Oddbean new post about login | logout It's funny how many gov-fighting bitcoiners are against woman, and not government, deciding what to do with their own body. It's almost as if they don't actually believe in freedom.
woman can keep her legs closed rape is a different story abortion can end a woman's ability to have children ever, if she ever wakes up to herself, then what... it's not just a tattoo
Man can also keep their dicks in their pants.
this is why a secular society that has no sacred value on the creation of life decays stupid people breed too much smart people don't breed overall this results in use of abortions and contraceptives that disrupt women's fertility and then you get a baby bust and then the migrants invade and then the crime rate goes through the roof and everything gets burned down and the survivers start again it's literaly happened hundreds of times in history... the symbol of the heart ❤️ is actually based on the shape of a leaf of a plant that causes abortions in the first week, and was very popular in the late days of rome, they had it also russia, in between the tsars falling down and communists rising, you can read it in Dostoevsky's masterpiece Crime and Punishment that there was "free love" cults running rampant in St Petersberg in the late 19th century, and very likely plenty of abortions going on as well really it's all symptoms of a society that has lost a sense of the value of life
note13yvrl0qcv4h6auum98j59v2d38gmweh0gsk54890tnkeds5g3chqkyzla7
I notice that you also didn't use the word abortion in this argument Why can't we just have precision when we discuss these matters? Thats more what I'm trying to get at here I don't think they are "against women" I think they are against aborting babies?
I can use abortion just fine. I am happy with any abortion as long as the woman has the freedom to choose it.
Happy is too strong. But Ok with it.
Yes I think it's much more honest if we discuss it like this instead of saying "reproductive health" or "against women" - it's a precise thing we are discussing, not a category of health or gender. This is my point, that we try to use Word games to avoid just having a clear discussion about it, more just trying to demonize each other. It just muddies the waters
It's because for men, it's only about the abortion itself. For woman, it's so much more. The abortion tiself is just a very small and quick component to the entire process.
The person inside the womb has a seperate body from the mother.
This is no person until much, much later. And if the woman is contemplating an abortion much later in the process, I can guarantee you she wanted to have the child and is only doing it against her will (health purposes). Later stage abortion is a huge punishment on itself to any woman. There is no need to create laws to double down in the punishment side.
If we can't agree on when life begins this debate will never be settled. No point arguing. I believe this is the root.
Correct. And we will never agree. So, let the woman just choose it whatever works better for her. The later the abortion, the worse for her anyway.
Another solution is to have some places that allow, some places that don't, and allow people to freely self select the jurisdiction that aligns with their values, that way people don't have to compromise
except it is not so simple to change where you live.
Definitely not simple, and this is not a simple problem we've been grappling with for so long, I don't know the answers Just thankful for nostr that we can attempt to have a free and open discussion about it, hopefully from the starting place that we are on the same team and not horrible people for having different opinions
If we can't decide on when life begins, let her kill her child after birth, as well, if it is better for her? Why not as a toddler, if it is a burden? It's not a fully-formed human, the same argument applies. Why not default to protecting life as a default instead of murder? Why not spend resources to help the mother with pregnancy and taking care of the child or adoption? If there are alternatives to killing innocent life, why not pursue them instead?
Why not default to protecting life instead of murder? Why not spend resources to help the mother with pregnancy and taking care of the child or adoption? You can. You just can't force the mother to carry on something on HER BODY that she doesn't want to. But feel free to develop mechanisms that the fetus can develop outside the mother.
Happy with killing a child? Happy with your wife killing your son against your will? Happy with ripping a baby up in the womb? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eR1Ut4BPbOw
You are missing that there are two humans involved.
Yep this is the root for sure, will never settle.
Life begins at conception.
I don't need word salads to explain my position or justify it. nostr:nevent1qqsp28klzsxc7r8aglz9cfc3sf3wkt7hl4rhd668s6za2w8m097jggcpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgspdudqzqx5ellme3prp68qus5se3vynsddcexkv5la5p7qxxcswjcrqsqqqqqptr5gg8
https://image.nostr.build/469e796574564521cae2ed9daff2db08005791a087197a1c928ee444d4ba7974.gif
Well... That statement is just scientific fact. So... https://media.tenor.com/ezHTpJeCQi8AAAAM/wrong-i-think-you-should-leave-with-tim-robinson.gif
If life is defined with metabolism, sure. Many organisms have metabolism, across the kingdoms. So then is it consciousness? Lots of organisms are conscious. What sets apart human life? Meaning? Potential? Experience?
Do I really have to explain how humans are intrinsically different from all other animals?
Dude yes please do cause we aren't. You're a fuckin animal dude
Not sure how to argue with someone that doesn't see a difference between you and a fish. This is the best they got. nostr:nevent1qqsxq0z0ecyckfqfr67fue87px7yg8t5f2x6349a9fsz30tfq3enncspz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsygq835ynsm3m9mg2ehn563zp279h0j93qyywcjrr6na96yhvtyn93vpsgqqqqqqshvgwd8
He's clearly spastic.
That's literally racism toward animals. Allow me to illustrate the fallacy: A pen and a pencil are both writing instruments. This is like you saying a pencil is intrinsically and fundamentally different from a pen, and them saying no it's not, it's a fucking writing instrument. Leave alone the fact of pencil lead vs ink, the different mechanics, the more permanent and permeating nature of ink, etc. He's saying a pen is literally identical to a pencil in every relevant way imaginable.
My argument was on the topic of when life begins, not every comparison between various lifeforms. Does life begin at a different point for the less-special fish that it does for a human?
Yeah, I saw the context after I replied. The post didn't have the full context right in front of my face and I'm lazy. Yet still, I don't think that that is relevant to the discussion either. The fish's metaphysical existence is not being examined at all here, is it? Perhaps I am still missing the context. Anyway, your choice of definitions and frameworks is irrelevant, as with most people on the abortion debate. My position as regards the proper laws on abortion is agnostic on when a human life begins and when we need to protect it from harm. A person's right to theor own body and capability to make their own judgements is all but inviolable. The mother is in the best position to make decisions regarding her body and her child. Ergo, pro choice. Simple. Everything else is noise, including your arguments. You are never going to convince someone who holds fetus life sacred to change theor mind on that one thing. I happen to hokd it sacred too. I am pro choice for the simple reason that arbitrary laws do more harm in this area than they help 99.99% of the time.
You are so much more eloquent than I am. Yes my own position aligns with yours on the irrelevance of that particular point of initiation of life. If I'm honest I guess I never intended to, or believed I could, change the opinion of the one I argued with. I was immature argumenting calling him an animal just as he brought in fish to make my point more absurd
Thank you! We all act immature plenty of times, not least of all me. I can be terrible. I occasionally have moments of insight though and am sometimes able to articulate it to point things out to my fellow rational animals, in the form of ideas, criticisms, answers, questions, etc. I appreciate when they do so for me, so I try to spread a little constructive criticism myself. You're golden. Keep on keeping on. I've said WAYYY more rude stuff than your minor little thing. I'm no better than you lol! Or perhaps more accurately, I'm better than you and worse than you at the same time. We just all notice things at different times and from different perspectives, and that's what communication is for.
He's right. I do believe Humans are superior to any other animal. I'm also of the opinions that you'd be an idiot to believe otherwise. nostr:nevent1qqsgnj6j3kg2lvymkjvvgeqx2e5wh8vpq8q9229cda8rd7y7552cctcpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43z7q3q8hdy2qy2qwga0ye7rtnucwuyf07erjfdmm7s74wwdt7sy4mk7tdsxpqqqqqqzgvavea
Humans are not animals because we have imagination, logic, science, written language etc. Arguing about what a “human” is, debating the proper course of action, having power over the natural world- these are what makes us Human. It is what the Bible is referring to when it teaches us that we are created in the image of God, to be Stewards of the Earth.
I prefer to say we are rational animals capable of logic, long term goal orientation, and advanced creativity. Still animals technically, but very much in our own league of animals. This nomenclature is much more consistent.
Still doesn’t explain why we have the right to property on earth and animals don’t.
We should give all the livestock lightning wallets
@LightningGoats ✅
lol yessss
Awesome note lmao nostr:nevent1qqsv5a09hps4z0hkrqnunuw8km54dl4zj3muex5nvgf50mvnw6tcz2qppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qgsfp6eqxe8w5g7ryzm4q3mtxemjk56ghu5kp5xkh22pywd9wm9rz5qrqsqqqqqp5su2lt
Actually it does. Legitimate property is the stuff that we have the information necessary to control without hurting others. Animals are not able to manage much but their own bodies and nests and stuff. Humans can manage far more. We have the ability to reason at a much more advanced level. We need these things to survive, and we have the ability to use them and to do so without hurting others for it. We have dominion over other life forms generally speaking, because we are, well, just able to. We're designed that way. We are tapped into logic, the logos of this universe, and are therefore endowed with the ability to be stewards of it.
Sure even that is fair enough. We're all flesh but we aren't mere beasts. Man is destined for greater, that's cool. But then what part is the part that isn't ok to snuff out? Cause if flesh-life starts at conception, and continues to death, that's the case for all of the creatures. I can kill and eat a beast. Should not torture the beast or cause undue suffering... Is aborting a calf as heinous as aborting a human?
Completely agree.
Abortion is just a form of euthenasia. Kill your offspring. Kill your grandma. Kill yourself. Culture of Death.
note13yvrl0qcv4h6auum98j59v2d38gmweh0gsk54890tnkeds5g3chqkyzla7
note13yvrl0qcv4h6auum98j59v2d38gmweh0gsk54890tnkeds5g3chqkyzla7
This, exactly this. Guns, abortion and immigration are all great triggers to get the closet statists to out themselves. This is why they are always top of the debates, great for manufacturing consent for more government power. They get the most population to line up and beg for a boot to lick.
This is inconsistent. Killing another human is not deciding what to do with your own body. Drawing some arbitrary line of personhood is barbaric. It is a human being in it's natural phase of development, at any stage.
note13yvrl0qcv4h6auum98j59v2d38gmweh0gsk54890tnkeds5g3chqkyzla7
