Forum Index            

SelectSmart.com®
Before you decide
Over 20,000 selectors

Share

This isn't complicated. 2020 is a referendum on Trump.

The job of the Biden campaign is simple, and Trump is helping.
Is your name welcomed below? Then you can post here. Otherwise, click "Log In" to post!
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 03, 2014 06:55AM
I find it interesting that everytime Tuk gets flustered he pulls out his wingnuts. His redneck and the gay comments are "sarcasm" just like his "liberal" slander in every other post... He's not really a righwing blowhard moralist trying to tell people how to live their lives. He believes in a woman's right to choose - really, he does... he just can't think of a single instance where it would be okay to actually utilize that right... eye rolling smiley

By the way, if we are using the Golden Rule as our moral guideline - then we must ask the mother if she would be okay suffering from Down's Syndrome herself. Since she has already expressed the opinion that she might opt for abortion if her unborn were DS - I think we already have the answer.
Sam
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 03, 2014 07:22AM
No need to throw a fit. We're just talking. I'm not obsessed enough with Dawkins to read everything he says. I did read his daunting book The Ancestor's Tale and thought it brilliant. As for his personal opinions I don't really care but I will give him the benefit of the doubt that his views are aligned with evolutionary science which as a whole makes sense to me as the foundation upon which morality should be built. Survival of the fittest, seek pleasure, avoid pain.

Where does logic enter into your view? Does your golden rule apply to fetuses, all fetuses? What if it was severely deformed or had nothing but a brain stem in its head? A fetus with two heads or only one eye in the middle?

Since I assume you would not want anyone ending your life should I also assume there is no example of a fetus which you would think abortion was the moral or best choice? If you are against all abortion scenarios then your argument against Dawkins opinion that it would be immoral not to abort DS fetuses (if that is in fact what he thinks) is just fluff. Just say you are against all abortions and be done with it. Maybe you just have a personal problem with Dawkins and don't like anything he says and this is just an opportunity for you to rant about him? Maybe you got butt hurt because you have a Down's kid of your own and can't even imagine not having him/her to love and love you back? Emotion is too subjective to base morality upon, imo.

There could be a very good reason to abort a DS fetus: because the mother (and/or father) doesn't want to have or raise it. If only people were lining up to adopt disabled kids (or abled ones for that matter) then abortion would probably not even be an issue. But they're not. Try to be realistic. Maybe you and your wife could contact your local DHS and find some kids that are suffering to help out with a loving family? Until then your anti-abortion rant is all bark and no bite. If you are not going to walk the walk, don't talk the talk.
Sam
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 03, 2014 07:30AM
Good Night, tuk. Don't know when I'll be back around (going camping tomorrow if the weather is good) but I do wish you the best even if we rarely if ever agree on anything. It was nice chatting with you. Take care...
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 03, 2014 04:38PM
Back in the early 90's when I was with my first wife, she was taking some pretty hardcore medications for various afflictions she had. For a few months she had been taking this one particular one, I can't recall what it was, that all of a sudden made the news about being pretty conclusively tied to horrific birth defects. Thalidomide-type stuff. As luck would have it (ours anyways), even though we had been using birth control, she became pregnant. Though it was emotion-wrenching, it was not even a choice for her. She wanted an abortion from the moment she found she was pregnant. I don't think I could have talked her out of it, although I didn't try to very hard. Yes, I was involved and my opinion mattered, but I saw it as her decision. We had discussed having children but neither of us was ever very driven to do it. We were having a lot of financial problems and never saw our way clear to bringing a baby into the situation. But her being on that medicine sealed the deal. It was the only time that she ever got pregnant. It was the closest I have ever been to having offspring. But it was her decision and she flat-out did not want to carry that baby to term. I can't imagine living in a system where being able to make such a decision was not allowed.

Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 03, 2014 06:53PM
I can. With the Supreme Clowns currently occupying the highest court in the land and the ludicrous, wholly unfounded decisions they've made already? Scalia overturning his OWN previous decisions when it's politically expedient? I'm expecting Roe to be overturned as soon as someone gets some fraudulent case that far up the chain of command. Or - as in the case of Citizen's United - some case that has nothing at all to do with abortion. The idiots on the right who have no business in a court room, much less on a court bench will decide to overturn simply because they can.
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 04, 2014 04:37AM
I will give him the benefit of the doubt that his views are aligned with evolutionary science which as a whole makes sense to me as the foundation upon which morality should be built. Survival of the fittest, seek pleasure, avoid pain.

IOW might makes right, and I have used that phrase in the past to demonstrate a lack of morality. Both pleasure and pain, not counting physical pain, is subjective. Do you even care about a rational ethical system?

[www.selectsmart.com]

It's serious business, guys. It's important to discuss right and wrong, what one ought to do... Yeah, you can have that careless 'nobody tells me what to do' attitude if you desire so but IMO you are not contributing to the greater good of society. Just think of the importance of of civility, of respectful disagreement in a face-to-face public setting...

If you want a material explanation for morality, assume a naturalistic foundation for the golden rule. Evolution has no moral compass or goal. Yeah, there might be some teleology to our world but that isn't science. Morality just isn't scientific...

Where does logic enter into your view? Does your golden rule apply to fetuses, all fetuses?

No, only persons...

Since I assume you would not want anyone ending your life should I also assume there is no example of a fetus which you would think abortion was the moral or best choice?

I believe if we knew that a newborn would be in constant pain and suffering it's our moral duty to abort as it is our moral duty to euthanize in similar circumstances as well. That's is basically what hospice care is... There is no choice for the fetus so it's a different matter, but to knowingly allow a baby to suffer just seems cruel. OTOH, having a DS baby doesn't imply a life of pain and suffering. Most of the time it's the opposite. DS people are some of the most caring loving people on the planet. If any of you have actually spent time with someone with DS you would know this...

There could be a very good reason to abort a DS fetus: because the mother (and/or father) doesn't want to have or raise it. If only people were lining up to adopt disabled kids (or abled ones for that matter) then abortion would probably not even be an issue.

I said this... If the state cared for people with DS the abortion rate would plummet...

Until then your anti-abortion rant is all bark and no bite

You mean my disgust at Dawkins? It's completely justified. How is it that a women who chooses to have a DS baby is committing an immoral act?
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 04, 2014 04:20PM
I think that morality can be a natural result of sufficient intelligence. I don't think it needs a metaphysical constituent or beliefs to imbue it into humanity. Conversely, I think the same can be said of evil. We don't need invisible beings, gods and devils, or belief in them to be responsible for or the driving forces for the good and bad of humanity.

Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 04, 2014 04:44PM
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 04, 2014 05:48PM
There seems to me that there exists some material cause for our desire to be treated in a certain way... Morality is a logical extension of that desire... The sense that we ought to treat others as we desire to be treated...

There also seems to be universal moral rules. Not universal as in necessary; they must exist in all possible worlds... Universal meaning existing within all humanity. But there is exceptions like psychopath's and people with similar brain disorders... It's just that they seem to exist in all people with good mental health. Eg unnecessary suffering is wrong. The unnecessary destruction of value is wrong...
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 05, 2014 07:39AM
Psycopaths, people with brain disorders and Republicans. All of them unnecessarily destroy value. The only one morally wrong however is the Republican who does it as a matter of policy - the psycopaths and the people with brain disorders have a legitimate excuse. I think we can all agree that the last person who has room to lecture on morality is the voter who pulls the R lever every... single... time... Not that I'm pointing the finger at anyone in particular. eye rolling smiley
Sam
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 05, 2014 07:46AM
Right and wrong are always relative and so not universal at all. Unnecessary suffering is wrong? What is un/necessary suffering? Regardless, it's still relative. A hunger strike for an important cause, for example. To him, suffering is the right thing to do. Some people set themselves on fire for a cause they believe is right. Euthanasia is illegal ffs. What is the unnecessary destruction of value? There is no moral code that did not come from some human's brain and then mouth to ear. Someone gets an idea and gets people on board. Are you suggesting there must be some supernatural force that imbues us all with morals while we sleep, sprinkled over our eyes like fairy dust? Every value, every code, every idea of right and wrong came/come from people just like you and me. Nothing special, nothing miraculous, nothing out there.
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 05, 2014 07:56AM
That's exactly what he's suggesting. Tuk's usual game - try to bring god to people without actually mentioning the word god. Like his "pro-choice" stance that doesn't involve any actual abortions. Morality is based on self preservation - there is nothing magical about it. Eons ago, we (humans) figured out we get ahead faster and easier if we don't have to spend most the time looking over our shoulders to see if one of our fellow homo sapiens is trying to club us for our cash or the turkey leg we're chewing on. The golden rule is common sense - not an edict from a magic man living on a cloud.

Some things are very simple - some people make it hard.
Sam
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 05, 2014 06:14PM
Agree. That said, I think tuk considers himself agnostic just like you do so it seems you are on the same page where gods are concerned but differ in your politics.
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 05, 2014 08:05PM
Right and wrong are always relative and so not universal at all.

So I'm in my own right to slap you in the face for being such a stupid bitch? That wouldn't offend you? What if I spit on you after that fierce backhand?

Unnecessary suffering is wrong? What is un/necessary suffering?

Seriously? You can't think of any situation where a person suffers needlessly?

A hunger strike for an important cause, for example. To him, suffering is the right thing to do.

No, I don't not believe martyrdom is necessarily a good or bad thing... There are many better ways to promote a philosophy or cause...

What is the unnecessary destruction of value?

Think, I'm positive you can give us an example...

Are you suggesting there must be some supernatural force that imbues us all with morals while we sleep, sprinkled over our eyes like fairy dust?

There could be a rational foundation for morality... yes...
Sam
Re: Dawkins says it's immoral not to abort DS babies...
September 05, 2014 08:49PM
None of that made any sense and as usual around here with the name calling...closet woman beater...outie
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login



Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!