Women's Rights

[Fragony]

Eh, do you have any serious debate at it in the Netherlands? I see ignorant teenagers who takes things too easy (that's a shock) and on the other side some worries about it going towards shaming women who gets an abortion.

Teenage pregnancies are so rare here that there isn't really anything to talk about, kids are very well informed at a very young age. No, no discussion here, the right for having an abortion is pretty much undisputed.

[Brenus]

“So a healthy fetus is the same as cancer or ebola. Didn't realize they were that dangerous to a woman's health.” That is your point of view, not mine. Someone wrote that all live should be protected. Take responsibilities of you own words please (or at least, do not put words in my mouth).

“EDIT: Btw, I am curious as to how a woman has the ultimate supremacy over her body, but apparently she doesn't have ultimate supremacy over what she can wear on her head/face. Apparently, women are in total control of themselves unless they chose to do something that some French man thinks originates with men.” Simple, if you really think about it. Same things in fact: Women are protected by the law of all “choices” imposed by religions or “supreme” moral codes imposed by extremists.
No wearing the full burkha in Public Spaces is a health and Safety issue, for the same reason you are not allowed to wear helmets (motorbike one) or baklava in a bank.
Sorry, I didn’t get the last bit:” they chose to do something that some French man thinks originates with men”. Do you mind to explain in less obscure way?

[ICantSpellDawg]

All human life has rights and value. I will agree that in the first 9 months of life that there is a "rights overlap" and I tend to apply my policy of self-defense rights to abortion on a regressive scale as the child gestates.

If someone breaks into to my house in the middle of the night and my life is threatened, I can shoot them, whether they are murderers or just homicidally deranged retarded person. If I invited them into my house, or left a sign on the door that said "nobody can come in, except 33.5% of you due to failed contraception", that is another story. Good luck shooting someone who you've let into your house and defending yourself, you monster.

[Brenus]

“If someone breaks into to my house in the middle of the night and my life is threatened, I can shoot them, whether they are murderers or just homicidally deranged retarded person.” I think that here a proportionate answer is the norm; meaning if someone cross your field there is no reason to kill.

“If I invited them into my house, or left a sign on the door that said "nobody can come in, except 33.5% of you due to failed contraception", that is another story. Good luck shooting someone who you've let into your house and defending yourself, you monster.” ? Relationship between breaking in a house with murder intention and abortion? But, if you want, we can say to according anti-abortion lot, if someone you invited in your home is stealing or killing, it is your fault and you have to live with the consequences. If you kill him or her, you will have to pay to raise his/her family.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I'm saying that the homicide is more difficult to justify in that situation

[Brenus]

Well, according to the anti-abortion clan, if you invited potential murderers or thieves, it is your fault as there is a lot of prevention things to do before to invite a person to a party, and you will have to live with the consequences of your poor choice of guest. And if if it was an uninvited guest. well, you shouldn't put yourself in a position to attract the attention of potential murderers or thieves...

[rickinator9]

I think abortion should be the exception rather than the rule. Abortion should only be allowed if there are medical issues relating to the pregnancy, if the future child would be handicapped or if it can be proven that the mother was raped. I think people just need to deal with the consequences of their actions. If I made a massive debt by gambling away all of my money and more, should I also get a magic way out? I'm certain everyone is going to say 'no'. Yet people who didn't control their desires or keep their legs closed should? Explain the logic to me.

[rory_20_uk]

I think abortion should be the exception rather than the rule. Abortion should only be allowed if there are medical issues relating to the pregnancy, if the future child would be handicapped or if it can be proven that the mother was raped. I think people just need to deal with the consequences of their actions. If I made a massive debt by gambling away all of my money and more, should I also get a magic way out? I'm certain everyone is going to say 'no'. Yet people who didn't control their desires or keep their legs closed should? Explain the logic to me.

Yes, it's called bankrupcy.

Many people who have an abortion are affected by the experience.
Generally those who aren't I don't want their genes in the pool anyway.

[Montmorency]

Sex is like gambling (money)?

A more precise analogy going with this line of reasoning would be that having sex with prostitutes is like gambling, in that if you're a john and you knock up a prostitute and she doesn't get an abortion, it's on you to pay child support...

[rickinator9]

Sex is like gambling (money)?

A more precise analogy going with this line of reasoning would be that having sex with prostitutes is like gambling, in that if you're a john and you knock up a prostitute and she doesn't get an abortion, it's on you to pay child support...

In my opinion, they are alike. You generally do them both for fun. Both have risks associated with them(Gambling: Debt, Financial ruin. Sex: Pregnancy, STDs). Both are generally frowned upon by the public. Both are done in special places.

Mostly what I am getting at here is why should women who made this mistake get a n-th chance and kill a human being in the process?

[rory_20_uk]

In my opinion, they are alike. You generally do them both for fun. Both have risks associated with them(Gambling: Debt, Financial ruin. Sex: Pregnancy, STDs). Both are generally frowned upon by the public. Both are done in special places.

Mostly what I am getting at here is why should women who made this mistake get a n-th chance and kill a human being in the process?

Three very simple things:

1) They're not killing a human bieng. They (outside of the barbaric USA who undertake the "scissors in the frontanelle" approach) are removing a blastocyst or perhaps a foetus. Neither are human biengs.
2) Their actions have consequences to themselves.
3) To "punish" the women has massive long term consequences for society - and unless the Church wants to pick up the tab of looking after all the "fallen women" and orphans (since the 1960's slave labour is frowned on even on these people) then abortions are the best idea.

The idea isn't that anyone is forced to have them, but nor are people forced not to have them. Freedom of choirce and all that...?

[Kadagar_AV]

Three very simple things:

1) They're not killing a human bieng. They (outside of the barbaric USA who undertake the "scissors in the frontanelle" approach) are removing a blastocyst or perhaps a foetus. Neither are human biengs.
2) Their actions have consequences to themselves.
3) To "punish" the women has massive long term consequences for society - and unless the Church wants to pick up the tab of looking after all the "fallen women" and orphans (since the 1960's slave labour is frowned on even on these people) then abortions are the best idea.

The idea isn't that anyone is forced to have them, but nor are people forced not to have them. Freedom of choirce and all that...?

This is the root of the problem...

If you have created a unique life form, you have created life. You might not want to call it "human", but instead see it as on some X to Y axis where it's a grey scale when life begins.

For others, life begins at the origin.

A baby isn't human, it's just a massive lump of cells that spend all its energies on shitting, peeing and crying. Sometimes they also scream.

I still wouldn't murder a baby though...

Good parents seem to be rather ill at ease if you do, if for no other reasons.

[Montmorency]

In my opinion, they are alike. You generally do them both for fun. Both have risks associated with them(Gambling: Debt, Financial ruin. Sex: Pregnancy, STDs). Both are generally frowned upon by the public. Both are done in special places.

Mostly what I am getting at here is why should women who made this mistake get a n-th chance and kill a human being in the process?

Sex is generally frowned upon by the public? Oh boy...

What we need to get at is actually this really bizarre view some have of sex as being either sacred, or sinful.

These same values have been postulated for thousands of years, and they have always done unspeakable damage to individuals and societies.

[Kadagar_AV]

Sex is generally frowned upon by the public? Oh boy...

What we need to get at is actually this really bizarre view some have of sex as being either sacred, or sinful.

These same values have been postulated for thousands of years, and they have always done unspeakable damage to individuals and societies.

On the flipside, not believing sex is sacred has lead to more than one set of grief...

Sex IS a very personal and intimate thing... Heck, probably the most intimate thing we have. I don't see why it shouldn't be respected?

[Husar]

Is something still intimate if you shared it with 23 nationalities?

[Brenus]

"A baby isn't human, it's just a massive lump of cells that spend all its energies on shitting, peeing and crying. Sometimes they also scream." Really? A baby isn't human? What a strange point of view...

[Rhyfelwyr]

What we need to get at is actually this really bizarre view some have of sex as being either sacred, or sinful.

These same values have been postulated for thousands of years, and they have always done unspeakable damage to individuals and societies.

Would you want to see some sort of 'Brave New World' situation where it is reduced to a whimsical physical act?

[Montmorency]

Is that the only alternative you can imagine?

What should really horrify you, though, is that there is no more substance or "virtue" to the world of BNW than there is to our own.

[Fragony]

I think abortion should be the exception rather than the rule. Abortion should only be allowed if there are medical issues relating to the pregnancy, if the future child would be handicapped or if it can be proven that the mother was raped. I think people just need to deal with the consequences of their actions. If I made a massive debt by gambling away all of my money and more, should I also get a magic way out? I'm certain everyone is going to say 'no'. Yet people who didn't control their desires or keep their legs closed should? Explain the logic to me.

I completily agree. Will still support the support the pro-choice crowd anyway though, not allowing abortions will only lead to tragedy. What I really think of it I keep for myself.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Why would that horrify me?

[Montmorency]

Maybe if I invert the clause structure:

there is no more substance or "virtue" to our world than there is to the world of BNW.

In other words, BNW is no "dystopia".

[Rhyfelwyr]

Hmm yes I wondered if that is what you originally meant. But I figured it was more likely that I simply wasn't getting what you were getting at.

BNW is very much a dystopia, I don't see how you could call it anything else. Its not a good situation when people rely on drugs to get through life. BNW what quite prophetic in that regard, remember the Prozac craze? I've seen similar things in working-class communities with mass diazepam dependence. A lot of broken people. Its sad.

[Montmorency]

Here's a good-enough sum of commonly-perceived negatives to BNW life:

The vast majority of people in BNW live lives that are completely predetermined and have no real prospects for self-determination.
The people have no close personal relationships, no family, no art, no history, no philosophy, no religion or any real beliefs in general, and no awareness that any of these things even exist
The people are basically babied - everything is provided for, there is no real challenge or risk to living. But danger is an essential part of being human.
The people's lives are utterly meaningless, they are just passive receivers of pleasure. Psychologists point out that human beings have an inherent will to meaning, and that pleasure alone does not actually make for a fulfilled life. (Viktor Frankl does a great job of showing this)
People don't have to grow or become strong. Everything is easy.
BNW is a place where people don't think, strive, love, take risks, grow, create, or care about beauty. It is a place where life is hollow to the core.

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-evil-s...#ixzz3Gm4GLjRF

It boils down to a lack of meaning, which as you are aware begs the question...

Sidney Morgenbesser in response B.F. Skinner: "Are you telling me it's wrong to anthropomorphize people?"

[Fragony]

Hmm yes I wondered if that is what you originally meant. But I figured it was more likely that I simply wasn't getting what you were getting at.

BNW is very much a dystopia, I don't see how you could call it anything else. Its not a good situation when people rely on drugs to get through life. BNW what quite prophetic in that regard, remember the Prozac craze? I've seen similar things in working-class communities with mass diazepam dependence. A lot of broken people. Its sad.

What makes you think people who use drugs rely on them. I sometimes use cocaine when on a party, see no problem with that. Neither does the police here, they are too busy with drunks in the weekend. They know that as well, they were with us at a friend of mine because the notoriously neurotic neighbour called them, the policy saw perfectly well that there was cocaine on the table. We watched some funny thingson youtube, didn't want coffee, and have a nice evening. You too

[Rhyfelwyr]

Here's a good-enough sum of commonly-perceived negatives to BNW life:

It boils down to a lack of meaning, which as you are aware begs the question...

Its not just lack of meaning. Its that some of the most basic human needs are not met. Its not the sort of life that makes us happy.

What makes you think people who use drugs rely on them. I sometimes use cocaine when on a party, see no problem with that. Neither does the police here, they are too busy with drunks in the weekend. They know that as well, they were with us at a friend of mine because the notoriously neurotic neighbour called them, the policy saw perfectly well that there was cocaine on the table. We watched some funny thingson youtube, didn't want coffee, and have a nice evening. You too

I'm not talking about the party culture, I'm talking about a whole other culture surrounding drugs, where people become dependent on them for getting through life. I'm not talking mainly about cocaine etc, I'm talking about Prozac, diazepam, temazepam, painkillers, even speed. I've seen all these be used by very unhappy people because it gets them through the day.

[Montmorency]

Food, shelter, sex, safety (from harm)...

"Self-actualization" is all that's left.

[Fragony]

I'm not talking about the party culture, I'm talking about a whole other culture surrounding drugs, where people become dependent on them for getting through life. I'm not talking mainly about cocaine etc, I'm talking about Prozac, diazepam, temazepam, painkillers, even speed. I've seen all these be used by very unhappy people because it gets them through the day.

No disagreement there.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Food, shelter, sex, safety (from harm)...

"Self-actualization" is all that's left.

But those things are either in a corrupted form, or are more extreme in their extent than we are designed to handle. Sex without the relationship would be a corruption, it doesn't give us real fulfilment. Too much safety can also be a bad thing. We are meant to experience danger, if gives us adrenalin, and that works in with other bodily functions. From my personal experience, I think mental problems like anxiety and OCD can stem from internalizing emotions which have lost their natural outlet. We are made to fear but we never come across any danger, so we start thinking that ordinary things are threatening. A bit like when Agent Smith said they originally made the Matrix a paradise, but humans couldn't accept it, they kept trying to wake up from it.

The way we live has to be in tune with the way we are designed (whether you believe we were shaped by God or evolution).

[ICantSpellDawg]

I completily agree. Will still support the support the pro-choice crowd anyway though, not allowing abortions will only lead to tragedy. What I really think of it I keep for myself.

Don't keep it to yourself. You know it is wrong. Just because you don't think there should be many laws against it doesn't mean you should ignore your appraisal of the action.

I think that drug addiction is horrible and am outspoken about it. I am still in favor of eliminating laws against hard drugs.

We have a responsibility to encourage ethical action even if we believe that the legal system is a relic and the vast majority of laws should be overturned.

[Fragony]

I don't know if it's wrong really, it feels wrong. It's a really touchy subject.