- Joined
- Sep 16, 2012
- Messages
- 53,677
- Reaction score
- 59,198
- Location
- Tucson, AZ
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Well, if overpopulation is a problem and if rights only come from government then I figure it's fine for government to redefine who has rights and just kill off that part of the population that isn't wanted....just like the Nazis and all other genocidal maniacs do.Great, more melodrama on your part. And yes, overpopulation is a problem. Especially if a child is not wanted or can be cared for in the first place. But it seems some are more focused on quantity over quality.
If you figure it's fine, then what's the problem? Why are you whining?Well, if overpopulation is a problem and if rights only come from government then I figure it's fine for government to redefine who has rights and just kill off that part of the population that isn't wanted....just like the Nazis and all other genocidal maniacs do.
What the heck are you talking about? Yes, even animals have and RECOGNIZE basic rights. Try to take a ball away from a puppy. That's HIS ball and he knows it. Why do birds make nests? It's so they have a place to lay their eggs and then care for them even BEFORE the baby bird is born. Birds recognize life before they can physically see that life. The right to communicate is a natural right. Even PLANTS communicate with color and fragrance. It's how they get pollinated. I don't know if you're one of those absolutist atheists or what but if you can't comprehend that certain rights are completely natural and exist whether government is involved or not then you're missing out on a big part of not just humanity but life as a whole.
I thought it was hilarious too. Not to mention obviously desperate.Holy shit, that's instinct and desire...not a recognition of personal rights? OMG that's hilarious. Birds make nest out of nesting instincts.
Are you saying our rights are "instinctive?" Great...please provide citations for any of your post that those things are rights.
I've read and re-read this. What is 'quantity' and 'quality' referring to? Children?Great, more melodrama on your part. And yes, overpopulation is a problem. Especially if a child is not wanted or can be cared for in the first place. But it seems some are more focused on quantity over quality.
That's exactly what he's referring to.I've read and re-read this. What is 'quantity' and 'quality' referring to? Children?
Pregnancy isn't just some random "physiological condition". It's the way we get more humans. Unless we treat nascent life as the life that it is we run the very serious risk of damaging the prospects of a future for our species.
Nope. "Life."I've read and re-read this. What is 'quantity' and 'quality' referring to? Children?
Wrong again. Unlike some, I can look at a bigger picture and not tunnel vision on a fetus.That's exactly what he's referring to.
What the heck are you talking about? Yes, even animals have and RECOGNIZE basic rights. Try to take a ball away from a puppy. That's HIS ball and he knows it. Why do birds make nests? It's so they have a place to lay their eggs and then care for them even BEFORE the baby bird is born. Birds recognize life before they can physically see that life. The right to communicate is a natural right. Even PLANTS communicate with color and fragrance. It's how they get pollinated. I don't know if you're one of those absolutist atheists or what but if you can't comprehend that certain rights are completely natural and exist whether government is involved or not then you're missing out on a big part of not just humanity but life as a whole.
Let's address this first.Holy shit, that's instinct and desire...not a recognition of personal rights? OMG that's hilarious. Birds make nest out of nesting instincts.
Are you saying our rights are "instinct?" Great...please provide citations for any of your post that those things are rights. And then tell me why we're allowed to or able to eat other animals and plants, or kill them will little regard?
Let's address this first.
Whether we're talking about an "instinct" or a "natural right" the effect is the same. Whether you believe in God, Darwin, Gaia or, in true Epicurean fashion, that there is no truth other than that which we can validate through our senses, there IS, without question, a natural pursuit of survival and a natural process of reproduction. Whether you think of those functions as "rights" or "instinct" is immaterial to the FACT that they are part of the nature of life...all life. Humans, having more control over their survival than other species, have constructed a whole mess of facilities that improve their chance of survival. Some of those facilities are material and some are social but all of them have been created with the purpose of improving chances of survival and that is the basis of all rights.
From time to time one person or group will decide that their own survival is more important than the survival of any other person or group and that's where we run into conflict. Governments are formed, primarily, for the purpose of deciding whose rights are protected and whose are rejected. The "rights" created by government are civil rather than natural and serve only to protect or reject the fundamental (natural) rights of the people that come into contact with the government. By denying the existence of natural rights you are denying the most basic purposes of ALL life. When the basic purpose of life is denied than all manner of atrocities tend to happen. That's where the human created destruction of the environment comes from and it's where genocides come from.
With regard specifically to the matter of abortion, the idea that a pregnant woman should have exclusive and unlimited right to ALL decisions related to her unborn child MUST be tempered with the understanding that the life inside her is distinct and unique. The life inside her is human and even in the first moments after conception is pursuing independent survival which, as I have said before, is the most fundamental purpose of life and the basis for all other rights.
There is one other issue that comes up with this whole "pursuit of survival" matter and that is the issue of sacrifice. There are times that the pursuit of survival of the species comes into conflict with the pursuit of survival of the individual. We all must, at times, decide who should sacrifice when others are in need and what level of sacrifice is prudent. A pregnant woman, without question, does sacrifice for her unborn child. It's important to acknowledge that sacrifice but the mere fact that sacrifice is occurring DOES NOT mean that the rights of the person she is sacrificing for are immaterial.
Damn! I keep forgetting the rule of DP that all liberal thought is perfect and all thought to the contrary is utter bullshit. Must be my old age that's catching up with me. Anyway, thanks for setting me straight once again.Nope, cuz that's wrong and I'm not reading the rest. You are running hard and fast from the actual issue being discussed. Just answer the questions in posts 81 and 107. No one else has had to BS their way around rights to do so, whether we agreed on the outcome or not.
No, you're just wrong and relying on absurd hypotheticals and emotions. But you're welcome.Must be my old age that's catching up with me. Anyway, thanks for setting me straight once again.
Really? I just check the forum rules and that one isn't there. Perhaps you can point it out? Or perhaps you have nothing left to offer other than snark?Damn! I keep forgetting the rule of DP that all liberal thought is perfect and all thought to the contrary is utter bullshit.
Well I'm the wake of the election there has been this movement called the 4B movement where women are abstaining from promiscuity and hookups. If this continues which I have no reason to think that it will the people that will benefit the most are women who use sex to cope with trauma.Absolutely disgusting laws. Maternal deaths up 61%. Paxton is a criminal sleeze. Makes me sick.
Never heard of it. Doesn't change the issue of pregnant women with life threatening issues not getting the proper care or any care if there is a chance it results in an abortion.Well I'm the wake of the election there has been this movement called the 4B movement where women are abstaining from promiscuity and hookups. If this continues which I have no reason to think that it will the people that will benefit the most are women who use sex to cope with trauma.
Essentially women with participated in hookup culture are saying they need to end hookup culture I don't see how that's a bad thing.
I don't know it's Roots but I've been hearing about it ever since Donald Trump was re-elected.Never heard of it.
I'm not sure that's happening. I live in Texas where so-called elective abortion is completely banned but they make exceptions for what they call non-elective abortion where your life is being threatened and continuing the pregnancy will cause injury or potential death to the mother.Doesn't change the issue of pregnant women with life threatening issues not getting the proper care or any care if there is a chance it results in an abortion.
Damn! I keep forgetting the rule of DP that all liberal thought is perfect and all thought to the contrary is utter bullshit. Must be my old age that's catching up with me. Anyway, thanks for setting me straight once again.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?