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

"Slippery slope" isn't a fallacy when the ruling class respects no moral tradition

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

  • "Slippery slope" isn't a fallacy when the ruling class respects no moral tradition

    In completely unrelated news, it's apparently A-OK to kill babies now:

    The article, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, says newborn babies are not “actual persons” and do not have a “moral right to life”. The academics also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.

    The journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, said the article's authors had received death threats since publishing the article. He said those who made abusive and threatening posts about the study were “fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society”.
    This does raise a few questions, like: Are those who advocate for a general right to infanticide in papers generally considered authoritative by the academic population "actual persons" with a "moral right to life?" Or are they vessels for a hostile philosophy who should be killed on sight? Do you believe you should accept any public recantation or public repentance from an individual who ever advocated the infanticide of children in a national publication under 'the values of a liberal society', given that his attitude toward truth is highly likely to be as shaky as his attitude toward life and public morals? Just asking questions in the spirit of public free inquiry here.

    They preferred to use the phrase “after-birth abortion” rather than “infanticide” to “emphasise that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus”.
    Or you could apply 'infanticide' and/or 'feticide' to them all? Really, words are so easy when you don't think of commonly-used meanings, general philosophies, legal consequences of bad behavior, consistency, or whether you might be advocating for a civilizationally destructive attitude in the general population.

    The important thing is that every liberal here owes Eric Rudolph, James Kopp, Paul Jennings Hill, Scott Roeder, Michael F. Griffin, and Peter James Knight quite a few apologies.

  • #2
    When our celebrated value is "making progress" what happens after we meet our goals. A slippery slope wouldn't normally be a good argument. You could say that since some of the wackier ones today are using the civil rights movment in the 60s as an excuse that we shouldn't have ended segregation or the law against mixed race marriages because it's "led to this." But our society seems preoccupied with progressing in a certain direction as an end in and of itself
    Last edited by hamster; 04-02-2015, 02:25 PM.
    "Some people feel guilty about their anxieties and regard them as a defect of faith but they are afflictions, not sins. Like all afflictions, they are, if we can so take them, our share in the passion of Christ." - That Guy Everyone Quotes

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Epoetker View Post

      The important thing is that every liberal here owes Eric Rudolph, James Kopp, Paul Jennings Hill, Scott Roeder, Michael F. Griffin, and Peter James Knight quite a few apologies.
      And Kermitt Gosnell
      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


      • #4
        Sounds like Hitler is going to win after all. He wanted to eliminate mentally and physically handicapped because they were not real people. As well as Jews too. Just dehumanize a group and you can safely do away with them without guilt.

        Radical Liberals such as these contribute nothing to society other than to leach off of it, and they seem to be sociopaths so they are mentally handicapped. So morally they are not persons either. We should be able to "abort" them too.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
          And Kermitt Gosnell
          What does Gosnell have to do with any of the other names on the list?
          "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
            What does Gosnell have to do with any of the other names on the list?
            Less with the other names and more with the subject of the OP.
            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


            • #7
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              Sounds like Hitler is going to win after all. He wanted to eliminate mentally and physically handicapped because they were not real people. As well as Jews too. Just dehumanize a group and you can safely do away with them without guilt..
              Why are you in favor of making children suffer through poverty instead of letting their parents make an informed about putting them to sleep as pretoddlers? This so-called "Christian love" fetishizes imaginary infant suffering over real problems like millions of unwanted children on the street and the burden it places on REAL, conscious people.
              "Some people feel guilty about their anxieties and regard them as a defect of faith but they are afflictions, not sins. Like all afflictions, they are, if we can so take them, our share in the passion of Christ." - That Guy Everyone Quotes

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by hamster View Post
                Why are you in favor of making children suffer through poverty instead of letting their parents make an informed about putting them to sleep as pretoddlers? This so-called "Christian love" fetishizes imaginary infant suffering over real problems like millions of unwanted children on the street and the burden it places on REAL, conscious people.
                True. True. Which is why I propose to extend the "non-person" definition to include any group or person I find objectionable. First the liberals. Then the feminists. Then anyone who doesn't like bacon. And lastly anyone who refuses to give me 75% of all of their belongings. These are all groups that are morally reprehensible and should be post-aborted immediately!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                  True. True. Which is why I propose to extend the "non-person" definition to include any group or person I find objectionable. First the liberals. Then the feminists. Then anyone who doesn't like bacon. And lastly anyone who refuses to give me 75% of all of their belongings. These are all groups that are morally reprehensible and should be post-aborted immediately!
                  Oh yeah and I propose making into law the parental phrase "I brought you into this world and I can take you out!" --- valid until they move out of the house and get a real job.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Epoetker View Post
                    In completely unrelated news, it's apparently A-OK to kill babies now:



                    This does raise a few questions, like: Are those who advocate for a general right to infanticide in papers generally considered authoritative by the academic population "actual persons" with a "moral right to life?" Or are they vessels for a hostile philosophy who should be killed on sight? Do you believe you should accept any public recantation or public repentance from an individual who ever advocated the infanticide of children in a national publication under 'the values of a liberal society', given that his attitude toward truth is highly likely to be as shaky as his attitude toward life and public morals? Just asking questions in the spirit of public free inquiry here.



                    Or you could apply 'infanticide' and/or 'feticide' to them all? Really, words are so easy when you don't think of commonly-used meanings, general philosophies, legal consequences of bad behavior, consistency, or whether you might be advocating for a civilizationally destructive attitude in the general population.

                    The important thing is that every liberal here owes Eric Rudolph, James Kopp, Paul Jennings Hill, Scott Roeder, Michael F. Griffin, and Peter James Knight quite a few apologies.
                    I notice the article you reference was posted in 2012. Has there been any follow-up since then?
                    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                    Than a fool in the eyes of God


                    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      My newborn niece would be insulted to be considered not a person. She just likes to sleep and eat because she needs to grow.
                      If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I have a newborn son. I find the idea that he is not a person and is unworthy of life obscene and evil.

                        I'm curious if any of the tweb liberals would like to comment on this story.
                        I DENOUNCE DONALD J. TRUMP AND ALL HIS IMMORAL ACTS.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Zymologist View Post
                          I have a newborn son. I find the idea that he is not a person and is unworthy of life obscene and evil.

                          I'm curious if any of the tweb liberals would like to comment on this story.
                          Congratulations! I thought you already had a kid? New one?
                          Newborns sleep a lot. Does that mean we aren't persons when we sleep? A sleeping human isn't aware of their surroundings.
                          If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
                            Congratulations! I thought you already had a kid? New one?
                            Newborns sleep a lot. Does that mean we aren't persons when we sleep? A sleeping human isn't aware of their surroundings.
                            Same one--he was born in December.
                            I DENOUNCE DONALD J. TRUMP AND ALL HIS IMMORAL ACTS.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Zymologist View Post
                              Same one--he was born in December.
                              He isn't a newborn anymore. He's a big 4/5 month old! Still working on absorbing data though. Then processing said data.
                              If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by Gondwanaland, Yesterday, 01:42 PM
                              43 responses
                              192 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                              Started by Ronson, Yesterday, 11:16 AM
                              8 responses
                              58 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by Juvenal, Yesterday, 04:13 AM
                              14 responses
                              62 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Terraceth  
                              Started by shunyadragon, 11-24-2020, 06:20 PM
                              22 responses
                              134 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by shunyadragon, 11-24-2020, 06:10 PM
                              5 responses
                              46 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Ronson
                              by Ronson
                               
                              Working...
                              X