Supreme Court strikes down Texas's restrictive abortion requirements

[Mouthwash]

Sorry but you can't burn the baby-killing bridge, which you've already crossed. You've referred to abortion as baby-killing, said people shouldn't have the 'freedom to kill babies,'

Having an abortion because you don't want a kid is ethically very close to murder imo. But the point of law isn't to serve justice. Bad or not, abortion does not harm society as a whole, so it shouldn't be punished like murder is.

There's also the fact that moral guilt must take into account intentionality. Murder is clearly wrong, but the biases in our head can tell us that fetuses are nonsentient bags of flesh and therefore aren't the same as us.

claimed that it's understandable when terrorists attack abortion providers

I did not. Violence against abortion providers isn't justified because it doesn't work. All pro-lifers that I know of understand this.

 

[El_Machinae]

It's a bias that says that fetuses are insentient? I'm not sure that's true. I mean, even if it's a 'bias', it strikes me as an agreed-upon condition in the discussion.

 

[Senethro]

Well thats a new way to misuse a word I've not seen before.

 

[Lexicus]

Having an abortion because you don't want a kid is ethically very close to murder imo. But the point of law isn't to serve justice. Bad or not, abortion does not harm society as a whole, so it shouldn't be punished like murder is.

But if they are 'ethically very close' how do they not harm society in very similar ways? What is the actual difference in your eyes? How does abortion not harm society to the same degree as murder?

There's also the fact that moral guilt must take into account intentionality. Murder is clearly wrong, but the biases in our head can tell us that fetuses are nonsentient bags of flesh and therefore aren't the same as us.

He's not misusing the word, but he's unintentionally arguing for clemency in the case that, for example, the 'biases in my head' tell me that black people are less than human and I kill one.

I did not. Violence against abortion providers isn't justified because it doesn't work. All pro-lifers that I know of understand this.

I believe your exact words were 'I can understand it.' That is the same as saying it is understandable.

And I find it chilling that you don't oppose the violence on ethical grounds, but rather because 'it doesn't work.'

 

[Farm Boy]

We both acknowledge the moral onus to make a sentient's life a good one. We just don't agree on the moral onus to force any specific sentience into existence.

Oh sure. The judgement call of quality. It changes us when we free our hands. One could consider a life ruined by being born to a biologically sound mother in a society that can't be assed to structure itself with reality and compassion. The ability to self fund buying cheap shat taking priority. And I'm supposed to be shocked when people consider us worth killing? I'm not. They seem just like us.

 

[Mouthwash]

It's a bias that says that fetuses are insentient? I'm not sure that's true. I mean, even if it's a 'bias', it strikes me as an agreed-upon condition in the discussion.

No, I mean that a cynical comparison between fetuses and inanimate objects can make people conclude that fetuses are simply meat, and therefore worthless. This is, in my opinion, the product of cognitive bias.

But if they are 'ethically very close' how do they not harm society in very similar ways? What is the actual difference in your eyes? How does abortion not harm society to the same degree as murder?

Society: a group of people involved in persistent social interaction, or a large social grouping sharing the same geographical or social territory, typically subject to the same political authority and dominant cultural expectations. Societies are characterized by patterns of relationships (social relations) between individuals who share a distinctive culture and institutions; a given society may be described as the sum total of such relationships among its constituent members. -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society

The fetuses killed by abortion may be worse off. I can't think of why society would be.

He's not misusing the word, but he's unintentionally arguing for clemency in the case that, for example, the 'biases in my head' tell me that black people are less than human and I kill one.

That's not rational conclusion to derive even for a racist. All societies which viewed blacks as subhuman also prohibited whites from murdering them (slavery notwithstanding). But the fact is that if my neighbors and family and authority figures and books say that black people are subhuman, I'm not going to treat them as equals.

I believe your exact words were 'I can understand it.' That is the same as saying it is understandable.

No, I view the action as heinous. I understand why people might carry it out, though.

And I find it chilling that you don't oppose the violence on ethical grounds, but rather because 'it doesn't work.'

"The reaction pattern of the Jews is characterized by almost complete lack of resistance... the documentary evidence of Jewish resistance, overt or submerged, is very slight." -Raul Hilberg, on the Holocaust

 

[El_Machinae]

No, I mean that a cynical comparison between fetuses and inanimate objects can make people conclude that fetuses are simply meat, and therefore worthless. This is, in my opinion, the product of cognitive bias.

In counterpoint, though, all of your analogies have been to things that a fetus very much isn't. Your bias was to conflate them with babies, or coma patients, etc. As far as conflations go, equating fetuses to babies is way (way!) more tenuous than comparing them to tumours.

 

[warpus]

Can't we just all agree that fetuses are not babies, nor are they potatoes?

 

[Senethro]

I'm still not seeing actual reasons to reject my biases that non-sentient meatclumps should be protected over living human beings.

Its like you think abortion is icky but are unable to articulate an ultimate reason why and are just flailing around with what is to hand until it breaks and you have to change.

 

[Lexicus]

The fetuses killed by abortion may be worse off. I can't think of why society would be.

How can we not say the same of murder victims?

That's not rational conclusion to derive even for a racist

Of course it would be a rational conclusion, if racism is taken to its logical conclusion. Your factual assertion

All societies which viewed blacks as subhuman also prohibited whites from murdering them (slavery notwithstanding).

is also laughably wrong; it was legal to kill your slaves and even after slavery ended lynchings continued for nearly a century. To this day in America black people are legally murdered by the police on a regular basis. In the racist societies in which there were actually significant numbers of black people (the US, colonial Africa, South Africa, Latin America) conditions are and were quite similar.

I understand why people might carry it out, though.

Yes, in other words, it is understandable.

 

[Farm Boy]

In counterpoint, though, all of your analogies have been to things that a fetus very much isn't. Your bias was to conflate them with babies, or coma patients, etc. As far as conflations go, equating fetuses to babies is way (way!) more tenuous than comparing them to tumours.

You did that without mouthwash. You don't destroy a tumor because you've seen a type of person you don't think should be allowed(forced! Seeing as it's always the exact same thing, in the case if beginnings) to exist. But that is the rationale that must be tapped to selectively destroy a human because of its specific characteristics being suboptimal according to an external value judgement.

 

[El_Machinae]

according to an external value judgement.

Yes.

There is no internal value judgement available. That's the point. There's no internal value judgement. Given that there's no internal value judgement, the best we can do is predict an outcome and then predict whether the outcome will be an acceptable one or even a good one.

If it's not a 'good one', then why force someone to live it?

 

[Farm Boy]

Because not all are so imminently wise as you. Because we already have people suggesting that a life more materially rich than the vast majority of human existence is so mean, materially, as to not be worth living. The judgement flows two ways. One from a protective standpoint of a developed human being. The other stands only as executioner. They might get to the same point but they flow forward and backward respectively. The wrong direction, It makes us worse when we're already bad enough. It will make them worse after we make room with our absence. The cost of the why is not free.

 

[Mouthwash]

In counterpoint, though, all of your analogies have been to things that a fetus very much isn't. Your bias was to conflate them with babies, or coma patients, etc. As far as conflations go, equating fetuses to babies is way (way!) more tenuous than comparing them to tumours.

I didn't realize tumors had dreams in their final two months of growth.

How can we not say the same of murder victims?

I'm not talking about the victims. A society that doesn't punish murder doesn't work as a society. David Cameron cannot order Britain's armed forces to rid him of his opposition leader, not only because he might not want to do so, but also because he doesn’t believe they would obey such an order.

it was legal to kill your slaves

Which I mentioned.

and even after slavery ended lynchings continued for nearly a century. To this day in America black people are legally murdered by the police on a regular basis. In the racist societies in which there were actually significant numbers of black people (the US, colonial Africa, South Africa, Latin America) conditions are and were quite similar.

'Being set up to discriminate against black people' isn't what I said.

It's somewhat incredible that you dragged me, in one page no less, from abortion to racist killings, and are now lambasting me because I don't understand that it's legal to kill black people in the United States. Dude, you have issues.

EDIT: You know what? I'm unsubscribing. I can't keep this colossal waste of energy up. Congrats, you're the first person I've blocked in years.

 

[Tahuti]

Having an abortion because you don't want a kid is ethically very close to murder imo.

That's essentially like saying not buying something you passed by is very close to theft.

 

[Senethro]

I didn't realize tumors had dreams in their final two months of growth.



I'm not talking about the victims. A society that doesn't punish murder doesn't work as a society. David Cameron cannot order Britain's armed forces to rid him of his opposition leader, not only because he might not want to do so, but also because he doesn’t believe they would obey such an order.



Which I mentioned.



'Being set up to discriminate against black people' isn't what I said.

It's somewhat incredible that you dragged me, in one page no less, from abortion to racist killings, and are now lambasting me because I don't understand that it's legal to kill black people in the United States. Dude, you have issues.

EDIT: You know what? I'm unsubscribing. I can't keep this colossal waste of energy up. Congrats, you're the first person I've blocked in years.

You're being disingenuous and petty, especially because he caught you saying things that were factually wrong.

 

[Lexicus]

I'm not talking about the victims. A society that doesn't punish murder doesn't work as a society. David Cameron cannot order Britain's armed forces to rid him of his opposition leader, not only because he might not want to do so, but also because he doesn’t believe they would obey such an order.

Well, you could easily make the argument that murder costs society whatever the victims would have produced (not just in an economic sense but also the relationships they would have had with other people and so forth). The only reason not to make the same argument for fetuses, is if you recognize your argument that a fetus has equal moral value to a human is wrong.

But I guess you're not making that argument. Instead you've come up with this rather...strange...notion.

Societies can work perfectly well with lots of killing; you say David Cameron can't just order the army to kill the opposition but as we know there were many societies, most of which lasted considerably longer than parliamentary democracy in England, which were founded on precisely the ability of the ruler to kill anyone who opposed him (or more rarely her). There are any number of societies throughout most of history, where practices which all of us would probably condemn as murder were accepted without question and they can't be said to have 'not worked' in any sense that our own societies can't also be said to 'not work.'
So I don't think much of your theory as to why murder is punished.

The point of the racist tangent was just to illustrate your inconsistency. I admit it was petty to call you out on your factual errors when it didn't really relate to the topic.
But you've declared that abortion is morally equivalent to baby-killing. Now you're making excuse after excuse to backpedal from the moral precipice which you seem to realize you reached. There is, there can be, no excuse for murder.

 

[El_Machinae]

I didn't realize tumors had dreams in their final two months of growth.

The fact that fetuses will have sentience isn't a feature of what they are now. You're ascribing features to fetuses that they don't have. The fact that they will have them does not make them analogous to babies.

Compare like to like. That's what analogies allow you to do. You're still expressing your bias by giving them attributes they don't have.

 

[onejayhawk]

The fact that fetuses will have sentience isn't a feature of what they are now. You're ascribing features to fetuses that they don't have. The fact that they will have them does not make them analogous to babies.

Compare like to like. That's what analogies allow you to do. You're still expressing your bias by giving them attributes they don't have.

Have you not argued that some fetuses do have sentience?

We need to distinguish between different stages of development. An abortion at five weeks can morally and ethically be distinguished from an abortion at twenty-five weeks. At this time in USA there is no legal distinction.

J

 

[El_Machinae]

Have you not argued that some fetuses do have sentience?

We need to distinguish between different stages of development. An abortion at five weeks can morally and ethically be distinguished from an abortion at twenty-five weeks. At this time in USA there is no legal distinction.

Yes, I argue that late-stage fetuses have sentience. We have enough good data to presume that they do. And enough good data to assume that early stage fetuses do not. It why I object so strongly to putting hurdles that delay an abortion in place.

Not so sure about the distinction being there at 25 weeks, but yeah, I'm in agreement with the gist of what you say (if not the specific timing).

Many other countries got their abortion rights from a different set of Common Law principles than the US, and so the conversations can easily be more sane. Nuance like fetal sentience can be factored into the changes of the laws. Less so when the rights were won using a different argument.