What is Your Take on Abortion? Pro-choice, pro-life, or somewhere in the Middle?

[TheKnight]

Actually do watch/listen to Sam: Sam Harris: Science can answer moral questions | Video on TED.com

I'm sorry, but I just don't see how Sam Harris' video supports your position. If anything, the video only proves that abortion for no other reason then the choice of the woman is morally wrong. Taking life in general is morally wrong unless there's a good reason for it and unless it is absolutely necessary.

I agree that science can answer moral question. I believe that the use of logic can lead us to perfect morality.

 

[prometheuspan]

As an aspiring cop

:run::beach:



you should try to pick up on "impeaching a witness" as a legal term as soon as possible.
:rainbow1:

 

[prometheuspan]

I believe that the use of logic can lead us to perfect morality.

see, you had a bright idea but you got mixed.

the use of logic can lead us to an improved ethics. morality is the obstacle. perfection is never attained except in degrees towards a whole pie.

 

[Sententia]

I fail to see how anything he's said is hateful.

Perhaps because you don't fully understand nor seem to care who might be reading this thread and how they might feel but more concerned with your interpretation of what he said and how you feel about it.

My point is that in a social contract system, morality plays second fiddle to the opinions of those involved in the contract.

And that is a good thing? Black people should be enslaved because the social contract deems that acceptable and morality is less important? Seriously? You value the 'Social contract' above actual morality?

If something is not moral but the social contract deems it acceptable should we allow it and support it?

Should we look around?

13-year-old bride in Yemen dies of bleeding 4 days after family-arranged marriage - Yemen Gossip

So in Yemen it is absolutely socially acceptable to marry a 13 year old off. And once married sexual relations are bound to occur and possibly may cause internal bleeding and death. Socially accepted by Yemen's social contract. Obviously immoral and not accept by my countries social contract. My point of view is my social contract be damned this crap is immoral. It should not be allowed or permitted even if most the people of Yemen think it should. Morality trumps the social contract. Your argument seems to be the Social Contract trumps morality. I vehemently disagree.

 

[prometheuspan]

morality is the subjective social creation; it can never be perfect and its obviously the problem.

ethics is the objective reality that morality is supposed to be pinned to.

formal logic and sociology can delineate an objective ethics. Mix pavlov and maslow
and the answers are there for picking off the knowledge tree.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

I agree that morals are human constructs. Because when you see it the way I do, none of us are truly doing anything, we only think we are because of our limited existence here. Take all this away and it is one working through everything. That may sound scary to some, but not when you come to realize it for yourself. The idea of a self is indeed hard to let go of.

 

[Mister Emu]

I feel abortion should be illegal in every case except where the death of both mother and child is an almost forgone conclusion... Though I waver on cases of rape.

I'm quite pro-choice, because a woman who doesn't want the baby will find some way to abort it anyways. Abortion should stay safe and legal, to decrease the number of deaths of the mother from back-alley abortions

Should any other form of homicide be legal because it increases the danger of the act while it remains illegal?

 

[TheKnight]

the use of logic can lead us to an improved ethics.

My poor use of terminology was for the sake of common understanding.

Perhaps because you don't fully understand nor seem to care who might be reading this thread and how they might feel but more concerned with your interpretation of what he said and how you feel about it.

He simply compared it to murder. You called it hateful without proving that it is different from murder. Meaning that his point still stands.

And that is a good thing? Black people should be enslaved because the social contract deems that acceptable and morality is less important? Seriously? You value the 'Social contract' above actual morality?

The majority of those involved in the social contract of America during the revolution were against slavery. And even if they weren't the majority, a revolution is bound to happen when you have two large sides of an issue disagreeing. That's simply how things are bound to work.

If something is not moral but the social contract deems it acceptable should we allow it and support it?

No. Not always. You can opt out of that social contract and revolt. If I ever found America doing something I found totally unacceptable on a major scale (like another Holocaust for instance) then I would revolt with all the power of my being. I would hope that anyone would.

Should we look around?

13-year-old bride in Yemen dies of bleeding 4 days after family-arranged marriage - Yemen Gossip

So in Yemen it is absolutely socially acceptable to marry a 13 year old off. And once married sexual relations are bound to occur and possibly may cause internal bleeding and death. Socially accepted by Yemen's social contract. Obviously immoral and not accept by my countries social contract. My point of view is my social contract be damned this crap is immoral. It should not be allowed or permitted even if most the people of Yemen think it should. Morality trumps the social contract. Your argument seems to be the Social Contract trumps morality. I vehemently disagree.

If the people of Yemen agree to that, then I think they should be allowed to do it. That's how government works.

Granted, if I disagreed enough to compromise peace, then I'd fully support a war to end it.

A dissenter only has two options ultimately, submit to the majority, or fight the majority.

At times I think the minority should submit, at other times the minority should fight. It all depends on what we're talking about.

 

[Sententia]

He simply compared it to murder. You called it hateful without proving that it is different from murder. Meaning that his point still stands.

Hasn't this been debated like a thousand times. He painted abortion as some sneaky ******* coming into the delivery room (so 9 month old fetus) as the common every day abortion and equated the two. Obviously false. Obviously agenda motivated. Obviously spreading hatred to women unfortunately facing such a decision or who have made such a decision.

What point do you want to debate? All abortions are equivalent to a a dude sneaking into the delivery room and killing a baby against the mothers will? Really?

You are asserting his point still stands. So all abortions are equivalent to 3rd semester abortions that are against the mother's will and done so in a sneaky manner and any women having an abortion should be treated like said sneaky person?

That point still stands?

Or do you have some other interpretation of that hateful rhetoric?

The majority of those involved in the social contract of America during the revolution were against slavery. And even if they weren't the majority, a revolution is bound to happen when you have two large sides of an issue disagreeing. That's simply how things are bound to work.

I see....

No. Not always. You can opt out of that social contract and revolt. If I ever found America doing something I found totally unacceptable on a major scale (like another Holocaust for instance) then I would revolt with all the power of my being. I would hope that anyone would.

If the people of Yemen agree to that, then I think they should be allowed to do it. That's how government works.

So morality or right or wrong doesnt matter so long as the majority agrees. If Yemen wants to keep marrying off 13 year olds who die from internal bleeding due to intercourse then its cool with you because the social contract trumps morality?

Mate... you don't have a horse in this race.

 

[TheKnight]

Or do you have some other interpretation of that hateful rhetoric?

I saw it as him comparing a ridiculous (non-realistic) horrible act to an act that is legal and considered acceptable. The tie he drew was a life being taken. The methodology doesn't matter because whether it's a baby in the delivery room or a fetus in the first week of the pregnancy, a life is still being taken.

So morality or right or wrong doesnt matter so long as the majority agrees. If Yemen wants to keep marrying off 13 year olds who die from internal bleeding due to intercourse then its cool with you because the social contract trumps morality?

Mate... you don't have a horse in this race.

It doesn't trump morality in all instances. However, morality is a personal thing. It varies from person to person. Thus, in a world where you have individuals, a social
contract is necessary for the establishment of a government/country.


Do I agree with Yemen's practices? No. I disagree wholeheartedly. However, my options as far as what I can do about that are limited unless I decide to go to war against Yemen. And that, being that I am only one person, is simply impractical.

 

[Sententia]

I saw it as him comparing a ridiculous (non-realistic) horrible act to an act that is legal and considered acceptable. The tie he drew was a life being taken. The methodology doesn't matter because whether it's a baby in the delivery room or a fetus in the first week of the pregnancy, a life is still being taken.

There is a large difference between a baby in the delivery room and a fetus in the first week of pregnancy. Many women miscarry and consider themselves murderers because their body was not capable of bringing a baby to term and go on to commit suicide or worse. Your opinion is both scientifically and logically false in this case.

It doesn't trump morality in all instances. However, morality is a personal thing. It varies from person to person. Thus, in a world where you have individuals, a social
contract is necessary for the establishment of a government/country.

Previously you posted:

I'm sorry, but I just don't see how Sam Harris' video supports your position. If anything, the video only proves that abortion for no other reason then the choice of the woman is morally wrong. Taking life in general is morally wrong unless there's a good reason for it and unless it is absolutely necessary. I agree that science can answer moral question. I believe that the use of logic can lead us to perfect morality.

You disagree with yourself. Work it out.

 

[TheKnight]

--Snip--

Comprehension fails you. I'm not going to re-post anything I've already said. I've addressed you already. If you feel I haven't, then please feel free to re-read my posts until you see where I have.

Have a nice day. :beach:

 

[Sententia]

Comprehension fails you. I'm not going to re-post anything I've already said. I've addressed you already. If you feel I haven't, then please feel free to re-read my posts until you see where I have.

Have a nice day. :beach:

Your words:

However, morality is a personal thing. It varies from person to person.

I agree that science can answer moral question. I believe that the use of logic can lead us to perfect morality.

Can something be scientifically immoral or is it subject to personal interpretation?

As I said. You disagree with yourself.

 

[Madhuri]

Hindu/Aussie perspective coming through! Make way, make way!

I think that abortion is generally highly immoral and quite a horrible thing. Among the only instances that I find killing to be permissible is when it is for the protection of your own life. I would not judge a situation where the woman was in danger for her life due to the pregnancy. There are always special cases where something hideous could become the more ethical option. It would be nice though, if those people who are ok with abortions could take more care to avoid pregnancy.

 

[JMorris]

Extremely pro-choice. More pro-choice than anybody you know.

I think abortion is tragic and often immoral, but I am firmly convinced that it's no business of the state to compel a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will.

I don't believe it even matters if the fetus is a person. No person has the right to live inside another person against her will, and the state has no more right to compel the use of a woman's womb than it has to compel you to give me a kidney.

i agree completely, except i dont find it tragic or immoral

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Abortion because the woman does not want a child is murder in my opinion.

If this is true and Abortion is equal to murder. There are over a million abortions a year in America. If I believed that my goverment was killing a million people every year. I would be in jail because I would want to stop it. Think about it murder a million citizens a year. If abortion is equal to murder. America is as bad as Nazi Germany. I think if we look close at the statement you will see that it is way to extreme.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

I see abortion as an insult to human life. But I am 100% pro choice. Why? For what ever reason Abortion rates are some of highest in countries that abortions are illegal. Were women have good birth control, are educated, and have freedom of choice, the rates are much lower. I have read that the abortion rate in Ireland dropped after it became legal.

 

[dawny0826]

And I realize abortion isn't a black and white issue either. There are times I'd call abortions perfectly ethical.

You're right. It's not black and white.

Although I personally do not agree with elective, non-therapeutic abortion, I wouldn't want to deny anyone the personal right to make that decision.

I haven't always believed this way. There was a time when I was staunchly pro-life. I still am in a sense, but I will vote pro-choice in the Commonwealth of VA.

 

[Walkntune]

Call a spade a spade mate. If you want to debate that it is spreading sunshine and love then do so... (Or atleast do something then other Ad homs against me... do thou have a point in this argument? My replies are not directed toward you but since you keep questioning my response I thought I would ask you to clarify)

You think you are calling a spade a spade but I believe you have spent way to much time in the garden and the sun is getting to you!

 

[Revoltingest]

What is Your Take on Abortion? Pro-choice, pro-life, or somewhere in the Middle?

Some issues:
- Does life begin at conception or at birth....or at some point in the continuum between those events? it's all a matter of definition, & different people choose different points for life's inception, yet no one has objective proof that they own "the truth".
- Not everyone believes that a human life or potential human life is sacred, allowing war, capital punishment, self-defense, etc. It can be acceptable that the cost of saving a life is too high.
- The fetus is part of & entirely dependent upon the mother, who undergoes no small inconvenience to deliver the baby.
- To prohibit abortion would be to assume some governmental control over the mother's actions & body for the benefit of another, ie, the fetus.

In light of those issues, I see prohibiting abortion as poor public policy (in N America) because it presumes that government has a kind of ownership of people, since one's body may be commandeered for the benefit of another with risk of pain, surgery & death to the host. Given the murky assumptions about when life begins & the balancing of relative rights, there is insufficient consensus to grant government such sweeping authority. Moreover, the legal theory behind outlawing abortion could also support compulsory organ 'donation', which would be more widely opposed, & suggests a flaw in this premise.

On the practical side, outlawing abortion has problems.
- Abortions continue anyway, but with greater danger, death & turmoil.
- It's a further burden on law enforcement & the justice system.
- People have less control over their own lives.

As for the morality & immorality of it, I don't know.