What does freedom mean to you?

Cocytus · Post by **Cocytus** » Sat May 23, 2009 5:13 am

PunkMaister wrote:
Cocytus wrote:
PunkMaister wrote:How can liberty conflict with life. Unless you consider something inhumane to be a liberty it is not.
Abortion is plenty inhumane, yet it is still a liberty.

I would have thought you, as a conservative, would have loved my formulation.
No it is not liberty at all. It is sanctioned murderjust like capital punishment only on this case of those that have committed no crime of their own whatsoever. But when it comes to abortion I can understand why for example a woman who has been raped and got pregnant as a result would want to carry that pregnancy to terms. Hopefully science can come up with more humane ways to deal with this issue that would not involve sanctioned murder but would allow women to still have their choice.

Well, actually it is a liberty. "Sanctioned murder" can apply equally well to what our soldiers do in defense of our country. Whatever your feelings on its morality, it is a liberty women in this country enjoy (and I use that term loosely. I can scarcely believe anyone would enjoy terminating the life of a child, even one they did not want.)

I agree science will eventually solve the problem, but that still leaves the problem of what to do with all the children dying now. I know there are individual doctors who will set up meetings between unwilling mothers and willing adopters as an alternative, but what I would love (and gladly pay, through taxes or donations) to see is a nationwide network dedicated to just such a purpose. Think of it. A rape victim on anywhere in the nation, instead of proceeding with an abortion, could be put in contact with a family anywhere else in the nation willing to adopt her child. Such a program could be a Congressional bill or a grassroots movement financed by donors, or even the church. Hell, the church could sell all that silly brass crap they don't need, fancy crucifixes and robes and chalices and such (cause Jesus sure as hell did NOT have any of that. Jesus was poor) and donate the proceeds to this noble cause.

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Sat May 23, 2009 5:35 am

Cocytus wrote:Well, actually it is a liberty. "Sanctioned murder" can apply equally well to what our soldiers do in defense of our country. Whatever your feelings on its morality, it is a liberty women in this country enjoy (and I use that term loosely. I can scarcely believe anyone would enjoy terminating the life of a child, even one they did not want.)

First of all what Soldiers do is fight wars. Killing in wars and cold blooded murder are 2 diametrically different things by any stretch of the imagination. Morals aside killing in war is an act of self defense or offense in order to secure something etc. We are talking war here. Do not confuse war with murder.
I cannot and will not equate Sanctioned murder of innocents as as a liberty, the moment we say that doing inhumane things is a liberty is the moment that liberty ends and anarchy begins. As I recall the past administration placed some breaks on abortion, women still have the right but minors can only do it with the consent of their parents or something like that or at least was that way until Obama came to power. Still I'm thorn over this when it comes to rape victims that on top of being rape end up pregnant as well. How on Earth do we tell the victim of a brutal rape that on top of her being rape she has to carry to full term the result of that rape? The embrio, the child is innocent but not what brought it into the world.

Cocytus wrote:I agree science will eventually solve the problem, but that still leaves the problem of what to do with all the children dying now. I know there are individual doctors who will set up meetings between unwilling mothers and willing adopters as an alternative, but what I would love (and gladly pay, through taxes or donations) to see is a nationwide network dedicated to just such a purpose. Think of it. A rape victim on anywhere in the nation, instead of proceeding with an abortion, could be put in contact with a family anywhere else in the nation willing to adopt her child. Such a program could be a Congressional bill or a grassroots movement financed by donors, or even the church. Hell, the church could sell all that silly brass crap they don't need, fancy crucifixes and robes and chalices and such (cause Jesus sure as hell did NOT have any of that. Jesus was poor) and donate the proceeds to this noble cause.

Adoption is great but I cannot imagine how most rape victims would even contemplate carrying the result of her rape to full term. We need something that takes that kind of burden and stigma out of the rape victim. If the embryo could somehow be removed without killing it and freeze it or whatever so if somebody else wants to bring it to full term can then be implanted in the surrogate mother to be.

GStone · Post by **GStone** » Sat May 23, 2009 4:28 pm

PunkMaister wrote:I cannot and will not equate Sanctioned murder of innocents as as a liberty, the moment we say that doing inhumane things is a liberty is the moment that liberty ends and anarchy begins. As I recall the past administration placed some breaks on abortion, women still have the right but minors can only do it with the consent of their parents or something like that or at least was that way until Obama came to power. Still I'm thorn over this when it comes to rape victims that on top of being rape end up pregnant as well. How on Earth do we tell the victim of a brutal rape that on top of her being rape she has to carry to full term the result of that rape? The embrio, the child is innocent but not what brought it into the world.

The problem with the parental consent is that the parent can be the rapist.

If the embryo could somehow be removed without killing it and freeze it or whatever so if somebody else wants to bring it to full term can then be implanted in the surrogate mother to be.

But, you can't. It's dependent upon the mother for a certain length of time in the beginning. That's why not all premies survive. It also brings up the question if no one is found to carry it to term. Do we just have warehouses of fetuses? Do we grow them in tubes? When they develop, they'll be sent to orphanages for the state to take care of them. And the system is already overbooked. We'd be creating a new welfare-like class. And even with a prosperous economy, there are only so many resources to go around.

GStone · Post by **GStone** » Sat May 23, 2009 4:40 pm

PunkMaister wrote:What makes you think that chefs are lowly paid employees at restaurants?

Because restaurants are that way. Fast food or fancy shmancy. The only ones that get any real money are the head chefs (which there are only a few jobs for) and management. For the head chefs and management, there's a chance it'd be worth it to them, but every one else employed is not paid that well and people at most jobs are overworked. Restaurants are [snap, snap, snap].

And even those that assist the chef are there because they need the job, would you rather have them unemployed taking welfare?

No, but the point is that they have to work hard for low pay for me to enjoy my money by eating out. That's one form of suffering.

Is not the same thing! Animals don't write poetry, they never ask their place in the universe, only we do that.

Most don't, but they do have learning and preference capabilities.

OK just STOP there, I mean where are you going with this? Are you seriously gonna suggest that a 4 year old boy or girl can make a rational, intelligent decision on his or her own about sex?

I'm not seeing 4 year olds driving cars. They aren't who I'm talking about. Pedophilia is about having sex with a minor. A minor has a wide range of ages.

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Sat May 23, 2009 4:56 pm

GStone wrote:Because restaurants are that way. Fast food or fancy shmancy. The only ones that get any real money are the head chefs (which there are only a few jobs for) and management. For the head chefs and management, there's a chance it'd be worth it to them, but every one else employed is not paid that well and people at most jobs are overworked. Restaurants are [snap, snap, snap].

So what do you suggest that all restaurants, fast foods, cafeterias should be shut down because they somehow represent a form of suffering, tell that to any restaurant employee and they will think you are nuts! You know that don't you?

GStone wrote:No, but the point is that they have to work hard for low pay for me to enjoy my money by eating out. That's one form of suffering.

Again what do you suggest they do? Let's say we replace all those people with robots and send those people unemployed to their homes. Would not that be even worse? You just took the daily bread out of a bunch of people just so you do not feel bad about eating in a restaurant. I work at a gas station, picking up the inventory, filling the vending machines and cleaning the place around among other things. Sometimes it can get hard but I'd rather have that than to just be home totally unemployed.

GStone wrote:Most don't, but they do have learning and preference capabilities.

Most? Asumming we are talking about animals here name one that can compose music, write poetry or do a painting or a sculpture, you said most so please do give an example...

GStone wrote:I'm not seeing 4 year olds driving cars. They aren't who I'm talking about. Pedophilia is about having sex with a minor. A minor has a wide range of ages.

Ah now we got to the bottom since you are talking kids that can drive a car you are actually referring to teenagers aged between 16-17 years old which is recognized as the so called age of consent...

GStone · Post by **GStone** » Sat May 23, 2009 5:28 pm

PunkMaister wrote:So what do you suggest that all restaurants, fast foods, cafeterias should be shut down because they somehow represent a form of suffering, tell that to any restaurant employee and they will think you are nuts! You know that don't you?

I brought it up to counter the notion that you really can live your whole life without harming any one or thing. Something is gonna suffer for my enjoyment to some degree. And I'm not saying I have a problem with that. It's cause and effect.

Again what do you suggest they do?

Stay as they are. I like fast food.

Let's say we replace all those people with robots and send those people unemployed to their homes. Would not that be even worse?

New jobs would eventually be created, if they didn't already exist.

You just took the daily bread out of a bunch of people just so you do not feel bad about eating in a restaurant.

I don't feel bad about it.

Most? Asumming we are talking about animals here name one that can compose music, write poetry or do a painting or a sculpture, you said most so please do give an example...

I said most don't, but I remember gorillas and chimps painting. I saw a photo of a cat painting on a wall, too.

Cocytus · Post by **Cocytus** » Sat May 23, 2009 5:54 pm

PunkMaister wrote:
Cocytus wrote:Well, actually it is a liberty. "Sanctioned murder" can apply equally well to what our soldiers do in defense of our country. Whatever your feelings on its morality, it is a liberty women in this country enjoy (and I use that term loosely. I can scarcely believe anyone would enjoy terminating the life of a child, even one they did not want.)
First of all what Soldiers do is fight wars. Killing in wars and cold blooded murder are 2 diametrically different things by any stretch of the imagination. Morals aside killing in war is an act of self defense or offense in order to secure something etc. We are talking war here. Do not confuse war with murder.

Semantics. Abortion is an act of self-defense when the life of the mother is at stake. It is an act of offense to secure a woman's right to choose.

PunkMaister wrote:As I recall the past administration placed some breaks on abortion, women still have the right but minors can only do it with the consent of their parents or something like that or at least was that way until Obama came to power. Still I'm thorn over this when it comes to rape victims that on top of being rape end up pregnant as well. How on Earth do we tell the victim of a brutal rape that on top of her being rape she has to carry to full term the result of that rape? The embrio, the child is innocent but not what brought it into the world.

We can't tell her what to do, but if we had such a system as I propose, we could offer an alternative. The choice would still be hers, but we would have done as much as possible without violating her rights.

PunkMaister wrote:
Cocytus wrote:I agree science will eventually solve the problem, but that still leaves the problem of what to do with all the children dying now. I know there are individual doctors who will set up meetings between unwilling mothers and willing adopters as an alternative, but what I would love (and gladly pay, through taxes or donations) to see is a nationwide network dedicated to just such a purpose. Think of it. A rape victim on anywhere in the nation, instead of proceeding with an abortion, could be put in contact with a family anywhere else in the nation willing to adopt her child. Such a program could be a Congressional bill or a grassroots movement financed by donors, or even the church. Hell, the church could sell all that silly brass crap they don't need, fancy crucifixes and robes and chalices and such (cause Jesus sure as hell did NOT have any of that. Jesus was poor) and donate the proceeds to this noble cause.
Adoption is great but I cannot imagine how most rape victims would even contemplate carrying the result of her rape to full term. We need something that takes that kind of burden and stigma out of the rape victim. If the embryo could somehow be removed without killing it and freeze it or whatever so if somebody else wants to bring it to full term can then be implanted in the surrogate mother to be.

And as I said, I expect science will eventually provide such services. But in the interim, a system of nationally coordinated adopters targeting potential abortions would at least stem the tide until the science comes through for us.