Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [Dapper Dan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
And to summarize to be clear, as an atheist:

1 - pain and anguish of loved ones

Even if I don't care about killing Bob 'cause Bob won't know the difference, his loved ones will. As an empathic person (an emotion that is beyond my control) I don't wish to hurt Bob's loved ones.

2 - empathy toward the fear of dying.

Even though Bob won't know the difference once he's dead, I feel empathy toward Bob knowing that he will die.

3 - emotional guilt that comes with the killing of another human.

Maybe I shouldn't care, but again, empathy is an emotion I have little control over.

4 - The social contract.

I don't want to die, so I agree not to kill you and you agree not to kill me.

5 - Religion

Does not apply.




To your point, "If you aren't religious then shouldn't you [fill in the blank]." As outlined above, nonreligious people don't generally go on self serving killing sprees. The fact that a religious person would think that the only reason not to kill is because they were ordered to do so by a god that they have no evidence even exists I find to be downright terrifying.

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [BarryP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
The fact that a religious person would think that the only reason not to kill is because they were ordered to do so by a god that they have no evidence even exists I find to be downright terrifying.

Fortunately for you, hardly any religious people hold that opinion. So you can stop feeling so terrified of the horrible religious people all around you.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [BarryP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BarryP wrote:
The fact that a religious person would think that the only reason not to kill is because they were ordered to do so by a god that they have no evidence even exists I find to be downright terrifying.

You should take up the cross then to relieve the terror
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [BarryP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BarryP wrote:
Quote:
If you are not religious then 3 shouldn't really apply either...another human is no different that a stalk of corn, or even a rock...it's just an assembly of elements and of no worth in and of itself if nobody loves it or benefits from it.


If that's the only reason that you don't kill people, then please, for the sake of humanity, stay religious.

If you really need religion to get you to be nice to people and not kill them, then you are in fact a piece of crap.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [BarryP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I wasn’t referring to any religious person. I was talking about Dan.

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [BarryP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
I wasn’t referring to any religious person. I was talking about Dan.

For clarity, I think you mean me here, not "the" Dan (slowman).

I'm just trying to understand the atheist logic here, especially pro-life atheists, not for the sake of anything but honest intellectual curiosity. I'm relaying to you what I think an atheist should believe so that you can correct my misconceptions. You seem to be saying "For the sake of humanity, I hope you don't do something for the sake of humanity". The reasoning doesn't seem at all grounded.

You said "If that's the only reason that you don't kill people, then please, for the sake of humanity, stay religious". You are generalizing here because my point was that it would be logical to kill people that are an absolute drain on society. This could include unwanted infant "people" among others - to keep this on topic. You say that you wouldn't do that out of "empathy", but atheists generally attribute emotions like empathy to a simple evolutionary adaptation, so it a pretty weak reason to defy a logical benefit to society. You say you cannot control it, but I suggest that you can and do all the time. You may feel empathy for the animal you are about to slaughter but logically you know that you must in order to eat. You may feel empathy for the families trying to come into this country but logically you know we have to set limitations. You feel empathy for the pet being put down.

Duffy and others seem to have the position that abortion, at least at some point, is killing a person, and that that is okay. But then Duffy says "If you really need religion to get you to be nice to people and not kill them, then you are in fact a piece of crap." You could reduce that to "if you think it is okay to kill people, you are (deplorable)". It's logically inconsistent with his position on abortion unless he believes himself to be deplorable. Although I'm quite sure that the point he wanted to make was just that he doesn't like religious people...an opinion often repeated.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [Dapper Dan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dapper Dan wrote:
If you are not religious then 3 shouldn't really apply either...another human is no different that a stalk of corn, or even a rock...


I'm questioning the honesty of your self-stated seeking to understand the non-religious viewpoint when you assign beliefs like that to non-religious people. But if you're really being honest, as a non-religious person, other humans have enormous value to me. You mean to be conflating non-religiousness with some kind of extreme sociopathy.

Though I also don't think we should pretend that religious people are all on the same page. Far from it. Religious people of all religions run the gamut from full-on pro-choice, and on down through the full range of compromise positions until you get to birth control. And even before birth control on the extreme end. Including Catholics.


Quote:
The "right to life" should only apply to those able to make the laws, as a social contract of self-interest and self-preservation.


I don't understand this at all. Maybe I'm missing some context for something from further up in the thread?
Last edited by: trail: May 19, 19 15:10
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My understanding is the religious position has more to do with the assignment of a soul not the scientific definition of the process. If a soul enters the equation at conception then abortions are murdering a child whose soul then enters heaven and the would-be mother and doctor have committed murder.

When one intermixes the religious belief with the biological science then with the law it gets very complex. Taking an anti-abortion stance (to religious folks) is no different than pulling a 2 yr old off the railroad tracks when a train is coming. God brought all the factors together to create a baby with a soul and it requires protection. Something like that.

It’s an emotional connection to a human being in the creation process.

This is how the religious folks I know explain it to me and I haven’t seen any discussion in this thread related to this position. I understand their position and I understand the raw science of the process. But it can become challenging for many people.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [Dapper Dan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well, if you are truly interested in how an atheist thinks, all I can say is throw out all of the assumptions you just wrote and got back to the 4 points I listed.

Or if I can make this very simple, I don't kill Bob because I don't want to kill Bob. Any justification for killing him would have to outweigh my wants to not kill him, like being a threat to the safety of humanity (Hitler, for example). Simply being a drain isn't enough.

Let me ask you this, can you name a person that you would have killed if you didn't think God would disapprove?

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [JD21] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JD21 wrote:
But it can become challenging for many people.

The whole thing is challenging. It's the confluence of so many issues: religion, science, healthcare, government, law, women's rights. Each one is a handful, and when you throw them all together it's a hell storm.

I like to think I understand the core "pro-life" belief. It's pretty simple: "It's state-sanctioned murder"

Maybe I like to oversimplify things, but in my view the core "pro choice" viewpoint is equally simple: "It's not state-sanctioned murder. So butt out of my life and my healthcare decisions."

I tend to think that the Roe "20 weeks" is a reasonable #. But I understand how some might not accept that.

It is somewhat of a zero-sum game, though. I don't see much room for compromise. I'm firmly "pro choice." But I generally don't ascribe badness on the "pro-life" crowd. They're generally good people, trying to do what they think is the right thing. I get annoyed when I don't get the same courtesy from pro-lifers - hence I don't like vaguely intellectual rhetoric which with the clear intended subtext: "You're a baby-killing sociopathic fuck." :)
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yeah - get far enough on either side and it gets tiresome. My hope beyond hope was that Roe is accepted as settled law and we as a society move on to other issues we face. I suppose I can still hope SCOTUS affirm Roe and these states stop but I’m sure that’s a naive/idealistic position to take.

I only added to the thread because the concept of a ‘soul’ wasn’t inserted previously.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [JD21] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JD21 wrote:
Yeah - get far enough on either side and it gets tiresome. My hope beyond hope was that Roe is accepted as settled law and we as a society move on to other issues we face. I suppose I can still hope SCOTUS affirm Roe and these states stop but I’m sure that’s a naive/idealistic position to take.

I only added to the thread because the concept of a ‘soul’ wasn’t inserted previously.

Roe is a shitty decision. You should hope for a new coherent decision that affirms a right to abortion if that is your position.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [Dapper Dan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Duffy and others seem to have the position that abortion, at least at some point, is killing a person, and that that is okay.

That’s not my position.

Here we go, one more time.

IMHO abortion is taking “a life”. I am not willing to try to determine what that life actually is. At some point it becomes a person and I don’t know what that point is and it doesn’t matter to me.

Quote:
But then Duffy says "If you really need religion to get you to be nice to people and not kill them, then you are in fact a piece of crap." You could reduce that to "if you think it is okay to kill people, you are (deplorable)". It's logically inconsistent with his position on abortion unless he believes himself to be deplorable.

You’re missing an important distinction here. I have said that abortion is awful and it would be great if we lived in a world that never did them.

But abortion should remain legal. I personally would do whatever I could to stop someone in my family from getting one. If Mrs. Duffy got pregnant (not possible but play along) we never do that except to save her life.

If my son knocked up a teenage girl, if she was willing to give birth but didn’t want to be a mother we would take care of it.

Also, religion generally says you shouldn’t murder people. There’s plenty of killing that religious people are perfectly fine with.

You may think of abortion as murder, I may think of it as one of the many types of killing that we as a society tolerate.

That’s where the real disagreement lies in this. Unfortunately the debate is rarely, if ever, framed that way.

Most people aren’t as blasĂ© about “killing babies” as I am. Most people value human life more than I do and I suspect that the pro-choice defensiveness in this thread demonstrates that deep down they do know abortion ends a life but they just can’t admit it.

Read this....

https://www.philosophy.rutgers.edu/...iles/Infanticide.pdf

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Roe is a shitty decision. You should hope for a new coherent decision that affirms a right to abortion if that is your position.

And, what would that look like, and how would that make more sense? Roe is certainly a better attempt at policy than this Alabama law. It at least acknowledges two competing imperatives. Overturning Roe will almost assuredly result in a worse political outcome for many people, for most states and for the nation as a whole. I could certainly see Roe being affirmed, with an earlier limit on the abortion window, due to better sex education, technology to detect pregnancies, and an easier, earlier and more effective option for performing abortions. A revised and re-affirmed Roe would satisfy a super-majority on this issue, and really marginalize the extremes on both ends of this issue.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
oldandslow wrote:
Quote:
Roe is a shitty decision. You should hope for a new coherent decision that affirms a right to abortion if that is your position.

And, what would that look like, and how would that make more sense? Roe is certainly a better attempt at policy than this Alabama law. It at least acknowledges two competing imperatives. Overturning Roe will almost assuredly result in a worse political outcome for many people, for most states and for the nation as a whole. I could certainly see Roe being affirmed, with an earlier limit on the abortion window, due to better sex education, technology to detect pregnancies, and an easier, earlier and more effective option for performing abortions. A revised and re-affirmed Roe would satisfy a super-majority on this issue, and really marginalize the extremes on both ends of this issue.

They made up a constitutional right out of thin air. Make it commerce clause for all I care
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You didn't answer the question, what is your version of a coherent decision that affirms a right to abortion? It is what you hoped for. Second time asking....
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
oldandslow wrote:
You didn't answer the question, what is your version of a coherent decision that affirms a right to abortion? It is what you hoped for. Second time asking....

Something that doesn't create a right out of thin air. If it can't be done then the constitution would need to be changed
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Disagree on the guns and the smaller federal gov't points, but I am with you on the rest of'em.

Next races on the schedule: none at the moment
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So, you don't actually have one.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
oldandslow wrote:
So, you don't actually have one.

No. I think it should be left to each state unless enshrined in the Constitution.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:

No. I think it should be left to each state unless enshrined in the Constitution.


So you explicitly oppose a federal law passed by Congress which would apply to all states? It seems that wildly divergent laws at the state level have historically increased regional animosity, and led to far worse problems (see Civil War, or segregation battles). You seem to be advocating for worsening poitical turmoil.
Last edited by: oldandslow: May 19, 19 20:23
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
oldandslow wrote:
Quote:

No. I think it should be left to each state unless enshrined in the Constitution.


So you explicitly oppose a federal law passed by Congress which would apply to all states? It seems that wildly divergent laws at the state level have historically increased regional animosity, and led to far worse problems (see Civil War, or segregation battles). You seem to be advocating for worsening poitical turmoil.

No I oppose SCOTUS creating a right out of thin air. If a Federal law is passed it is the law of the land.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So, you want to reinstate anti-sodomy laws in individual states? There are an enormous set of rulings which enumerate rights not specifically granted by the Constitution, yet subject to interpretation by SCOTUS . Do you want to bring back Plessy v. Ferguson? How far do you take it? It is nowhere near as cut and dried as you think.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
oldandslow wrote:
So, you want to reinstate anti-sodomy laws in individual states? There are an enormous set of rulings which enumerate rights not specifically granted by the Constitution, yet subject to interpretation by SCOTUS . Do you want to bring back Plessy v. Ferguson? How far do you take it? It is nowhere near as cut and dried as you think.

Interesting take on my suggestion that something like the Civil Rights Act would be sufficient.
Quote Reply
Re: Alabama - derp! - bans abortion... [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Would the Civil Rights Act have even been possible without Brown v. Board of Education? Would gay rights have advanced without Lawrence v. Texas? Do you disagree with the Windsor decision (ending DOMA)?
Quote Reply

Prev Next