Wiki:
Page name: Fair Abortion Discussions [Exported view] [RSS]
2008-12-13 16:33:14
Last author: Fizban
Owner: Dil*
# of watchers: 12
Fans: 0
D20: 11
Bookmark and Share

Fair Abortion Discussions


Owner: [Dil*]

Hi all, I'll be as blunt/honest as possible with you all. This page is made in direct retaliation to the censorship on the page abortion discussions. I became so disgusted with the slanted view blatantly endorsed on the page, so I made a new one. Come one, come all. I am a very fair moderator and I will not delete your comments unless your comments are just personal insults and attacks.




Pro-choicers
1.[Dil*] - Owner (dilandau's wrath)
2.[Cliché] - Incredibly pro-choice.
3.[tuff ghost] - As pro choice as she is pro gay marriage. -encites riots among the prolifers beneath us-
4.[ceridwen] - Pro choice, but hopes that women will choose life.
5.[Expensive Fidelity] - I was born at 24 weeks old. Need I say more.
6.[Fizban] - I don't personally believe in Abortion. But I dont really know many people who jump for joy at the idea, especially when applied to them. But, I believe the right to choose is far more important than the possible amount of rights of a fetus.

Pro-lifers

2.[M_Sinner] - Not for the banning of abortion, but hopes that one would make a decision based on more than selfishness.

Undecided



>why pro-choice is better

Username (or number or email):

Password:

2006-08-13 [Jewl]: Opinion? or Opinoun?

2006-08-13 [Dil*]: he means opinion, that much should be apparent.

2006-08-13 [Fizban]: HAHAHAHA lols...I was staring at him, staring at my inatentive spelling...lols. Whoops...*fixes*

2006-08-26 [Franc28]: "if you can consensus and agreement that the majority doesnt agree with killing you can create the law forcing a moral judgement on all citizens and thus, enforce it."

In a democratic system, sure. But that is a question of policy, not of actual moral knowledge. If you equate the laws with morality, then you end up with all sorts of thorny paradoxes, such as the fact that civil disobedience suddently becomes the ultimate evil, something which basically NO ONE agrees with (and in fact we usually consider people like Gandhi or Schindler to be very moral people, not ultimate evil).

Another major problem with this moral framework is this: if the laws determine morality, then how do we figure out which laws are good and which laws are bad? How do we figure out which laws to pass in the first place? You end up with a circularity: the laws are good simply by virtue of being laws. This is a wholly arbitrary standard.

2006-12-24 [sophomoric]: [ceridwen]: Nothing being absolute is an absolute =P

2006-12-25 [Dil*]: haha, I love telling people that :) Soph beat me to it.

2006-12-25 [Jewl]: but... wouldn't that mean that there WAS something absolute, thus saying that nothing is absolute wouldn't BE absolute?

2006-12-25 [Dil*]: He just said that. It's a self-contradictory sentence, so there can be some absolutes.

"There are no absolutes, therefore this sentence must not be absolute." - negating itself.

2006-12-25 [ceridwen]: Heh... well I aso said there probably is an absolute thruth, we're just not aware of it.

And... scratch relative morality. It's subjective. relative is too vague, and produces anarchy and nihilism. Subjective is much more fitting.

2006-12-25 [Dil*]: I totally disagree with cultural relativism, and 'moral relativism' (which is the same thing).

I'm a subjectivist, and I discard the 'collectivist' morality of CR.

2006-12-25 [ceridwen]: Cultural relativism is all right to a certian extent. In fact, I think subjective morality takes a bit of CR... culture helps shape ones idea, which then affects morals.

2006-12-26 [Dil*]: If you take it as a general description of the 'majority' morality, then it's fine, but people can't use that to justify their own morality, again, it describes what 'is', at best, but not what 'ought to be'.

2006-12-26 [Fizban]: Cultural relativism can kiss my ass :). I think it's one of the worst, so much crap is guilded onto morals by culture.

2006-12-27 [Dil*]: yes, I may make a page bent on destroying CR for good because it pisses me off so badly. I can only make pages on rage energy. Is this bad?

2006-12-27 [Fizban]: LOL@!!

well, its good for the idea that rage and anger, although negative emotions, can be used in creation :)...

although, good or bad creations are all dependent on what that motivation brings forth.

2006-12-28 [Dil*]: it's true. It's terrible...

write atheology when I'm pissed, write poetry when I'm depressed, draw when I'm happy, read when I'm neutral.

2006-12-28 [Fizban]: loyls...so funny. You have emotions and activities applied to all of them.


Does that mean they have ties to one another?

Such as your being angry has something to do with, non-atheists? :O

2006-12-28 [ceridwen]: Dil... angry with theists? Nevah!
xP

2006-12-28 [Dil*]: yes, theists piss me off.

2008-08-19 [Silverline's Escape]: i believe that it is a womans right to get an bortion if she wants one, but i would never get an abortion myself because my grandmother very strongly wanted my mother to get an abortion when she was pregnant with me.

2008-12-13 [Fizban]: Your pro-choice who personally chooses Life. Works for me.

Number of comments: 134
Older comments: (Last 200) 6 5 4 3 2 1 .0.

Show these comments on your site

Elftown - Wiki, forums, community and friendship. Sister-site to Elfwood