If any of you are feeling a little unstable...

[Chankgeez]

… and in other breaking news, Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/30/world ... .html?_r=0

[Iommic Pope]

… and in other breaking news, Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/30/world ... .html?_r=0

To steal an old bit from Bill Hicks, they're not people until they're in my phone book.

And in relation to those two points, more Hicks: let's figure out this food/air/water deal first.
Seriously not good news.

On the subject of abortion, there is very little (if any) moral/philosophical ground to hold against the weight of the argument(s) for allowing women the right to choose.

That whole "potential Beethoven/Einstein" line is a complete fucking joke.

However, with that in mind, you young'ns should be wrapping it up. AIDS didn't go away, and don't put a girl through having to get an abortion just because you were, literally, a selfish prick.

[morange]

On the subject of abortion, there is very little (if any) moral/philosophical ground to hold against the weight of the argument(s) for allowing women the right to choose.

You don't think the idea that killing people is wrong is moral/philosophical ground? Not that I want to argue this one way or the other, because I'm not even sure what the right solution is, but I can admit that both sides have important points to make.

[morange]

The issue seems to me to be about when a baby can be considered a human being, at which point it is murder to kill it. I think we probably agree that just because a woman gave life to her (born) child, doesn't mean she has license to kill it. And what is the difference between a baby just before birth, and just after? Nothing much. So the point when abortion becomes murder must be sometime between conception and birth, right? This is where things become pretty grey for me.

Humans have a long history of selectively changing their morals to allow the killing of certain people. The subjectivity of morality makes these kinds of discussions pretty futile.

[Eivind August]

The issue seems to me to be about when a baby can be considered a human being, at which point it is murder to kill it. I think we probably agree that just because a woman gave life to her (born) child, doesn't mean she has license to kill it. And what is the difference between a baby just before birth, and just after? Nothing much. So the point when abortion becomes murder must be sometime between conception and birth, right? This is where things become pretty grey for me.

Actually, they have more or less pinpointed when it is "human". I do however totally agree that both sides make decent points. It's a really hard subject, both ethically and for the girls who have to/want to go through with it - which is why I can't stand people being very vocal about how wrong (or right) it is. Let people figure it out for themselves, and make sure they get the information and support they need.

I'm not opposed to hunting for food. Hunting for sport and hunting endangered species is pretty lame.

These are my opinions, bow before them.

What is life, maaan?

[Eivind August]

The subjectivity of morality makes these kinds of discussions pretty futile.

Exactly.

[The_Active_Conundrum]

I think people are too dumb.

That's the problem.

[Iommic Pope]

From a medical point of view, the current limit of termination for pregnancies (in Australia at least and I'm fairly certain in most developed nations that there is consensus on this) that are not going to self terminate and need to be done so for medical reasons, is 20 weeks. Up to this stage the foetus is not considered "a life" as there is no sign of cogniscence/functioning. We have very similar laws regarding termination by choice, which I don't agree with for these reasons, but also because they fail to take into account the fact that no pregnancy is a guaranteed life. Things can go very wrong at any stage, all the way up to the last minute. There is always room for error, that's nature. These laws and that line of thinking that "it's a life and it's going to cure cancer" is based on vague potentials and is very unrealistic. 99.9% of people aren't curing cancer, writing novels or making the world better. They're sucking up resources and being cunts in the process.
From a social point of view, how can anyone expect an unwanted child to grow up and become such a person as described? Demographically, the kind of circumstances that result in unwanted pregnancies mean that the parents are usually unprepared and unresourced, which causes strain and could result in unwillingness to parent. Without mentioning reliance on welfare to feed, clothe, educate and take care of the kids health needs.
I know I'm speaking in very broad and general terms here and that this is a very grey area, and that there are all variety of parenting circumstances, but there are a few key cases to consider that make these aspects of the dilemma very real. We can discuss adoption later, but for the most part, even if there was a family/couple to adopt every unwanted baby, that's still no reason to outlaw abortion.

Rape.
More specifically, gang rape.
Telling a woman she cannot abort and must give birth to a child whom she conceived under the most heinous of circumstances is fucking wrong.
Wrong for her. Wrong for that child.
Yes that does happen.

I do think human life is worth preserving (we just gotta figure out how to not be assholes) and I abhore murder and violence. No I don't think abortion is murder.

I think we need to start concerning ourselves with the preservation of the life that is here and what that's going to look like in thirty years without getting wrapped up in potentials that may or may not pay long term dividends that are ballooning the population in the interim.

[Iommic Pope]

You guys all typed that while I was ranting but basically this:

I think people are too dumb.

That's the problem.

[Chankgeez]

You guys all typed that while I was ranting but basically this:

I think people are too dumb.

That's the problem.

… or maybe the problem is that lions aren't smart enough?

[morange]

I like how that guy's response to the lion thing is, oh, I didn't know that lion was a friend of yours.

[Ugly Nora]

You guys all typed that while I was ranting but basically this:

I think people are too dumb.

That's the problem.

… or maybe the problem is that lions aren't smart enough?

Too soon.

[Iommic Pope]

We are the exception to our own Darwinian rule.
Irony is a bitch when she hits hard.

[morange]

We should build schools in Africa for lions.

[Eivind August]

Good post, Pope. Also, there's the fact that abortions have taken place since forever, and there are still alot of DIY abortions going on, often resulting in the death of the mothers as well. The medical procedure is deemed very safe. There will always be reasons behind an abortion, and I don't think it helps anybody pointing fingers in disgust at women who undergo the procedure.

Also, this:

We should build schools in Africa for lions.