I was thinking, and what better debate then then one of the oldest controversies in the world. Sexuality. Ive always found it fun to venture in, and find out just what everyone thinks about sexuality. What do you all think about how, certain groups react so diversly to that topic. So lets let the debating swing.
Please feel free to answer any of these questions, or answer any of your own questions here. Please be professional with your answers, and keep it clean. Thanks =p
Question 1. What are your thoughts on same sex couples?
Question 2. What are your thoughts on cultural Taboos?
Question 3. What are your thoughts on Abortion?
Question 4. What are your thoughts on Rape? (Why are woman the more potential victim?)
Question 5. Do you believe that being of a popular status, may make sexual pressure more intense? (I.E. Jamie Lynn Spears)
Question 6. What are your thoughts on a human being of Gay, Bi, or straight orientation?
1. Nothing wrong with it.
2. Taboos are stupid.
3. I think it's the mother's decision and no one else's.
4. Rape is obviously horrible.
5. No.
6. Nothing wrong with it.
Nice, direct answers, thanks for your opinions :)
P.S. House rules!
1. I really don't care, as long as it's not the overly flamboyant gays that have to shout it out to the world all the time.
2. Taboos are pretty fucking stupid if they don't have some sort of underlying real danger to them.
3. Pro abortion here, as much decision for the father as the mother, that is, if child support laws stay the same.
4. Some women ask for it.
5. Yes, the media says sex = popularity, why else are most female actors whores?
6. Don't care, as long as they don't shout out how proud they are.
I'm pretty much with Bio.
I see thanks you for posting :)!
1 ) I endorse it, naturally. But I do agree if you're overly flamboyant please go live in a gay village
2 ) Idiotic but you can't change them, can you?
3 ) If necessary, go ahead. I've never really given any deep thought about abortion but in a way I guess it's a good thing it exists. If you're in no situation to have a baby or you're terribly young abortion may, sadly, be the right option.
4 ) Rape is naturally horrible, but I have to imply that males are also getting raped more than you think. I found a rather interesting article about it that I can't find atm, but you could just read this for the hell of it (http://www.ibiblio.org/rcip//male.html). You asked why women are the more potiental victim tho, I think it's just because most men are raging hormone machines who needs sex.
5 ) Jamie Lynn Spears is not only young but also stupid. If you're famous I think there are some people who just want to bang you so they can brag about it 10 years later saying 'I got that Spears woman pregnant'. So yeah, I do believe it puts pressure on you since you have quite broad opportunities for all types of activities if you are of a famous stature.
6 ) It's not anything you choose to become. People will more or less have to live with it. Go for it, people :bean:
1. Nothing wrong with it.
2. Taboos are stupid.
3. I think it's the parent's* decision and no one else's.
4. Rape is obviously horrible.
5. No.
6. Nothing wrong with it.
1: Nothing wrong. Especially when it's two hot girls.
2: Depends on what the taboos are.
3: If she wants to, she should be able to. Some people can't afford a child.
4: Men and women are different. Men are more prone to sexual desires.
5: Yeah.
6: There's nothing wrong with them. In fact, if a pretty girl is bisexual, it just makes me MORE attracted to her.
well you know me for 5 long years. you should know what i think huh?
1. i don't mind about sex from the same gender,just don't talk to me TOO MUCH about it ;D
2.taboos are..stupid kinda.
3.You know me and cass LOL. i shud be a Dad by now. THANK YOU ABORTION!
4. rape is plain wrong. iono what to say seriously. just get a slut and pay. don't ruin someone's life like that...
5. sure. Paris Hilton is known for ''beeing the best ''sex star'' ''. she might not be that good. she ''is'' because she's f***** famous.
6. I got Bi friends. one of my best friend is BI and i don't mind at all. when he told me he was bi, I was like ''it's cool man''. and i acted the same way with him and still am. same for gay people. DON'T EXPECT NE-THING FROM ME THOUGH LOL!!! :o
Thanks for the post bro :)! Your opinions are greatly appreciated!
1) im with bio the ones who scream it out are annoying >_>
2) Pssh like no one else breaks them, there pointless really.
3) Hmm as long as both parents agree, saw if it would be born in to terrible conditions then it is ok i guess.
4) Rape is wrong, but again with bio, some women dress like slags, and they think they wont get raped for it =/
5) Emo = Whore
Chav = whore
Hmm people with alot of friends, seem to be whore's.
6) As long as they dont touch me i dont care what they wanna do.
Thanks for your post link!
I'm pretty much with Link, except the 6th in way, since I'm bisexual, but I don't come onto people.
Thanks for the post Tezuka!
1. Nothing wrong. Just don't shout it out to the world, it's annoying even when opposite sex couples do that.
2. If it was a tabboo on killing, then I could understand. But tabboos on sexuality is just stupid.
3. Abortion is up to the parents, but personally I think it's wrong. The mother will regret doing it for the rest of her life, and if she doesn't want to take care of the child (or is unable to), then she could put it up for adoption. If she doesn't want to take care of the child, there's a good chance that someone else might.
4. Rape is wrong, but some men can literally not help themselves due to psychological problems.
5. Media popularity definitely makes sexual pressure more intense.
6. Everyone is human, what their "preference" is should not matter.
Thank you for your post Zylos <3
Quote from: dominicko on December 30, 2007, 04:37:36 AM
Interesting, the exact same opinion as Halo, right down to the word haha. Thank you for your post! <3
No, I changed one word. Hence the *
lol sorry bout that overlook
EDIT those 2 posts are not the same sorry haha <3
Question 1. I don't care.
Question 2. They make me larf.
Question 3. I'm against it. My father wanted me aborted. ;9
Question 4. Because we are told that women are the weak ones, and men are strong.
Question 5. No.
Question 6. Bi doesn't bother me... but I find gay weird. A bi person still has atracations to women (or men) but a gay person doesn't have natural attractions to the opposite sex.
Thanks for your opinions Fredrick
Quote from: Charlemagne on December 30, 2007, 04:29:52 AM
1. Nothing wrong with it.
2. Taboos are stupid.
3. I think it's the parent's* decision and no one else's.
4. Rape is obviously horrible.
5. No.
6. Nothing wrong with it.
I disagree with your edit. The father doesn't have anything to lose from an abortion; he makes dozens of millions more potential babies every day. The final say should be left to the one carrying the child.
Yay I love debate <3
I agree with Malson, I think the final descion should be a collabortive effort between everyone involved, not just the parents.
EDIT
I agree with Malson, and also (the rest of the sentence.)
That's not what I said at all, retard. Try actually reading my post before you garble my opinions.
lol That was meant to be in 2 sentences sorry lol. I was adding my own addition to it
Question 1. Same sex couples are fine. I think that as long as a person is happy in a healthy relationship, it is not my place to judge their beliefs.
Question 2. Taboos are nothing but actions/lifestyle choices that society has deemed "unusual". There is no such thing as a taboo, for it is merely a figment of collective imagination.
Question 3. Tastes great, less filling. But seriously, I think that a more prudent solution would be adoption.
Question 4. Rape is a product of humanity. Other animals use sex as a means to reproduce. Humans guard it and hold it so high in regard that rape becomes a shameful act. I think that rape is a despicable thing, but in order to keep this debate open, it is important to note that rape is a human device.
Question 5. Sexual pressure is always intense. It all depends on how a person deals with said pressure that matters. We live in a world where children are experimenting with sex before puberty occurs. It is impossible for a 12 year old to think about the effect their choices have on their future. That's just the way it is.
Question 6. Wasn't this question #1? Oh well... Like I said earlier, I have no choice in the matter, so it is pointless to get upset about. People who get irritated about gay couples may as well get irritated at the tide coming in. Its going to happen, and there's nothing you can do about it.
Nice and Insightful, thanks iholk
EDIT
The last question, is not question one. Just not the best order I guess lol. To late to change it now.
Quote from: Malson on December 31, 2007, 03:08:33 AM
Quote from: Charlemagne on December 30, 2007, 04:29:52 AM
1. Nothing wrong with it.
2. Taboos are stupid.
3. I think it's the parent's* decision and no one else's.
4. Rape is obviously horrible.
5. No.
6. Nothing wrong with it.
I disagree with your edit. The father doesn't have anything to lose from an abortion; he makes dozens of millions more potential babies every day. The final say should be left to the one carrying the child.
For some reason when I initially posted I had single mothers in mind... in which case, yes it is of course up to just the mother.
If it's a mother and father, well I agree with arlen. Put it this way, if my wife were pregnant and she wanted an abortion, I would be pretty pissed if she went and did it without even talking to me about it.
I'm not saying she doesn't have to tell her husband about it. Hopefully their relationship is strong enough to the point where they can tell each other something like that. What I'm saying is that the father has no right to keep the baby inside her if she doesn't want it there.
I think most of us can agree on that.
1. A-O-K
2. Some are in place for obvious reasons, but outside that they're ignorant.
3. Why is this an issue? I never understood. If it's not in your stomach, how can you possibly tell someone how to handle it?
4. Rape sucks.
5. It shouldn't. However, there's this concept known as the self-fulfilling prophecy...
6. Whatever floats your boat.
Question 1. NO
Question 2. If you mean like two cousins marrying, then keep the taboos
Question 3. Abortion is a sin that covers up another
Question 4. Bad, Men are more agressive
Question 5. Other than press coverage, no
Question 6. Being homosexual is a sin against God, but as long as they make it obvious to the world, it's fine with me
Question 1. What are your thoughts on same sex couples?
My opinion is biest(sp?) due to the fact that I grew up in a Christian home. It goes against what the Bible says, therefore, it's wrong.
Question 2. What are your thoughts on cultural Taboos?
If you are around people of a different culture then your own, it would be best to respect their taboos as to not offend them.
Question 3. What are your thoughts on Abortion?
In my mind, abortion should only be aloud in two surcemstances. One, if the mother will die in the process of giving birth, or two, if the child was concieved during an act of rape.
Question 4. What are your thoughts on Rape? (Why are woman the more potential victim?)
Plain and simple, it's wrong. As to the second question, men are more likely to portray their sexual lusts in the open and attempt to satisfy them. Women are a bit more subtle.
Question 5. Do you believe that being of a popular status, may make sexual pressure more intense? (I.E. Jamie Lynn Spears)
(Almost) Everyone experiences some sort of sexual presser at some point in their life. Being "popular" makes it happen sooner/more often as more people are attracted to you.
Question 6. What are your thoughts on a human being of Gay, Bi, or straight orientation?
See question 1.
Looking at it in a philosophical view, homosexuality is not a choice, but rather a part of human nature for certain individuals. Having schooled in Chicago, I know a good number of people who happen to be gay, and aside from their sexual preference they are no different from everyone else.
Human nature is composed of two parts: nature and nurture (a.k.a. heredity and enviorment). Homosexuality is mainly due to genetic heredity, but partly to environmental factors, and pure chance. A homosexual has not chosen to become homo, he has simply become one because of external factors. It has originated by nature, and variety is natural, so I cannot see any reason why homosexuality should be considered unnatural, despite how people may feel about it.
If homosexuality is natural, then there is no reason why it should be considered "wrong", or why they should be prosecuted for it since they have done nothing wrong. It is simply a part of who they are, and that cannot be changed.
Quote from: iHolk on December 31, 2007, 08:37:23 AM
Question 4. Rape is a product of humanity. Other animals use sex as a means to reproduce. Humans guard it and hold it so high in regard that rape becomes a shameful act.
I'm calling you out on this, I'm pretty sure some animals will rape other animals to show them their place in a pack (ie, male wolf rapes male wolf to show he is stronger).
Question 1: Fine. homosexuality occurs all the time in the wild. But a lot of people just like to write it off as dominant behavior or 'practicing for the opposite sex.' Whatever. Even if that were the case, it still happens, people still like it and they still do it.
Question 2: Neutral....don't really care I guess.
Question 3. I'm against it mainly and I think it should only be used in the dire of circumstances. ((ie: women was raped and even then, isn't adoption better? Jeesh...)) But aborting that fetus because you're not ready to be a parent or you're bored or just lazy or whatever? I'm sorry- but the girl shoulda been more responsible and thought about that when she spread her legs and let something inside her coo cha-cha, as does the man.
Question 4. People say rape is about power but that's kind of BS. It's true, but men ARE naturally hornier than women. Gay or straight...you know, men are sex pigs. WOOF! So that can be channeled in a healthy or unhealthy way like anything else. Girls can rape too, of course- it's never clear cut, but we're hornier, so we'll always be more on the offensive with this issue. Also if men are taught to deny their sexual urges, and wouldn't even THINK about being with a man (even if they might need to, since again men are easy and don't need as much seducing to me usually) they might resort to being a misogynist that's upset with women for putting out. But fellas, just think if YOU didn't have a dick and could be receptive only. ((Empathy 101)) You'd have to be more trusting, wary, and a little shyer about sex too ya know? It's not their fault, just how they were designed. That's why men who like to have control over women and passive gay males are just fucking bullies and should be shot in the head.
Question 5. I think so yeah....to a degree. In my experience you only get laid once you get some self-confidence in yourself, if you don't like yourself why would anybody like you...that sorta thing. And celebs have WAAAY too much of that sometimes, spoiled hollywood brats!
Question 6. They are what they are. The hypothatawhatever in gay men is smaller and responds to the male sweat as a sexual, erotic stimulant. That's why if a gay dude says "you reek bro" he's just covering up his desires to look cool while going to secretly masturbate to ya later. =P
This isn't exactly the best debate on sexuality I've ever seen. For one thing, it falls just short of those retarded chain emails and for another the questions suck. Sexuality is a broad subject and both the questions and responses are rather wanting here.
Anyways, as for sexual preferences (hetero, homo, bi, pans, whatever), I believe that's shaped mainly by experience and environment. Kind of a vague statement, and rather concise, but it's all you're getting from me for now.
Also, Adorkable is kind of dumb but she can be forgiven for that because she's female. Rape IS about power- you think guys rape women (or other guys) because they're horny and can't get any? It's the same issue as sexuality- they get violent sexual fantasies and eventually act them out (not that every guy with violent sexual fantasies becomes a rapist, of course). This can be due to a variety of reasons, depending on each person.
And yes, there are examples of rape in the animal kingdom. I believe chimpanzees, or some other primate, use rape as a way of demonstrating superiority, but I'm not entirely sure.
Question 1. What are your thoughts on same sex couples?
Question 2. What are your thoughts on cultural Taboos?
Question 3. What are your thoughts on Abortion?
Question 4. What are your thoughts on Rape? (Why are woman the more potential victim?)
Question 5. Do you believe that being of a popular status, may make sexual pressure more intense? (I.E. Jamie Lynn Spears)
Question 6. What are your thoughts on a human being of Gay, Bi, or straight orientation?
-----------------------------------------------------------
Answer 1: I prefer straight couples,,but there is nothing wrong with same sex couples. And of course,,lesbian couples just turn everybody on.
Answer 2: Neutral,,don't care about it.
Answer 3: Support it,,however,,I think that the COUPLE (not just the pregnant woman alone) should decide whether to get an abortion or not.
Answer 4: Rape is a crime, women are generally percieved as the weaker sex,,so they get attacked more often.
Answer 5: No,,being popular (Hollywood wise) usually means that your children are spoiled and dumb,,and more likely than not,,will end up as parents by the age of 16.
Answer 6: Nothing wrong with it,,people of the ancient world did not care about sexual orientation,,neither should we.
Quote from: gonorrhea on January 08, 2008, 05:48:19 AM
Adorkable is kind of dumb but she can be forgiven for that because she's female.
I don't know, I'm not arguing that she is dumb, but we do have smart females on the boards.
# 1 & 6: Don't care. In fact, I often participate in Heterosexual Shame parades :police:
# 5: No, though I suppose there would be more people who want to have sex with you if you were famous.
# 2: err, depends on the taboo. There are a few, like necrophilia, bestiality, incest, etc... that I find repulsive.
# 4: I'm a big fan of rape. At least once or twice a week for me. It really ought to be legal. Seriously, what kind of ridiculous question is this?
# 3: This is the only question I really care about. I am strongly opposed to abortion because I do believe that you are human from conception and deserve human rights. My justification for this is in one of the old abortion topics which I cannot find, but the short version is that I am unable to assign humanity upon birth, when biologically the child is the same 10 minutes before labour as it is 10 minutes after. Time of birth is way too arbitrary in my opinion. Similarly, by induction, anytime that it is a living, growing organism would also be an arbitrary assignment of humanity. The fetus is merely a stage of development. A fetus may not be an infant, but an infant is not a toddler and a child is not an adult, but all are human. If human life means anything at all (of that I'm unsure), I think that it would have to start at conception, rather than birth.
Also:
QuoteWhy is this an issue? I never understood. If it's not in your stomach, how can you possibly tell someone how to handle it?
That's one way to dodge an issue. Though that logic would almost certainly nullify any conception of morality or ethics. You don't have to be in a situation to provide a commentary on it.
True, but it also makes your opinion less worthy than that of someone who would have to endure child birth.
Not necessarily- it gives you a different perspective, which is at least supposed to be a good thing.
A different perspective isn't a particularly valuable one, though. If you wanted to make dinner, would you rather listen to a chef or a construction worker?
I'm a bit late I know, but I don't think that is a particularly good analogy. There's a difference from getting a professional opinion on something factual and concrete and getting an opinion on an ethical issue
Take, perhaps, someone being blackmailed. He has a few options: pay, ignore, call the cops, kill the blackmailer, etc...
Though I have never been blackmailed, I would say that whatever the right option is, killing the blackmailer would be a bad thing to do. I do not think that if a blackmailed person is to tell me that that is the best option, I would concede simply because I have never been in that situation. If anything is wrong, killing is, and I think I can state that fairly confidently even though I am not in a situation where I am tempted to kill someone.
My point is: not only does not being in a situation make your opinion on that situation less valid, being in a situation does not make your opinion on the issue more valid either. The person in the situation has something at stake, but that is no guarantee that they think about it from an ethical perspective. It is easily conceivable that they will do what they perceive as best for them, and so no, I don't think that opinion has priority over mine. In almost any case I can imagine, an objective opinion is more likely to be correct than a subjective one.
Quote from: Malson on January 01, 2008, 06:09:07 PM
I'm not saying she doesn't have to tell her husband about it. Hopefully their relationship is strong enough to the point where they can tell each other something like that. What I'm saying is that the father has no right to keep the baby inside her if she doesn't want it there.
Which is why I said it was the *parent's decision, and not the *father's decision.
I was saying that to Halo, not you =x
Quote from: You on December 31, 2007, 03:08:33 AM
Quote from: Me on December 30, 2007, 04:29:52 AM
1. Nothing wrong with it.
2. Taboos are stupid.
3. I think it's the parent's* decision and no one else's.
4. Rape is obviously horrible.
5. No.
6. Nothing wrong with it.
I disagree with your edit. The father doesn't have anything to lose from an abortion; he makes dozens of millions more potential babies every day. The final say should be left to the one carrying the child.
That part was directed at you. But the post up there was responding to Halo.
Yeah, and I was responding to the part directed at me. ???
Quote from: modern algebra on January 10, 2008, 05:08:12 PM
Also:
QuoteWhy is this an issue? I never understood. If it's not in your stomach, how can you possibly tell someone how to handle it?
That's one way to dodge an issue. Though that logic would almost certainly nullify any conception of morality or ethics. You don't have to be in a situation to provide a commentary on it.
Dodge? What? It's their personal ordeal, who are we to mandate what they can and cannot do? I personally think its better for the baby to be eliminated quickly than left in a trash can, or worse.
Like I said, you could use that statement (slightly modified) to escape making any ethical judgements on any activity whatsoever. And in this case you are using it so that you do not need to make an ethical judgement of a complicated situation. AKA dodging the issue.
I'm not dodging the issue, I'm saying its the mom's decision.
Quote from: modern algebra on January 25, 2008, 05:06:19 PM
Like I said, you could use that statement (slightly modified) to escape making any ethical judgements on any activity whatsoever. And in this case you are using it so that you do not need to make an ethical judgement of a complicated situation. AKA dodging the issue.
It's only complicated because people make it that way. Put simply, the fetus is in the possession of the mother. Therefore, it is up to the mother to decide. Besides, where is the loss for the father? He produces millions of sperm cells every day. If the mother disposes of the embryo, all he has to do is shoot some more semen in her to start the process back up again.
Leaving it to the mother follows the simple rule of "if it's in your possession, it's your responsibility." Until its birth, the child belongs to the mother and no one else. If the mother doesn't want the baby, the father doesn't have a right to infringe on that, as he's not the one who has to nurture the child for 9 months and then deliver it. Any father who thinks he DOES in fact have a right to tell the mother what she can and can't do is an inconsiderate and pretentious prick, end of story.
This isn't dodging the issue, this is providing a simple answer to a simple question made complicated by a bunch of "white collared wifebeaters" who think they have a right to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body. I don't find it particularly coincidental that I have yet to hear a woman present herself as anti-abortion.
I believe that the fetus is human, as does anybody who is against abortion. I have already stated my abridged reasons for that belief; namely birth is too arbitrary to assign the concept of humanity (as this is ambiguous, I am referring to the concept of inalienable rights; rights given simply for being human with no other justification and rights that cannot be taken away, no matter what actions the individual pursues) to an organism. If the fetus does not belong to the human species, what is it? The issue is not, in my mind, whether or not it's the mother's choice or the father and mother's choice.At the very least, the issue of the fetus as human or not human is complicated enough to warrant some thought. I think that for you to hold that opinion, you have to make some kind of argument to justify the belief that it is not human in order to condone it's killing, rather than saying "it's not my problem; let people who get pregnant deal with it and leave me out of it". To me, that seems like dodging the issue.
EDIT::
And really, you haven't heard women who identify as anti-abortion? Where do you live? I live in Canada, which is more liberal than the States, and I've heard plenty of women say they are anti-abortion, even young women.
Quote from: modern algebraI think that for you to hold that opinion, you have to make some kind of argument to justify the belief that it is not human in order to condone it's killing, rather than saying "it's not my problem; let people who get pregnant deal with it and leave me out of it".
I think it's human; I just don't care if it is or not. What does one life matter, especially when it's unable to biologically support itself? Let's look at it from a demographic point of view. If you were to outlaw abortion, every one of the millions of fetuses that would have been aborted would only add to the already insanely high world population. A population that's increasing exponentially, I might add. One life, and a sub-life at that, matters very little in the long run. The more people there are, the more strain is put on the planet to support said people, and eventually the world is going to overcrowd to the point where it becomes nearly impossible to sustain oneself. If you truly value human life, wouldn't that bother you?
That's why I said the final say should be left to the mother. Put simply, you have no right to dictate how much SHE has to value the life of her own fetus. In the end, it should be left for her to decide. The United States is a country rooted in freedom and privilege, which I'm sure you understand, even if you're not from here. There is no reason why a woman shouldn't be allowed the choice to not have to go through the hardships and pain of bearing a child. Does it really matter THAT much that a baby who hasn't even been born yet be disposed of?
If you're planning on asking me to put myself in the fetus' shoes, so to speak, then I'll tell you the honest truth. I was an accidental conception, and I could very well have been aborted. Does it bother me that I might not have been able to live? Not at all. If I hadn't been allowed to live, I wouldn't have even had the ability to be bothered. I would have simply ceased to exist. My life is nothing more or less than anyone else's, or any other creature on the planet for that matter. I think people give human life a lot more credit than it really deserves, because we're really nothing more than
animals with exceptional intelligence. But that's straying into religious territory, so I won't go on much more about that.
Basically, I'm not at all saying "it's not my problem; let people who get pregnant deal with it and leave me out of it" to dodge the question. I'm saying it because it's not my business, so I'm not going to put my two cents in where it doesn't belong. My only biological "job" is to impregnate females. After doing that, the rest is for them to decide.
See, even if a WOMAN is anti-abortion, then she should only be able to anti-abortion for HERSELF. She has no right to say, I DON'T WANT TO DO IT, SO YOU CAN'T DO IT EITHER.
That's my philosophy here. TO EACH THEIR OWN.
I'll preface this post by saying I am a humanist, though I should say that I am not a Humanist in the sense of the actual philosophy of Humanism. I just think the word suits my own belief system better than any other word does. I believe in the supremacy of humanity over all other forms of life on earth. I assign value to other things in the world only based on the way they effect humans. I believe that the human intellect can eventually overcome any barriers, even ones that seem insurmountable currently. I realize that I would be in your category of people who give human life more credit than is deserved, and I don't think I can make an argument that would make you come around, so maybe the argument to follow is pointless. But despite that, I will try. This probably seems out of place but I think it provides context for my argument.
I'll start with:
Quote
I think it's human; I just don't care if it is or not. What does one life matter, especially when it's unable to biologically support itself? Let's look at it from a demographic point of view. If you were to outlaw abortion, every one of the millions of fetuses that would have been aborted would only add to the already insanely high world population. A population that's increasing exponentially, I might add. One life, and a sub-life at that, matters very little in the long run. The more people there are, the more strain is put on the planet to support said people, and eventually the world is going to overcrowd to the point where it becomes nearly impossible to sustain oneself. If you truly value human life, wouldn't that bother you?
This is not necessarily a bad argument, but I think it suffers because it requires that you divorce yourself from your own humanity. It could just as well provide a justification for murder. Could you feel comfortable making that argument to justify the actions of a murderer? Because there is nothing in that paragraph (except 'sub-life') that localizes it to the fetus case, and most of it, such as the insignificance of human life and overpopulation, would apply equallly well in any circumstance of murder. In fact, if we are looking at the long run, then not only one life does not matter, every human life doesn't matter. It is inevitable at some point that humanity should be extinct. What does it matter if it happens sooner or later? One life is infintesimally insignificant in terms of the universe; A thousand infintesimally insignificant lives added together is still infinitesimally insignificant, and the entire population of the earth is still insignificant in the universal framework. Under that logic, war, genocide, every atrocity thinkable becomes justifiable. So, even if your argument is technically sound, it is inapplicable without denying the entire notion of Ethics and ethical behaviour.
As to the final question of your paragraph, the answer is no. I believe Life > Death. Even starving; scraping for a meal, I would rather be alive than dead (a vacuous statement, considering that I am not in that position, but I am sincere as far as that can be useful). This is not universally applicable, as suicide exists, but I think that the least statement which can be made is that it is better to have the choice. Aside from which, I have already stated my belief on science and the human intellect. Canada could use a billion people. Tell them to come here :P Overpopulation exists in India already, but I think it will be a long time before overpopulation can become a planetary phenomenon and I think that science will find a way to feed people regardless. Already, it is easier to grow more crops in less space, and those crops are more resilient to natural phenomenon like cold spells and the like. Eventually, I think food production will become much easier and I think that humanity is more likely to go extinct from other things before overpopulation becomes a problem like you describe, even if science fails us in that regard.
QuoteThe United States is a country rooted in freedom and privilege
This is of course, true. The U.S. is based on a conception of inalienable human rights, and among them is the right to liberty. Also among them is the right to life, and that trumps liberty IMO. It is particularly the arbitrary assignment of these rights that I am contesting. I do not see why birth is held as the time when you magically receive your rights, and in particular I cannot see any legitimate reason surrounding birth which would make it impossible to assign these rights later in life. Whereas, I can see why you could assign these rights to conception. MY argument has always been that if human life means anything, it must logically mean something from conception, because there is nothing about birth that seems special enough to suddenly assign meaning to human life.
And of course, the reason why I do not believe that the mother has the right to kill her child is rooted in the belief that human life matters and that nobody has the right to take that life from another human being. I can't really expect this to sway you, having read your argument, but that is my view on the issue. I have to go right now, but if I missed any of your points that you thought were particularly compelling, or if you feel I misinterpreted part of your argument, please tell me and I will try to rectify that in whatever way possible.
@Arrow: I wasn't making any claim that because some women are anti-abortion, it must by necessity be wrong. And as I have argued in the above post and in previous posts, I do not think "to each their own" is a compelling argument in a case which directly threatens the life of another human being. It certainly would be ineffective in a courtroom if yoe happen to be defending a murderer. And I do consider it to be murder, as I believe it is a human life.
Quote from: modern algebranot only one life does not matter, every human life doesn't matter. It is inevitable at some point that humanity should be extinct. What does it matter if it happens sooner or later? One life is infintesimally insignificant in terms of the universe; A thousand infintesimally insignificant lives added together is still infinitesimally insignificant, and the entire population of the earth is still insignificant in the universal framework.
This is exactly how I feel. However, murder isn't justifiable because people still have a right to their own life, as insignificant as it may be. And really, at that point we stand opposed. I don't consider a fetus human until it is able to survive without direct support of another. A fetus cannot live unless it is attached to its mother, because it will not be able to survive outside the womb until the third trimester of pregnancy. As long as the child is in prenatal development, and relies completely on its mother to grow until it is capable of survival in the outside world, I don't consider it deserving of the same rights as you and me.