18 Oct 09
Originally posted by whodeyIf an 11 year old girl is raped and gets pregnant, are you for forcing her to carry the fetus to term - even considering all of the emotional and physical trama that would cause her?
You are the one who brought up the whole issue of utilitarianism, not me. Therefore, you tell me.
19 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperAgain, this is a nonsequitor. Its like saying, shouldn't a woman who was ubducted by aliens who implanted a fetus in a woman and it is a woman who hates children and was a sociopath and a child molestor and who vows to get a back alley abortion if she is not allowed to obtain one legally, shouldn't she have access to abortions legally?
If an 11 year old girl is raped and gets pregnant, are you for forcing her to carry the fetus to term - even considering all of the emotional and physical trama that would cause her?
The question is, is the unborn child human. Playing to emotions, no matter how horrible the circumstances, is a non sequitor. I don't mean to down play the emotions, but it is like appealing to your emotions about killing a baby that has been born to try and get the child killed.
19 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyIt is a bit more wrong because presumably a newborn baby is capable of experiencing more pain (I'm speculating here) and has a slightly more advanced consciousness, additionally people have bonded more to a newborn baby.
Why is a bit more wrong? So according to your logic, it is a bit more wrong to kill a 99 year old than it is a 20 year old?
So according to your logic, it is a bit more wrong to kill a 99 year old than it is a 20 year old?
No. Generally speaking, it's less wrong to kill a 99 year old.
19 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by KazetNagorraYou could argue the same about the 99 year old. For the most part, they are not as aware of their surrounding as the 20 year old nor do they experience the same amount of pain. Typically, the older you become the less overall sensation you have. In addition, when one reaches that ripe old age, they typically have less and less close relationships as those that were once close to them die or becomes more focused on familiies of their own. So how bout it? Is the 99 year old of less value?
It is a bit more wrong because presumably a newborn baby is capable of experiencing more pain (I'm speculating here) and has a slightly more advanced consciousness, additionally people have bonded more to a newborn baby.
[b]So according to your logic, it is a bit more wrong to kill a 99 year old than it is a 20 year old?
No. Generally speaking, it's less wrong to kill a 99 year old.[/b]
19 Oct 09
Originally posted by whodeyYes, as I said the 99 year old is of less value.
You could argue the same about the 99 year old. For the most part, they are not as aware of their surrounding as the 20 year old nor do they experience the same amount of pain. Typically, the older you become the less overall sensation you have. In addition, when one reaches that ripe old age, they typically have less and less close relationships as those ...[text shortened]... omes more focused on familiies of their own. So how bout it? Is the 99 year old of less value?
19 Oct 09
3 edits
Originally posted by whodeyUm... it's not like that at all. Unlike your scenario mine is actually possible, in fact, plausible, in fact, it actually HAPPENS.
Again, this is a nonsequitor. Its like saying, shouldn't a woman who was ubducted by aliens who implanted a fetus in a woman and it is a woman who hates children and was a sociopath and a child molestor and who vows to get a back alley abortion if she is not allowed to obtain one legally, shouldn't she have access to abortions legally?
The question is, is ing to your emotions about killing a baby that has been born to try and get the child killed.
But don't worry, I'm sure nobody noticed that you blatently dodged the question. So I'll just ask it again so people can watch you dodge it.
Nonsequitor question #1: Should she be FORCED to carry the baby to term?
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/vadodara/Minor-raped-by-friends-father-becomes-pregnant/articleshow/5110573.cms
Minor raped by friend's father, becomes pregnant
Nonsequitor question #2: Should she have been FORCED to carry the baby to term?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/south_east/8283606.stm
Three men have been convicted of raping a member of their own family as she grew up.
The three, who cannot be named to protect the victim, were the woman's stepfather, step-uncle and step-cousin.
Yeah, OK. My scenario compares to aliens from out of space. Now that I have effectively burned your argument to a crisp - in the cases I showed you do you support forcing them to carry the fetus to term?
FYI, I can post many more.
20 Oct 09
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI would say that the 99 year old is of far less value than the unborn child. At least the unborn child has the potential to be a future slave of the state in which they are born to serve the fatherland of their respective country. All the 99 year old does is such the life out of the states treasury as they just sit around waiting to die. Therefore, perhaps inttead of killing the unborn we should be killing the elderly?
Yes, as I said the 99 year old is of less value.
20 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyWhat about in the case of war? Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed many innocent people. The us invasion of Iraq did as well. If we acted under the principle that innocent life could never be taken for any reason we'd be unable to exercise modern warfare. Personally this whole issue is rife with grey areas and it seems no matter where one tries to draw a line a contradiction or at least an imposing philosophical dilemma arises.
I can't think of any.