Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Political & socio-economic nerd-rage thread.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by drssgchic View Post
    Let's say she's 17 and was raised in a very, very conservative area.
    It's been my experience that while often annoying and seemingly closed-minded/uncaring on the surface most conservatives and religious folks are far more loving than you give them credit for. I do not think many would toss the baby out into the streets unwanted etc.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by canio6 View Post
      It's been my experience that while often annoying and seemingly closed-minded/uncaring on the surface most conservatives and religious folks are far more loving than you give them credit for. I do not think many would toss the baby out into the streets unwanted etc.
      Loving, yes. Informed? Not where I grew up. And I'm not saying they'd throw the baby out into the streets. The mother . . . that's another story.
      http://cattaillady.com/ My blog exploring the beginning stages of learning how to homestead. With the occasional rant.

      Originally Posted by TheFastCat: Less is more more or less

      And now I have an Etsy store: CattailsandCalendula

      Comment


      • Originally posted by drssgchic View Post
        Loving, yes. Informed? Not where I grew up. And I'm not saying they'd throw the baby out into the streets. The mother . . . that's another story.
        That has not been my experience. While growing up in a very conservative area and teaching in another I never once saw the baby or mother tossed out. It isn't 1950, pregnant girls even stay in the same schools now. That said, I may have just gotten lucky in my observations and YMMV.

        Comment


        • Moralizing people about making the right decisions doesn't offer any real solution to the problem. If a guy gets in a motorcycle accident, you don't refuse to fix his leg because he neglected to wear his helmet. The damage has already been done.

          In real life, people don't suddenly nut up and become responsible if you drop a baby on their doorstep. That's also perhaps the most volatile and insane way to teach a person a lesson, ever.
          “The whole concept of a macronutrient, like that of a calorie, is determining our language game in such a way that the conversation is not making sense." - Dr. Kurt Harris

          Comment


          • Regarding abortion, there are two different fronts.

            Firstly, the issue of whether it is morally right. I agree with the people who think that abortion is morally wrong. However, I also think that this is trumped by the second point.

            Secondly, whether it's illegal or not, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO KEEP HAVING ABORTIONS. Making them legal just makes them much much safer for all concerned.

            For this reason I think that abortion should be legal (just like drinking, and speeding).
            Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

            Griff's cholesterol primer
            5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
            Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
            TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
            bloodorchid is always right

            Comment


            • Originally posted by canio6 View Post
              It's been my experience that while often annoying and seemingly closed-minded/uncaring on the surface most conservatives and religious folks are far more loving than you give them credit for. I do not think many would toss the baby out into the streets unwanted etc.
              Hasn't the Catholic church run most of the orphanages in the US and abroad? The old cliche is leaving a baby basket on the church steps. I think people tend to jump from one extreme to another; "if a woman chooses to bring a pregnancy to term, then she must also love and care for the child after birth." That's not true. The child could be put up for adoption very easily at no additional cost to the mother.

              Which brings us to another issue: Why can't mothers (and parents) be compensated for bringing a child into this world? Sperm donors are paid, adoption agencies and attorneys have their fees, and the government has their fees, why is it illegal to receive a fee for your labor? I don't think it's a wise idea to have a baby assembly line that sells human beings, but babies aren't being sold into slavery, either. They are being adopted by people who want to love and care for them.
              | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

              “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Chaohinon View Post
                Moralizing people about making the right decisions doesn't offer any real solution to the problem. If a guy gets in a motorcycle accident, you don't refuse to fix his leg because he neglected to wear his helmet. The damage has already been done.

                In real life, people don't suddenly nut up and become responsible if you drop a baby on their doorstep. That's also perhaps the most volatile and insane way to teach a person a lesson, ever.
                Exactly.

                Originally posted by magicmerl View Post
                Regarding abortion, there are two different fronts.

                Firstly, the issue of whether it is morally right. I agree with the people who think that abortion is morally wrong. However, I also think that this is trumped by the second point.

                Secondly, whether it's illegal or not, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO KEEP HAVING ABORTIONS. Making them legal just makes them much much safer for all concerned.

                For this reason I think that abortion should be legal (just like drinking, and speeding).
                +1 for point 2. We've been doing this for a very long time in various ways. Most of which are harmful to the mother at best.

                I see abortion as a last-resort sort of birth control. However, whether that option is legal, monitored, and as safe as possible, or a rusty hanger in her bedroom or a back alley, it will always be there.
                http://cattaillady.com/ My blog exploring the beginning stages of learning how to homestead. With the occasional rant.

                Originally Posted by TheFastCat: Less is more more or less

                And now I have an Etsy store: CattailsandCalendula

                Comment


                • Originally posted by DamienMaddox View Post
                  The reason would be because she was lazy (Why would abortions be available but not other birth control methods, why would she know about abortion and not other birth control methods?). The question of wanting her to be a mother, preferably no, but it is likely the child would grow up to be a stronger independent individual.

                  Obviously it can go either way, but children are smart enough to decide what they don't want to be like when they grow up. Being a good example for your children is preferred because they have more to learn from, this would be a pulling force of motivation. The child is rewarded for building their character and being responsible. On the other hand, a mother who is a bad example teaches the child what not to do, and this is a pushed force of motivation. Their need for security that is not provided by the mother (or parents) forces them to become independent and to rely on themselves. They may not have the "head start" the other child has, but as an adult, they are much more liberated than the other child because they are confident in their ability to overcome adversities and achieve goals, without help from others.
                  Children learn from their environment and while some may vow never to make their parent's mistakes, most others think that their environment is the norm and become just like those around them. Do you really think that cultures that brag of 30yo Grandmas really teach their kids to have sex at such a young age? No way, but kids see others around them and follow suit. The same with poor manners or money managing skills. It becomes the accepted norm to run out of money before the week/month is over or to eat junk food all the time. Having crappy parents is a no win deal for kids!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Mud Flinger View Post
                    Children learn from their environment and while some may vow never to make their parent's mistakes, most others think that their environment is the norm and become just like those around them. Do you really think that cultures that brag of 30yo Grandmas really teach their kids to have sex at such a young age? No way, but kids see others around them and follow suit. The same with poor manners or money managing skills. It becomes the accepted norm to run out of money before the week/month is over or to eat junk food all the time. Having crappy parents is a no win deal for kids!
                    I agree that people who have no interest in properly caring for a child shouldn't. So what if you give them to people who want them and would be good parents? The adoption laws, and religious zealots that oppose same-sex couples, single but stable individual households, etc., make it so difficult to adopt children, not to mention expensive and time-consuming. The government and Catholic church have a monopoly on the adoption industry as thousands of worthy people and orphaned children wait for bureaucracy, separated by church AND state. One more government fiasco in this needlessly-complicated game of civilization.
                    | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

                    “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                      This is where the divide comes. Those that consider a pregnancy to be parasitic have already chosen what makes them happiest, and that is their choice. I believe it should be left up to the individual, and if she feels good about her choice, then that is her choice. I disagree with the stance and hope people would consider other options and be open to new points of view, but ultimately it's not my business... so long as I am not forced to pay for their choice in either direction.
                      Then we don't disagree about preferred policy at all. You want no laws against abortion, I want no laws against abortion. Problem solved.

                      Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                      You can't have it both ways. You want it to be all about you and disregard the new individual inside, then pay for it.
                      Um... I will? When did I ever suggest you or anyone should have to pay for someone else's abortion? did you miss the part where I am not a statist?

                      Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                      Before baby formula existed babies were pretty dependent on their mother for nourishment postpartum unless there happened to be a wet nurse available.
                      Or a goat. But yes, technology tends to increase the number of available choices in our lives. I don't see how this is relevant.

                      Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                      What is an embryo? It is an animal at its earliest stage of growth; an organism. What is an organism? By scientific definition, it is life. If science found an organism on Mars, they'd declare that life was found.
                      I think you are conflating the idea of "alive" with the idea of "person". I am trying to keep those two concepts separate, as they should be, since life is neither necessary nor sufficient for personhood. As far as I am concerned a computer could be a person if it were self-aware, and a fully developed human could be a non-person if he is braindead. I simply refuse to accept that a clump of cells which will likely one day develop into a human person is already a human person. It is a human animal, a human life, yes, but it is not a human person and therefore has no rights. I understand that you disagree because you believe there is some Factor P, separate from the facility for self-aware consciousness, which imparts personhood. I think the person is the "software" running in the brain. In the absence of said software there is no person, and the existence of software with those characteristics makes a person, regardless of the hardware running it. This is a basic difference in assumptions and outlook that I seriously doubt we'll bridge through debate, which is why I am happy to agree that neither of us should be making rules for the other regarding our reproductive choices (or my wife's reproductive choices in my case).

                      Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                      This article disagrees with most of what you have asserted: A Distinct Human Organism : NPR
                      See my above arguments. That article is arguing from similar assumptions to yours, that there exists some criterion other than possessing conscious awareness that can qualify an entity as a person. I don't accept the premise any more coming from an NPR article than I do from you.

                      Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                      Huh? Why should the only place a woman can receive treatment (estrogen, morning after pill, etc.) be at a centralized agency?! That makes no sense whatsoever. Why can't we buy morning after pills over the counter? Hell, put them in vending machines. They used to do it for cigarettes and thousands of other risky things.
                      I was under the impression that you were advocating a law against abortion, which is what I was referring to. You're not, apparently, so that section of my comment is irrelevant and I'll happily retract it.

                      Originally posted by DamienMaddox View Post
                      I feel an important question is the motivation to classify an embryo/fetus/etc as a parasite. This is a relatively new way of phrasing is. Is the purpose of this classification solely to dehumanize the fetus and to convince ones self that their decision is a moral one? Do you feel absolutely certain that abortion is moral?
                      Am I absolutely certain of anything? Nope. I am pretty confident in my position that an early-stage embryo has no mental functions that should earn it personhood status with rights equal to its mother's, yes.

                      Originally posted by DamienMaddox View Post
                      Looking deep into the future, centuries from now, will abortions still be practiced? If there is nothing morally wrong with it, why research and develop methods to prevent conception when we can just develop abortion methods that are just as easy? Which route are we most likely to take, and why? If we are completely open and honest about how we feel about our morals, who and what will we eventually conclude has rights? Today we seem to be fighting for gay rights and the rights of the unborn. The safest bet for tomorrow would be that we would eventually be fighting for animal rights. In the past, we fought for rights of races and genders, and so far, we have not found any of those battles to be a mistake. Are we making our first mistake now or could this just simply be the way our species is evolving from a violent species to a peaceful species?
                      It is my hope that we can come up with a reasonable definition of "person" and extend rights to all entities who fit that definition. Obviously we're not all agreed on what is and isn't a person as of yet. I have no idea what people will think far in the future; I can only hope that we will continually become less violent and more happy as a species. Clearly if more people think like me in the future then early-term fetuses will not be considered people and abortions will not be classified as "violence". If we knew where the world was going to be three centuries from now we could just skip all the nonsense and jump straight there.
                      Today I will: Eat food, not poison. Plan for success, not settle for failure. Live my real life, not a virtual one. Move and grow, not sit and die.

                      My Primal Journal

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by magicmerl View Post
                        Regarding abortion, there are two different fronts.

                        Firstly, the issue of whether it is morally right. I agree with the people who think that abortion is morally wrong. However, I also think that this is trumped by the second point.

                        Secondly, whether it's illegal or not, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO KEEP HAVING ABORTIONS. Making them legal just makes them much much safer for all concerned.

                        For this reason I think that abortion should be legal (just like drinking, and speeding).
                        Sounds like everyone is in agreement that it is morally frowned upon to have an abortion, and that if there are alternatives, they would be used instead.

                        Banning abortions outright would definitely have undesired consequences as well.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Mud Flinger View Post
                          Children learn from their environment and while some may vow never to make their parent's mistakes, most others think that their environment is the norm and become just like those around them. Do you really think that cultures that brag of 30yo Grandmas really teach their kids to have sex at such a young age? No way, but kids see others around them and follow suit. The same with poor manners or money managing skills. It becomes the accepted norm to run out of money before the week/month is over or to eat junk food all the time. Having crappy parents is a no win deal for kids!
                          There are always exceptions to the rule too. Environment doesn't dictate how a child will turn out.

                          I think that having crappy parents is still a better deal than not existing at all. (Morally speaking, not advocating abortion laws here either).

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by DamienMaddox View Post
                            I think that having crappy parents is still a better deal than not existing at all. (Morally speaking, not advocating abortion laws here either).
                            Maybe most people who grow up this way would agree with that, but speaking as the product of an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy, and then raised by two miserably unhappy people who made crappy parents, I would prefer my mother have gotten an abortion. It was very, very painful growing up as someone's regret. (And my parents had another "regret" just fifteen months after me. Birth control, dammit! Birth control!)
                            Last edited by Gay Panda; 05-07-2012, 04:46 PM.
                            JOIN THE PANDA SHOW!!! Primal With A Side Of FABULOUS and PANDALOONERY!

                            Comment


                            • GayPanda, you need to have more unplanned "oopsies". My zoo is sadly lacking in pandas. Please propagate your beloved species.
                              (In all seriousness, I totally feel you).

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                                The old cliche is leaving a baby basket on the church steps.
                                I don't have a dog in this fight, but I just wanted to say that in Nevada you can still do that. If you leave a baby at a hospital, firestation, church or something similar within a certain time after it's birth (1 month?), you can remain anonymous and not be prosecuted. And yet people STILL leave them in dumpsters.

                                Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                                Which brings us to another issue: Why can't mothers (and parents) be compensated for bringing a child into this world? Sperm donors are paid, adoption agencies and attorneys have their fees, and the government has their fees, why is it illegal to receive a fee for your labor? I don't think it's a wise idea to have a baby assembly line that sells human beings, but babies aren't being sold into slavery, either. They are being adopted by people who want to love and care for them.
                                Because puppy mills are horrific enough. I can't even imagine what baby mills would be like, and you know people would do it.
                                Durp.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X