Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
The right to life, from a moral standpoint
The right to life, from a moral standpoint
By SJConspirator
25 Jun 2022 8:00 pm in No Holds Barred Political Forum
26 Jun 2022 3:14 pm
We have am abundance of food...but we also have an abundance of mediocrity.SJConspirator » 26 Jun 2022, 2:58 pm » wrote: ↑ It's hard to overstate the stark contrast between the extreme scarcity of times past and the techno abundance of today. The fat of the land has never been fatter. Does that figure into the question of ethical eugenics?
And I do not believe we have any chance of maintaining the current quality of life for much longer.
Just as south Africa quickly collapsed into extreme scarcity shortly after abolishing apartheid, so will we collapse...and for similar reasons.
So your note about our current circumstances is relevant right now...but itbia very temporary. Buckle your seatbelt therebis some turbulence ahead..
in 10 years we may very well be trying to water our corn fields with gatorade.
26 Jun 2022 3:26 pm
I am fine with eugenics policies. But to avoid them being macabre I would suggest simply sterilizing people who are genetically unfit. The same idea Francis galton had and the policy we used successfully in the usa for decades. That is the proper way to address the issue imo.Cannonpointer » 26 Jun 2022, 3:01 pm » wrote: ↑ I would take it farther. Gay babies, gingers, *** babies, the children of fat miscegenators, what have you.
Something about infanticide just feels deeply wrong to me...and corrupts the nation engaging in it perhaps as much as retarded children do.
26 Jun 2022 3:42 pm
Cannonpointer » 26 Jun 2022, 2:58 pm » wrote: ↑ As is valuing liberty and the pursuit of happiness. For some reason, I link those three together in my mind.
Fair enough...but without life the other two are guaranteed to never be realized.
26 Jun 2022 5:01 pm
roadkill » 26 Jun 2022, 3:42 pm » wrote: ↑ Fair enough...but without life the other two are guaranteed to never be realized.
Both WILL be realized - just not by the dead fetus.
Here is what I believe. I believe we should ax ourselves what our NATURAL rights are that we can delegate. On account of the framers said that all JUST powers are derived from (meaning, delegated by) the governed. A bear won't eat what a bear can't smell - and a citizen can't delegte what a citizen doesn't have.
Now, I have a natural right to stop thievin and killin - but I feel no natural right to tell stranger she has to take her pregnancy to term, and she ain't allowed to take any measures to end it. Since I don't see me HAVIN' that right, I don't see me DELEGATNG it.
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
26 Jun 2022 5:05 pm
Cannonpointer » 26 Jun 2022, 5:01 pm » wrote: ↑ Both WILL be realized - just not by the dead fetus.
Here is what I believe. I believe we should ax ourselves what our NATURAL rights are that we can delegate. On account of the framers said that all JUST powers are derived from (meaning, delegated by) the governed. A bear won't eat what a bear can't smell - and a citizen can't delegte what a citizen doesn't have.
Now, I have a natural right to stop thievin and killin - but I feel no natural right to tell stranger she has to take her pregnancy to term, and she ain't allowed to take any measures to end it. Since I don't see me HAVIN' that right, I don't see me DELEGATNG it.
If only it were more than vote gathering.
26 Jun 2022 5:11 pm
There is some very commendable reasoning.SJConspirator » 25 Jun 2022, 8:00 pm » wrote: ↑ The unborn should be protected, no doubt. But is it the duty of the state to protect the unborn, or the duty of the mother and immediate Family?
If the duty of the state is to dictate to a woman she must nanny, that is literally a nanny state.
if it is the duty of the state to protect the unborn, why is this duty abdicated the moment the baby is Born? Is a 3 day old no less innocent and vulnerable than a Fetus?
26 Jun 2022 5:22 pm
No, it should be less than vote gathering. We can VOTE on **** we have no business voting on.
I think abortion is one of those things. Clearly, we have a regulatory interest that we can delegate. Society doesn't have to put up with the spectacle of women who are big pregnant resorting to gruesome late term butchery. But unless you believe you have a right to dictate what a pregnant woman can eat and drink, you can't really stop women from off-loading unwanted pregnancies.
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
26 Jun 2022 5:28 pm
Cannonpointer » 26 Jun 2022, 5:22 pm » wrote: ↑ No, it should be less than vote gathering. We can VOTE on **** we have no business voting on.
I think abortion is one of those things. Clearly, we have a regulatory interest that we can delegate. Society doesn't have to put up with the spectacle of women who are big pregnant resorting to gruesome late term butchery. But unless you believe you have a right to dictate what a pregnant woman can eat and drink, you can't really stop women from off-loading unwanted pregnancies.
How about a woman not getting pregnant if she doesn't want it? There are ways.
26 Jun 2022 5:31 pm
roadkill » 26 Jun 2022, 5:28 pm » wrote: ↑ How about a woman not getting pregnant if she doesn't want it? There are ways.
I'm good with women who don't want to be pregnant not getting pregnant.
Unless you're suggesting abstinence. Abstinence **** with pussvailability.
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
26 Jun 2022 5:39 pm
Cannonpointer » 26 Jun 2022, 5:31 pm » wrote: ↑ I'm good with women who don't want to be pregnant not getting pregnant.
Unless you're suggesting abstinence. Abstinence **** with pussvailability.
No...not suggesting. But there are ways to have both.
26 Jun 2022 5:42 pm
thanks, I will assume your not being a sarcastic douche for now
26 Jun 2022 5:45 pm
Well, we've already had mask mandates. We could have jimmy hat mandates.
We could make morning after pills available OTC.
We could tube tie welfare recipients after a year of drawing benefits, as a condition of continued bennies.
We could provide free training for america's whore-squad in the fundamentals of Geisha.
We could give housewives free hypnosis sessions to condition them to crave the taste of semen.
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
26 Jun 2022 5:51 pm
accurate or incompleteSJConspirator » 25 Jun 2022, 8:00 pm » wrote: ↑ The unborn should be protected, no doubt. But is it the duty of the state to protect the unborn, or the duty of the mother and immediate Family?
If the duty of the state is to dictate to a woman she must nanny, that is literally a nanny state.
if it is the duty of the state to protect the unborn, why is this duty abdicated the moment the baby is Born? Is a 3 day old no less innocent and vulnerable than a Fetus?
absolutely correct, or entirely wrong
good or evil
legal or ethical
social morality or genetic constant
space occupied or time inhabiting
Actual fits all 6 from a 7th part equally here
Facts always omit the 7th degree of mutually here. Practiced the same way for hundreds of generations and thousands of years, self evident results cannot be a mystery by accident or oversight where nobody ever knew.
so you want to play morality is separate not working in series parallel with legality, situational ethics, social consensus demanding everyone believe literal truths aren't figurative conclusion of anyone knowing what tomorrow brings any rotation of the planet other than life will never be the same total sum achieved here now.
26 Jun 2022 5:53 pm
26 Jun 2022 5:57 pm
which life, what death?
26 Jun 2022 5:58 pm
And women can make a man responsible if that's their choice. Although there have been cases when that didn't work legally.Cannonpointer » 26 Jun 2022, 5:45 pm » wrote: ↑ Well, we've already had mask mandates. We could have jimmy hat mandates.
We could make morning after pills available OTC.
We could tube tie welfare recipients after a year of drawing benefits, as a condition of continued bennies.
We could provide free training for america's whore-squad in the fundamentals of Geisha.
We could give housewives free hypnosis sessions to condition them to crave the taste of semen.
26 Jun 2022 6:08 pm
I've expressed identical sentimentsSJConspirator » 26 Jun 2022, 5:42 pm » wrote: ↑ thanks, I will assume your not being a sarcastic douche for now
26 Jun 2022 7:37 pm
and yet, my post got no commendation from you selfish bastard
26 Jun 2022 7:40 pm
Considering that 2020 brought a new record of death by bullets for children, the Pro-life argument weighs false to me.SJConspirator » 25 Jun 2022, 8:00 pm » wrote: ↑ The unborn should be protected, no doubt. But is it the duty of the state to protect the unborn, or the duty of the mother and immediate Family?
If the duty of the state is to dictate to a woman she must nanny, that is literally a nanny state.
if it is the duty of the state to protect the unborn, why is this duty abdicated the moment the baby is Born? Is a 3 day old no less innocent and vulnerable than a Fetus?
26 Jun 2022 7:48 pm
And with all the decencies you have always afforded me.SJConspirator » 26 Jun 2022, 7:37 pm » wrote: ↑ and yet, my post got no commendation from you selfish bastard
I'm such a lout.
Let me fix that.
Who is online
In total there are 582 users online :: 7 registered, 16 bots, and 559 guests
Registered users: murdock, Cannonpointer, Harper Lee, Jantje_Smit, 31st Arrival, jerra b, LowIQTrash
Bots: proximic, Not, Adsbot, GPTBot, CriteoBot, app.hypefactors.com, Custo, DuckDuckBot, semantic-visions.com, linkfluence.com, ADmantX, YandexBot, bingbot, Googlebot, Mediapartners-Google, curl/7