Same thinking. The parent is in "control" of the child during then so why is all that ILLEGAL if the child has no rights? Thats because the child has rights indeed. Priviliges like driving no but basic human rights it has as well as almost all Constitutional rights as well. (2nd Amendment is contentious but it should be available to all) QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 25 Aug 2004 Location: DAS BOOT IM DER OSTSEE
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 10:11 pm Post subject:
I cant legalize the first two. Sex with anybody under 18 is statutory rape. _________________ PPM's Reichstrollfuherer, 236th Trollenparties brigade. QUICK_EDIT
Although I don't have time to read all of what you wrote because it's a whole book and add my English as well (slower reading), but I really appreciate it that some think against money (you should be an idol for lots of people, Clazzy).
But people got to the stage where money is the most important and above the law. Nobody thinks that this planet has a ruler... well it has, a monster that we created ages ago, a monster called money. In some places it might not be so bad, but in countries affected by different regimes or that were conquered by other countries just because of the resources, and I can give Romania as one of the examples (why do you think I'm in Canada? you get it), countries like this have a huge demand for money and they are lead by it.
Now I prefer talking about my home country, although I'm 100% positive that in other places it was/is worse. Why does Romania have a crappy reputation and economy? Well for starters, communism (the practiced one) simply ruined the economy. We had to pay the USSR because they built factories in Romania, but they actually took our factories and national values (mostly the objects/artifacts) and we payed for the theft only. Same thing happened when the Nazis came over us. But the Turks and Hungarians (I don't offend any of these groups for what happened, like the other Romanians might do) tried getting their hands (and did) on out territory, taking away from us land, valuable objects, ruining the society, economy and even politics. Even the Roman Empire came over the territory while the dacians were living there, and for a simple reason: the resources. Right now in Romania, if you are poor (meaning >$500/month and the majority has that little as a wage) you don't have a bright future. You can't leave the country (although by entering the EU it will be), you can't have proper education (since richer people bribe teachers and everything related to teaching, just to get their kids in the top, in a totally dishonorable way), you can't even get a damn house. You can also get killed (stabbed, clubbed, whatever) just for a few credits (less than $10; imagine getting killed for that "huge" amount of money) or just because they saw you with a mobile hanging from your neck or you had a golden (probably) necklace on yourself.
What I want to say is that people fight for money right now, kill for money, but not only that, resources as well. We are driven by the economy. We work like slaves all day just for a small amount of papers and coins, and a large part of that goes on taxes, food and water. We pay for water! The planet is mostly water on the surface and we pay for it. Same for food. If you don't have money you simply die. All I'll say is look at Iraq now... The oil beneath it. That's the only valuable thing there.
And lots of stronger countries occupied others just for resources, and are now the highest, but they left other countries in ruins economically, politically and socially. We're all fighting just for what others have and we don't. But the question is, are we fighting, or are our leaders to blame for what is going on? (I think both)
Nobody seems to be knowing of the Child in this instance
True.
Quote:
Yes, an unborn baby is completely dependent on it's mother. However, so is that baby after birth. A baby or small child cannot fend for itself, so the theory goes, since this child is a parasite, I have the right to kill it?
I believe Mother Teresa said it very succintly: "It is a poverty that a child has to die so that you may live as you wish".
Indeed. Besides the child DOES NOT HAVE to necessarily live with its parents. Just has to live which more than advocates social services like Adoption. Many churches and/or States run Adoption centers so theres no shortage of that. QUICK_EDIT
That happens all the time and isn't solely something to do with abortion and it's quite possible someone who had an abortion could go onto be very happy.
If abortion is such a great thing why don't we hear about how happy it makes women? Of course there are women who have post natal depression, but there are more women who are depressed after abortion than after pregnancy. But where are the reports of women who are happy because of their abortions? If abortion is great then why is it done in the US in poorly run, unsanitary clinics that care more about making money than caring for women? .
People are less likely to make a fuss if something goes well - unless they are a miracle or something people would want to read about generally you'd not hear. Especially with abortion as many people might not want to state they got rid of a child they didn't want - even if it had positive effects on their lives, people are highly judgemental.
And personally I actually DO know someone of my age who had an abortion and who was happy after it, before it however she was considering killing herself for being an idiot and getting pregnant accidentally.
And really, it's likely run in places like that because people who dislike it would protest based on their morals if it's in high profile establishments.
SomeGuy[YR:SF] wrote:
Nobody seems to be knowing of the Child in this instance. Choice advocates aside, would you ever hear what the child has to say? For all intensive purposes the right of the child to live even if its not with that parent(s) overrides the choice of the woman since the child is another person. It would be the same logic by saying I want you dead because its my choice.
In my mind a fetus is not a person. Feel free to disagree but I don't class a semi-human like form that would likely die instantly outside the womb a person. Anything that could survive without it's mother should be giving up for adoption and it's wrong to remove the baby after a certain period of the pregnancy and given a chance to live. But something which isn't capable of living by itself at all and has yet to become truely human should be completely the choice of the person who has to have the would be baby grow inside them as a part of them for many months.
Feel free to disagree - I don't care about this topic as it is something I have seen can have positive effects of first hand and as such cannot be bothered to aruge my case further. QUICK_EDIT
A fetus is not semi-human. Look at it biologically, its 100% human albeit not fully formed. its the same thign at the biological level mere seconds after conception. QUICK_EDIT
Especially with abortion as many people might not want to state they got rid of a child they didn't want - even if it had positive effects on their lives, people are highly judgemental.
Interesting that you say it's a child here. I think fetuses are only dehumanized so that people can get rid of them without guilt. QUICK_EDIT
Especially with abortion as many people might not want to state they got rid of a child they didn't want - even if it had positive effects on their lives, people are highly judgemental.
Interesting that you say it's a child here. I think fetuses are only dehumanized so that people can get rid of them without guilt.
guilt for what ?, terminating an organism that isn't self-sufficient ?
I don't get this social taboo on killing, sometimes it's neccesary, or it would affect things positively in the long run.
And as far as i see fetuses aren't ranked as humans until they develop intelligence. _________________ Micro TS
Portable, no campaign, movies or music, just the engine and needed resources for skirmish and lan. QUICK_EDIT
And as far as i see fetuses aren't ranked as humans until they develop intelligence.
Then why not start eradicating all the LIVE people without it? Well start with the uneducated and then move into the mentally unstable, then to those with medical problems of the brain. By that reasoning (lack of intellegence) they qualify for destruction in the same manner as fetuses. Say dont kill the listed? Then dont apply a generic moniker that exists in already-born people.
Besides whats to stop a fetus from becoming smarter than you? Only your insistance on its destruction is the case. QUICK_EDIT
guilt for what ?, terminating an organism that isn't self-sufficient ?
I don't get this social taboo on killing, sometimes it's neccesary, or it would affect things positively in the long run.
And as far as i see fetuses aren't ranked as humans until they develop intelligence.
Well let's carry out your personal conviction out to its conclusion Judeau.
Won't it be fun when the birth rate drops so low that your pension fund is bankrupt and you're 70 years old and going senile. Why should the young have to sacrifice their happiness to take care of you? That's right; you say that sometimes killing is necessary. Well you've lived long enough, but now you've become helpless. So why don't we put you out of your misery. In the long run it will make everyone’s lives easier, affect things positively, if you will in the long run. No one should ever have to sacrifice their happiness for those afflicted with senility. They are unintelligent dead weight and frankly just barely better than vegetables.
Is that the kind of culture you really desire, Judeau? Mother Teresa still said it best: It's a poverty a child has to die so you can live your life as you wish. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 Location: Star Kingdom of Manticore
Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:10 am Post subject:
Desu wrote:
I cant legalize the first two. Sex with anybody under 18 is statutory rape.
2 things have to happen before statutory rape is declared.
1. You have to get caught.
2. The parents have to press charges. Legally, the State cannot do anything unless it is on public grounds OR the parents press charges.
Otherwise it's just sex.
wow.. i've been statutory raped half a dozen times!.. HAHAHHAHAHAHA who gives a shit.xD!
hey! nice poster there DCoder! I ran across that VHEM site when I was in high school and felt really disturbed for some reason. Much of what they said there is true regarding the world's state ever since humans stepped in but somehow, I can't visualize the success of their vision. It's like, hoping for something you know will never come true! QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Location: National Reference Laboratory for IPNV
Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:59 pm Post subject:
Bumping is not a good thing; however, since you bumped it.
My political Compass
This just confirms what I, already knew This topic is really good, I should have find it before
cdmt wrote:
Abortion hurts women it doesn't empower them. Abortion causes: an increased risk of breast, ovarian and cervical cancer, an increased incidence of severe depression, potential damage to the cervix which can lead to miscarriage of other babies, increased risk of ectopic pregnancy, risk of being unable bear children again due to scarring, and severe abdominal pain.
If you are raped it would still be better emotionally and physically to have the child and then give the child up for adoption. Abortion disrupts a natural process of the body in a way that is very violent to the women's body emotionally and physically. Rape is horrible enough. Why intensify her pain more through abortion? Why do people think that just because you get rid of the baby the pain goes away and everything is peachy? I knew someone who had an abortion. I had pleaded with her, not to have the abortion. She is agnostic though and didn't think that abortion was wrong and saw it as being a very positive choice. After she got the abortion I didn't hear from her for a few weeks. Then I got a call at 2am she told me that she was going to commit suicide because of her abortion. It affected her that much. She also started sleeping around a lot with whomever because her self esteem had plummeted. I have had to console her often. Don't give me any bull about how great abortion is for women.
Wow, exactly the same point of view that I have; abortion is never good; a human should never take the life of another human being. QUICK_EDIT
guilt for what ?, terminating an organism that isn't self-sufficient ?
I don't get this social taboo on killing, sometimes it's neccesary, or it would affect things positively in the long run.
And as far as i see fetuses aren't ranked as humans until they develop intelligence.
Well let's carry out your personal conviction out to its conclusion Judeau.
Won't it be fun when the birth rate drops so low that your pension fund is bankrupt and you're 70 years old and going senile. Why should the young have to sacrifice their happiness to take care of you? That's right; you say that sometimes killing is necessary. Well you've lived long enough, but now you've become helpless. So why don't we put you out of your misery. In the long run it will make everyone’s lives easier, affect things positively, if you will in the long run. No one should ever have to sacrifice their happiness for those afflicted with senility. They are unintelligent dead weight and frankly just barely better than vegetables.
Is that the kind of culture you really desire, Judeau? Mother Teresa still said it best: It's a poverty a child has to die so you can live your life as you wish.
you poor deluded fool, you assume too much about me.
i plan to go to a poor country once i degrade past a certain point, help as much as possible with what i have left, and then once i cannot contribute anything anymore, walk to my death.
HOWEVER, this is something i myself plan to do, by all rights, once a person reaches such an age, that person has had a life full of work, and therefor, there is an outstanding "debt" towards this person, they have fostered a new generation, the duty of the new generation, is now to repay this debt.
admittedly, the fact people are becoming marginally more educated leads to lower birth rates, so the debt per child is higher, that is why over-consuming should be stopped, it is the way of thinking by the day, thinking of the future , and acting upon predictions, is how a balance can be made, killing oneself helps this balance as well.
a fetus has no life, it's a parasite, a lump of flesh, that will eventually develop into a human being, eliminating it is only a loss of "potential", however, the potential argument is complete bullshit, as i stated earlier.
and, your last argument, is a authoritarian one, invalid as such, good day to you.
to all you who think good intentions will make for good results, let me say this, the road to hell is littered with people who had good intentions with no thought behind them.
or for those who i'd prefer to think more often than talk, good intentions with no thought behind them, will result in a negative situation, look at politics for the funniest example around.
and last of all, why are you all so unwilling to end life, is it because your own mortality scares you? _________________ Micro TS
Portable, no campaign, movies or music, just the engine and needed resources for skirmish and lan. Last edited by Judeau on Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:24 pm; edited 3 times in total QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Dec 2004 Location: Tiberium Research Center N27
Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:11 pm Post subject:
I'm ok for abortion... but who said people will have them frequently? Perhaps some limitations?
Fetus dos not have intellegence, as said by Judeau. It's also possible what child only develops intelegence after few days after the birth. _________________ DUNK! QUICK_EDIT
i'd also like to tell you about some rather obvious things
living standard, the quality of life, and all such fancy names, is simply the ratio between the amount of people, and the available resources as you're probably unwilling to admit, are limiteds, these resources "regenerate" at a certain rate, depleting these resources slows the regeneration rate to a crawl, so you need to strike a balance between resources taken, and resources regenerated, the way we're doing it currently, such is not the case.
our resource usage is growing exponentially, due to massive populaton growth, and far higher energy usage per human.
with the fact we're swifly depleting available resources, comes the fact, the regeneration rate is becoming less
in addition to that, the amount of wildlife is linked with the available resources, so, going on as we are now, will result in total decimation of wildlife, and civilization as we know it, does this make clear why we need to cut down on our growth rates ?
having less people living in higher standards is now substainable due to better technology, with better standards, comes a better society, and an increase in research, which will lead to more efficient ways to use resources, which, once again, lead to better standards, both for us humans, and the wildlife, this, is called a upwards spiral, our current situation, is a downwards spiral, it is possible to break out of the downwards spiral, by decreasing our population, and it is obviously also possible to break out of the upwards spiral, by increasing population
now, tell me, what ways are there to decrease our population ?
let's list them :
1.decrease amount of births*less pregnancies*
2.death
and yes, before you say i am a hypocrite, i do not intend on producing any offspring
we're all fucked if intelligence is hereditary either way, seeing as the stupid do what they do best, breed and ignore any possible source of information
the smart members of society will produce less children or kill themselves
while the ignorant horde, will simply breed as long as it can, and wallow in luxury, until it all ends. _________________ Micro TS
Portable, no campaign, movies or music, just the engine and needed resources for skirmish and lan. QUICK_EDIT
This thread's turned more into a debate than a political orientation chart showcase, but here's mine.
Clicky!
I have no personal problems with abortion. Call me immoral, heartless, cruel, or whatever, but that's my stand. I agree with Judeau on the subject of killing; it's not always a bad thing. That's not to say it should be allowed on a domestic level. I wonder how people can be against abortion, but support the war in Iraq; according to their way of thinking, abortion is killing something, and in war, people have a tendency to die. Perhaps they somehow believe that nationalism is a bad thing; because if you think about it, all the "insurgents" are trying to do is protect their way of life and country. So how is the average, church-going, white religious conservative supporting the war in Iraq, any different from the Iraqi insurgent shooting at badly armoured humvees? _________________ QUICK_EDIT
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
