support an exception to abortion bans for rape then you do not believe that the fetus has value. If you do not support making miscarriage prevention research the overwhelming #1 priority you do not believe that the fetus has value. If you would choose to save a 5 year old child from a fire instead of a tray of 10 just-fertilized eggs you do not believe that the fetus has value. Etc. Anti-abortion people consistently demonstrate that the only time a fetus is granted full status as a person is when they need that argument to oppose abortion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Knockagh wrote:
I would dearly love to see more research into the causes of miscarriages.

But how much more? Would you support a complete end to cancer research in favor of directing those resources to attempting to prevent miscarriages? If not then you do not believe that the fetus is really a full "person".

 Knockagh wrote:
It nearly midnight here in the old UK and harvest is drawing to an end so I've just turned off the tractor and I'm off to get into bed beside my wife, who's belly has a lovely little 23 week old baby inside it. We see it kick everyday we have had two wonderful scans showing us the little wonder. It's part of my family no matter what happens.

I would dearly love to see more research into the causes of miscarriages. I'm knackered gents.

Well my girlfriend did quite a bit of research on this in uni. A lot of miscarriages are caused by the unborn fetus having a blood type that doesn't match the mother's, so the body kills it thinking it is a foreign body.

But mostly because the fetus is deformed in one way or another.

 Peregrine wrote:

 whembly wrote:
There are MASSIVE funding and research in ob/gyn field that touches on all the development phases of the fetus AND the mother. Mostly in genetic defects and cancer research. So, I'm not so sure that's a valid argument Peregrine.

Of course it's a valid argument. Is money being spent on something besides miscarriage prevention? If so, we have a problem. Three times as many "people" die in miscarriages vs. all other deaths combined, so no possible investment in medicine/safety/etc could outweigh the need to find a way to prevent miscarriages. Cancer research is a complete failure of priorities, spending money on preventing terrorism is a waste, etc. We need to stop doing all of that and put the resources to better use.

Now, you could easily resolve the problem by admitting that the fetus is not really a person, but until you do you'd better not be advocating investing in anything other than miscarriage prevention.

The question remains, and will always remain so, that since there's no more denying the humanity of the preborn at any stage... the only thing abortion supporters can do now is claim that a human life only has value if they say so.

Define "humanity". And it's not just having no value if I say so, it's having no value if you say so. The actions of virtually all people who oppose abortion clearly demonstrate that they do not sincerely believe that the fetus is a full person, because those actions only make sense based on the premise that the fetus is not. If you support an exception to abortion bans for rape then you do not believe that the fetus has value. If you do not support making miscarriage prevention research the overwhelming #1 priority you do not believe that the fetus has value. If you would choose to save a 5 year old child from a fire instead of a tray of 10 just-fertilized eggs you do not believe that the fetus has value. Etc. Anti-abortion people consistently demonstrate that the only time a fetus is granted full status as a person is when they need that argument to oppose abortion.

I respectfully disagree wholeheartedly....

Personhood has no meaning as it's a crutch to make your argument. It's really the same thought process that justified dehumanizing the Jews in WW2 and slaves in the US.

Having said that, I do advocate in investing in medical research. (I work in the healthcare industry, so this is right in my wheelhouse).

 whembly wrote:
I respectfully disagree wholeheartedly....

Then you're wrong. The numbers are not up for dispute. Roughly 130 million miscarriages per year, compared to about 50 million deaths from all other causes combined. If miscarriage prevention is not your #1 priority, at the expense of anything else, then you do not believe that the fetus is a real "person".

Personhood has no meaning as it's a crutch to make your argument argument.

That's funny, because the anti-abortion argument is entirely about "personhood".

It's really the same thought process that justified dehumanizing the Jews in WW2 and slaves in the US.

No it isn't, not at all. Abortion has nothing to do with racial or cultural stereotypes or white supremacist beliefs. Please do not sink to making ridiculous "abortion is nazis" emotional arguments.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Self-awareness and higher-level thoughts are also not found in young infants and many handicapped people. So you would argue those are not human? Tell me, where do you draw the line of what is human and what is not?
In my opinion, there is only one criterion for being human, and that is being a member of the genus Homo. All those who belong to that genus are human.

Are you insinuating that infants aren't sentient?

Are you confusing self-awareness and sentience?
Sentience is the ability to perceive and respond to external factors of any kind.
Self-awareness is the ability of introspection and to recognise oneself as an individual.
Infants are sentient. They are not yet self-aware (at least not until they are about 18 months old, after which self-awareness starts to develop).

-edit-

I wrote a bunch of stuff... got confused... try re-writing it... then... bah, it's not worth it.