Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
11-02-2009, 22:39   #31
gvn
Moderator
 
gvn's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean_K View Post
The good news is that 100% of the population will die relatively soon.
I guess I should of defined how long I meant by relatively.

Relatively in this case means in the next ~100 years.
gvn is offline  
Advertisement
11-02-2009, 22:49   #32
cautioner
Banned
 
cautioner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Tipp
Posts: 876
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcasticfairy
Abortion, hmmm, I'm againist it, as a general rule. However there are cases where I understand it's necessity. When it comes to aborting a child on the basis that it could have disabilities? I'm not really sure where I stand on that, I feel that it sort of depends on the case, but that is possibly a little hypocritical in itself
Everyone knows someone with disabilities of some form. Where's the distinction? Who should be so badly disabled as to be put to death? (or terminated, if that's a less biased term?) What these people in my class were arguing was that it would be perfectly fair to declare that they won't enjoy life as much as they could and should therefore be killed. I'll be honest; I'm still trying to wrap my head around it. One claimed the same defence for blind/deaf baby. Mind-boggling.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC 2K3
As an extension to my previously shared opinion, I kind of also think that the normalisation of abortion as a valid and moral choice in the event of an unplanned pregnancy, as opposed to a guilt ridden grey area, would be a good thing for society. Now the possible argument against this is that not granting rights to the unborn would lead to a general disregard for the value of human life, and that infanticide could be justified etc., but I think the majority of people make a subconscious distinction between humans in and ex utero which is strong enough that this would not arise as a result.
How exactly do you think it would improve society? I'm honestly curious, not trying to be snide or anything.
cautioner is offline  
11-02-2009, 22:49   #33
Fad
Moderator
 
Fad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Co.Dublin
Posts: 7,464
I kinda share JC 2K3's sentiment on abortion.

I dont really care.

I dont think life really begins properly until a baby can survive without ridiculous measure, like being in a incubator for months or something. I dont mean if a baby is born prematurely its not alive, its just naturally it couldnt possibly survive without some unreal amount of mechanical assistance. (This is coming out kinda iffy, but hopefully you get what I mean)
Fad is offline  
11-02-2009, 22:55   #34
cautioner
Banned
 
cautioner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Tipp
Posts: 876
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fad View Post
I kinda share JC 2K3's sentiment on abortion.

I dont really care.

I dont think life really begins properly until a baby can survive without ridiculous measure, like being in a incubator for months or something. I dont mean if a baby is born prematurely its not alive, its just naturally it couldnt possibly survive without some unreal amount of mechanical assistance. (This is coming out kinda iffy, but hopefully you get what I mean)
Again, this seems like a very iffy distinction; still leaves leeway for personal discretion. Even though I'm opposed to it almost entirely, I can't respect this method of thinking as much as I could, say, life beginning at 2 months of pregnancy, something definite and consistent.

Not that I don't respect your opinion, Fad
cautioner is offline  
11-02-2009, 22:59   #35
blinkey 101
Registered User
 
blinkey 101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: crumlin
Posts: 342
yawn.
blinkey 101 is offline  
Advertisement
11-02-2009, 23:00   #36
Fad
Moderator
 
Fad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Co.Dublin
Posts: 7,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by cautioner View Post
Again, this seems like a very iffy distinction; still leaves leeway for personal discretion. Even though I'm opposed to it almost entirely, I can't respect this method of thinking as much as I could, say, life beginning at 2 months of pregnancy, something definite and consistent.

Not that I don't respect your opinion, Fad

OMGWTFDUDETHATSSOTOTALLYNOTFAIRNOTAGREEINGWITHMEENTIRELY!RAWR

I'm sort of a Nihilist, and I dont really think life means anything, so my definition of life is obviously enough gonna be a bit different to others
Fad is offline  
11-02-2009, 23:02   #37
JC 2K3
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by cautioner View Post
Everyone knows someone with disabilities of some form. Where's the distinction? Who should be so badly disabled as to be put to death? (or terminated, if that's a less biased term?) What these people in my class were arguing was that it would be perfectly fair to declare that they won't enjoy life as much as they could and should therefore be killed. I'll be honest; I'm still trying to wrap my head around it. One claimed the same defence for blind/deaf baby. Mind-boggling.
Well you could argue that since people having children is essentially for the selfish purpose of fulfilling a natural urge and thus will bring them pleasure and gratification, that they would be entitled to not have to bring up a disabled child if they so wish.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cautioner View Post
How exactly do you think it would improve society? I'm honestly curious, not trying to be snide or anything.
Guilt for things that there's no reason to feel guilty about is a bad thing. A girl who has an unplanned pregnancy and doesn't want a baby shouldn't have to go through that. It would also lessen the amount of kids growing up in less than ideal circumstances because they were unplanned and the mother felt obliged to have them. I mean in general, more control over when new people are brought into the world can only be good for society.
JC 2K3 is offline  
11-02-2009, 23:02   #38
cautioner
Banned
 
cautioner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Tipp
Posts: 876
Life.

Don't talk to me about life...
cautioner is offline  
11-02-2009, 23:13   #39
SarcasticFairy
Registered User
 
SarcasticFairy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by cautioner View Post
Everyone knows someone with disabilities of some form. Where's the distinction? Who should be so badly disabled as to be put to death? (or terminated, if that's a less biased term?) What these people in my class were arguing was that it would be perfectly fair to declare that they won't enjoy life as much as they could and should therefore be killed. I'll be honest; I'm still trying to wrap my head around it. One claimed the same defence for blind/deaf baby. Mind-boggling.
I wasn't thinking they wouldn't enjoy life as much and therefore should be killed/terminated. Taking your example, that woman had several disabled kids. A child with disabilities needs more attention than your average child. With so many kids needing all her undivided attention, there's only so much she can take, as well as the fact that the new baby would need a lot of attention that it might not get, and so suffer further. Sort of, it's kind of hard to explain what I'm thinking (my mind is a bit frazzled at the mo ). It is neither fair on her nor on the new child.

Also, when you're talking about more than blindness/deafness (as awful as that would be, in all fairness), but as in Down's Syndrom, AIDS, etc., and you know that your future child will be afflicted with whatever for their lives, there is going to be, for me anyway, some kind of debate. You're stopping this 'childs' life before it has begun, but you're doing it for the right reasons, in a sense. That's kind of what I meant about it applying to each case seperately.
SarcasticFairy is offline  
Advertisement
11-02-2009, 23:25   #40
cautioner
Banned
 
cautioner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Tipp
Posts: 876
Quote:
Originally Posted by JC 2K3 View Post
Well you could argue that since people having children is essentially for the selfish purpose of fulfilling a natural urge and thus will bring them pleasure and gratification, that they would be entitled to not have to bring up a disabled child if they so wish.
Giving birth to someone does not necessarily entail bringing them up; I realise that carrying a baby for 9 months is a tremendous task even for planned mothers, but my thought on the matter has always been that if someone can make an effort and not take the easy option, and in the process save a life, then that's something special. That of course is where personal opinion comes into the matter. It is a huge ask of anyone but in my personal opinion if someone has it in their direct power to decide the fate of another it should be worth the toil. Others obviously don't feel the same way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC 2K3
Guilt for things that there's no reason to feel guilty about is a bad thing. A girl who has an unplanned pregnancy and doesn't want a baby shouldn't have to go through that. It would also lessen the amount of kids growing up in less than ideal circumstances because they were unplanned and the mother felt obliged to have them. I mean in general, more control over when new people are brought into the world can only be good for society.
I could whip out the tired old the-baby-could-be-the-next-Morgan-Freeman cliché and you could just as easily retort with old the-baby-could-be-the-next-Hitler, but I think that's a bit redundant in any case.
What you call guilt, I would call a conscience. Neither of us are in any position to speak authoratively, but I do recall reading that a large number of women who do abort are dramatically affected for the rest of their lives: they'll estimate the baby's would-be birthday, note it each year, wonder what might have been, etc. I don't think you can define it as something there's no reason to feel guilty for. It's yet another matter of personal opinion.
It's easy to imagine and pity children growing up in less than ideal circumstances, but children have been doing that for millenia and I daresay a couple of them turned out all right. A less-than-perfect childhood is not something I see as a grounds for humane termination. Children grow up.

Why, oh why, do I always start Abortion debates when I should be studying...
cautioner is offline  
11-02-2009, 23:32   #41
Piste
Registered User
 
Piste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Trapped in a box by a cockney nutjob
Posts: 11,014
My angle on abortion is a life only has value if it is valued- ie. it doesn't have an innate value. An unwanted foetus has no value as its parents don't want it and it isn't sentient so doesn't value its own life.
Piste is offline  
11-02-2009, 23:35   #42
cautioner
Banned
 
cautioner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Tipp
Posts: 876
Potential value doesn't figure?
Anyway, I'm sorry for hijacking this thread with my crazy theories and constant opposing, I shall now be leaving in order to watch the latest episode of Heroes.

It's supposed to be a good one.
cautioner is offline  
11-02-2009, 23:45   #43
Piste
Registered User
 
Piste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Trapped in a box by a cockney nutjob
Posts: 11,014
Nope I don't believe in "potential" value. Potential means nothing unless it becomes a reality.
Piste is offline  
12-02-2009, 00:13   #44
Crumble Froo
Registered User
 
Crumble Froo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 11,760
yep, would mostly agree with piste on the abortion thing... personally, for me, i dont think i could ever have an abortion, but i don't see why my own personalised belief in it should affect what other women can do to their bodies.

i suppose on other political opinions, i think it's complete bullshit that gay couples don't have marriage/partnership rights in ireland. i quite like new zealand's laws regarding common law partnership too, not to mention being able to get married anywehre you want (i think they recently passed something to that general effect in ireland, but that doesnt go quite as far). i think prostitution should be legal, and i'd like to see more open debate on legalising cannabis.
Crumble Froo is offline  
(2) thanks from:
12-02-2009, 00:16   #45
challengemaster
Registered User
 
challengemaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: End of girlfriend's whip
Posts: 11,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piste View Post
Potential means nothing unless it becomes a reality.
Dare you to say that to a physicist!
challengemaster is online now  
(3) thanks from:
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet