Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Kansas Abortion Vote

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Is anybody surprised that the guy who advocates for allowing babies to be "aborted" several weeks AFTER being born likens humans dying to being nothing more than wheat being harvested.
    I’ve heard the right fringe on here making that accusation. But because it’s at once unbelievably hideous and promoted by those who so regularly argue via misrepresentation, it sounded too much like, “Wolf!” for me to take it seriously.

    Originally posted by Starlight View Post
    Well hopefully people are not too surprised given I've repeatedly explained that it's the lack of mental development in the fetuses that puts them outside the moral sphere. In the same way, plants are outside the moral sphere due to their lack of mental development.
    So there you go. He’s talking about babies just this side of acephelous.

    Looks like a retraction is in order, rouge.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Starlight View Post

      One of the amusing things on this forum is how much the people like you, with entirely broken moral compasses, think you are in a position to try to lecture moral philosophers like myself on the subject, when sitting down shutting up and learning would be the more sane approach by you. But don't worry, I won't hold my breath.
      How do you ever manage to fit that swollen gigantic pumpkin of a head through doorways? Are you forced to use entrances with double doors for you to squeeze through.

      It is always amusing when a person who supports straight up, unadulterated infanticide among other things that make you a thoroughly morally reprehensible person sees himself as the pinnacle of morality.

      A case study in self-delusion.

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Juvenal View Post

        I’ve heard the right fringe on here making that accusation. But because it’s at once unbelievably hideous and promoted by those who so regularly argue via misrepresentation, it sounded too much like, “Wolf!” for me to take it seriously.



        So there you go. He’s talking about babies just this side of acephelous.

        Looks like a retraction is in order, rouge.
        We have reposted star's comments over the years on this ad nauseam for various posters who doubted that he could actually support such things. After that those posters tend to quickly distance himself from them. There are even at least one thread dedicated to it.

        But since you asked so nicely...

        Originally posted by Starlight View Post


        So if I had to give a clear answer I'd say age range 1-4. As such, I've got no inherent objection to post-birth-abortion / infanticide / call it whatever you will in the first couple of months after birth if there is some sort of good reason for it. If I was writing a law, I would probably want to draw the line in the sand at 3 months post-birth, as beyond that there's probably enough cognitive development beginning to occur that we're headed into gray areas, and there doesn't seem likely to be any medical motivations to want to explore those gray areas further.
        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
        Right. And our society is generally fine with the concept of killing dogs, so long as it is done humanely. So I find it bizarre that people aren't fine with the killing of less intelligent animals, such as a human under 1 year old.
        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
        As I said, my criteria of interest is the level of cognition of the fetus/infant, and a useful comparison is how it compares to animals. If it's less-aware than the animals that we kill on a regular basis, then I don't overly object to it's killing. But if it's more aware than even the most intelligent animal, then I would object.
        [*underlining added*]

        Then there was this exchange:

        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        A view where it is fine to wantonly murder infants several weeks old if the mother decides she doesn't want them? You are deluding yourself.
        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
        You know what I paraphrase comments such as this to in my mind as I read them? "I hate abortion! Waaaaaaaaaaaaah!"
        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        Interesting how you keep trying to equate your approval of killing children several weeks old with abortion since you know that many of your liberal friends approve of the latter but not the former. It's like you realize just how repulsive your view and wish to conceal it from them.
        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
        I equate it because to me it is the same. What does it matter whether the fetus is outside the womb or inside when it is killed? To me that makes no moral difference...


        And as an added bonus, here you can read a long essay by him where he supports a cut off age of up to three years old for being killed.

        And that's just what I found in a ten minute search


        What he objects to is saying that he "wants" to commit infanticide when his position is that he merely supports infanticide as an option for several weeks or months after the baby is born.

        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Starlight View Post
          Well hopefully people are not too surprised given I've repeatedly explained that it's the lack of mental development in the fetuses that puts them outside the moral sphere. In the same way, plants are outside the moral sphere due to their lack of mental development.

          One of the amusing things on this forum is how much the people like you, with entirely broken moral compasses, think you are in a position to try to lecture moral philosophers like myself on the subject, when sitting down shutting up and learning would be the more sane approach by you. But don't worry, I won't hold my breath.
          One guy wants to protect babies, one wants to allow them to be killed up to 6 months old and calls himself a moral philosopher. Gee I wonder which one has a broken moral compass?

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Starlight View Post
            Well hopefully people are not too surprised given I've repeatedly explained that it's the lack of mental development in the fetuses that puts them outside the moral sphere. In the same way, plants are outside the moral sphere due to their lack of mental development.
            So, if I take a newborn baby from his mother, and brutally murder him, in your opinion that is about the moral equivalent of destruction of property. It's about the same as breaking a window or keying a car?

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post

              One guy wants to protect babies, one wants to allow them to be killed up to 6 months* old and calls himself a moral philosopher. Gee I wonder which one has a broken moral compass?
              *Correction, apparently it was up to 4 years according to rogue's post above.


              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by rogue06 View Post


                What he objects to is saying that he "wants" to commit infanticide when his position is that he merely supports infanticide as an option for several weeks or months after the baby is born.
                And this is where all Star's erudite moral reasoning leads him! Despicable...

                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                  We have reposted star's comments over the years on this ad nauseam for various posters who doubted that he could actually support such things. After that those posters tend to quickly distance himself from them. There are even at least one thread dedicated to it.

                  But since you asked so nicely...
                  The first, and the only one I’ve looked at in any detail, was in response to a question from the preacher about when a “potential human becomes a for really human,” not a moral permission slip for infanticide, so now you’ve got a second retraction due. From what I’m seeing, folks doubting your presentations are distancing themselves from you, not from him, as you’re clearly not interested in responding to his positions in good faith.

                  I’m not going to go through the rest of them other than to post up what looks to be a summary of his position.
                  .
                  It follows that my overall view on abortion/infanticide is as follows:
                  - Under ~25 weeks or so, there is no brain function and thus no consciousness, thus the fetus does not have moral relevance, and thus any action can be freely taken to kill it. Such acts do not register on the scale of morality, because like chopping down a tree, they involve no harm to a entity possessing consciousness or higher mental functions.
                  - After ~25 weeks or so, the fetus is apparently a conscious being, and therefore any action taken to kill it involves harm to a conscious being and is therefore a moral wrong. Such action would need to be morally justified by some other harm being prevented or good gained. While still close to 25 weeks, "because the mother wants to" is pretty much a good enough reason, just like killing a fly because its buzzing is annoying us is a good enough reason. However, as the fetus further develops its mental capabilities, the requirements for the moral justification of doing so likewise develops.
                  - By 3 years or so, it is a conscious being with fully developed human mental capabilities, and the requirements for the moral justifications of harming it have maxed out at adult-human levels.

                  So, between 25 weeks gestation and 3 years or so, he provides a sliding scale of developing consciousness under which greater and greater justifications are necessary to make abortion or infanticide morally permissible, providing examples of mere annoyance at one end and community starvation in the face of a famine at the other. This is a highly nuanced position looking to set rules governing the full spectrum of human experience, akin to rules for when the Donner party or a Uruguayan rugby team should accept the inevitable compromise with cannibalism and mortality.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                    So, if I take a newborn baby from his mother, and brutally murder him, in your opinion that is about the moral equivalent of destruction of property. It's about the same as breaking a window or keying a car?
                    I'm sure star would object to them being "brutally murder[ed]" but wouldn't have much of a problem if they were suffocated under a pillow.

                    I'm always still in trouble again

                    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Juvenal View Post

                      The first, and the only one I’ve looked at in any detail, was in response to a question from the preacher about when a “potential human becomes a for really human,” not a moral permission slip for infanticide, so now you’ve got a second retraction due. From what I’m seeing, folks doubting your presentations are distancing themselves from you, not from him, as you’re clearly not interested in responding to his positions in good faith.

                      I’m not going to go through the rest of them other than to post up what looks to be a summary of his position.
                      .
                      It follows that my overall view on abortion/infanticide is as follows:
                      - Under ~25 weeks or so, there is no brain function and thus no consciousness, thus the fetus does not have moral relevance, and thus any action can be freely taken to kill it. Such acts do not register on the scale of morality, because like chopping down a tree, they involve no harm to a entity possessing consciousness or higher mental functions.
                      - After ~25 weeks or so, the fetus is apparently a conscious being, and therefore any action taken to kill it involves harm to a conscious being and is therefore a moral wrong. Such action would need to be morally justified by some other harm being prevented or good gained. While still close to 25 weeks, "because the mother wants to" is pretty much a good enough reason, just like killing a fly because its buzzing is annoying us is a good enough reason. However, as the fetus further develops its mental capabilities, the requirements for the moral justification of doing so likewise develops.
                      - By 3 years or so, it is a conscious being with fully developed human mental capabilities, and the requirements for the moral justifications of harming it have maxed out at adult-human levels.


                      So, between 25 weeks gestation and 3 years or so, he provides a sliding scale of developing consciousness under which greater and greater justifications are necessary to make abortion or infanticide morally permissible, providing examples of mere annoyance at one end and community starvation in the face of a famine at the other. This is a highly nuanced position looking to set rules governing the full spectrum of human experience, akin to rules for when the Donner party or a Uruguayan rugby team should accept the inevitable compromise with cannibalism and mortality.
                      He is talking about allowing a child to be aborted months after their birth.

                      And now you appear to be rationalizing it.

                      You might want to think long and hard about that.

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Why is consciousness elevated in a secular framework when it's just one of several inter-related biological processes and electrical impulses? Why does the secular abortion proponent single out one biological process as their "line in the sand" when human growth and development is a linear inter-connected set of processes? Can consciousness exist in a fetus without a heart that previously formed, etc.?
                        That's what
                        - She

                        Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                        - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                        I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                        - Stephen R. Donaldson

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          He is talking about allowing a child to be aborted months after their birth.

                          And now you appear to be rationalizing it.

                          You might want to think long and hard about that.
                          They are all ghouls...How to build an abortion altar:

                          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            He is talking about allowing a child to be aborted months after their birth.
                            No, he’s not. I quoted what he said, and that’s not it.

                            And now you appear to be rationalizing it.
                            And you appear to be lying about it.

                            You might want to think long and hard about that.
                            When he says you’re misrepresenting him, and I show the post — in the thread you pointed out to me — that proves you’re misrepresenting him, there’s not much more to say that I haven’t said before.

                            Grow a conscience.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                              Why is consciousness elevated in a secular framework when it's just one of several inter-related biological processes and electrical impulses? Why does the secular abortion proponent single out one biological process as their "line in the sand" when human growth and development is a linear inter-connected set of processes? Can consciousness exist in a fetus without a heart that previously formed, etc.?
                              I’ve never actually met an abortion proponent. I’m imagining what that would look like.
                              .
                              Hey Susie, I’m bored, how about we get knocked up and have abortions, that’ll be fun!

                              Nah, can’t see that happening.

                              On the other side, I’ve seen the phrase “forced birth proponent” popping up more often. Because talking past each other has worked so well already.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Juvenal View Post

                                No, he’s not.
                                Yes, he is. I've debated him on this a number of times. He seriously has zero problems killing a born baby under 3 months or so old. None. This isn't rogue exaggerating his positions. He's quite proud of it too.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                189 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                419 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                88 responses
                                401 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X