Terri's Law overturning/checks and balances?

[Peter Ahlstrom]

I didn't quote the Bible. But if I had, that would be my prerogative. Evil does not exist if religion doesn't exist, and I was the one who brought up evil in the first place.

In your last post you basically just repeated stuff you said before, so I'll just repeat what I said before: We have to way to judge whether or not someone's life will be happy. Many very happy and successful people had horrible home lives. If we try to make that judgment, we're playing God, and we're woefully underqualified.

[stacer]

I say that to kill the child is not a punishment, but an act of mercy.

So basically, you're saying that, because I was born in an abusive family (which truly I was, but I won't get into the details), I would have been better off killed.

I take high exception to that. True, many children of abuse grow to repeat the cycle of abuse. But just as many of us recognize the evil in the previous generation's choices and *choose* to live a different life. Would you deny me that choice? I certainly wouldn't. I have a great life, and am extremely happy. I have gone through many rough times to get where I am, but I would not give up the experiences I've had--nor my family, imperfect as they are--simply because I went through a painful childhood and early adulthood.

As Ookla said, pain is a part of life. Many people see more of it than some. Some people carry hidden burdens that you may never guess they were carrying. A better way of dealing with pain, I think, would be to help carry those burdens.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

I thought we had decided not to discuss politics in depth on this board due to the fights it has caused...

[Archon]

But if I had, that would be my prerogative.

Yes that would be, but I was asking for a favor. You didnt directly quote, but you made a reference that I couldnt follow, so I would prefer if you wouldn't. I was not making a statement against religion.

Next, Stacer, I apologize. First of all I was not clear with my point. My point was not that people should go around killing people that they think would be better off dead. My point is that I do not think that we should take the choice to have an abortion out of the hands of parents who know that their child will not be treated with the care that any baby should. If the parents know that the child is going to end up abused or worse, they should have the option of not having the baby. That was my point. Second of all, I did not mean that people that had rough childhoods could not lead happy lives. I was saying that many do not, and I hope you will agree with me there.

[fuzzyoctopus]

I thought we had decided not to discuss politics in depth on this board due to the fights it has caused...

Hence the post earlier that maybe this is not a good place for this.

I am staying out of this, possibly in another solar system.

[Peter Ahlstrom]

I thought we had decided not to discuss politics in depth on this board due to the fights it has caused...

Well, I wasn't part of this agreement. So...is this a forum rule? No...um...politics? (What is the definition of politics you're using? I guess the initial thrust of the thread is politics, but I would not call abortion politics.)

Yes that would be, but I was asking for a favor. You didnt directly quote, but you made a reference that I couldnt follow, so I would prefer if you wouldn't.

Um, I don't understand what you're saying. I made a reference to something you couldn't follow? It doesn't matter. I wasn't relying on external reference to prove any point. Only the words I actually wrote in my post were what mattered. If you choose not to try to understand them for what they are, that's up to you.

Asking me to divorce what I say from my religious beliefs is asking something impossible. If I don't address something from the perspective of what I believe, where would I address it from? I have no patience for pointless debate for the sake of debate such as is practiced in high school debate clubs. If I say something it's going to be because it's what I believe (at least at the moment).

Anyway, in my post where I said people were evil, what I really should have said was that they were choosing something evil. I guess that's a meaningful distinction that should be made. People are not inherently evil or good. (What people inherently are are seekers after quick gratification.) It's choices that are evil or good, it's lifestyles that are evil or good, it's philosophies that are evil or good. So...I am sorry I said you were evil as well. I think your opinions on this one issue are severely misguided, but I am not in a position to judge you on any grander scale, and nor do I wish to or pretend to be.

I posted this thread as a rant. I'm not going to convince you to change your mind, and you're certainly not going to change mine.

[Archon]

That's exactly what Satan's plan was before the world was created, to save us from a life full of pain, strife, and hardship.

I don't know what you are talking about here. What was his plan exactly?

I am not asking you to separate religion from your arguments, in any way. You lost me there so I thought it would be easier if we avoided allusions to events that I am unaware of. If you want to that is fine, but please explain yourself more thoroughly.

   Not everyone is looking for a quick thrill. Many people plan for a better future for themselves, saving for their own, long term, well being. If a thrill has no consequences then not many will turn it down, but that is to be expected.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

THere is no rules against "politics." The rule was about the whole Iraq war thing, because it was making everyone very hard to get along with. If other subjects go that route, they'll be banned too. So far, I don't see that happening here.

Without going too deep into my position, Archon, your biggest problem is that you assume that abortion is the only way to prevent a child from being raised by parents who don't care for him/her, which is ridiculous. Adoption is a common and readily available means of making sure children are cared for by loving parents. While you may hear horror stories about kids who bounce from home to home, that is extremely rare. I actually had a friend in HS who was probably better adjusted than I am, and he lived in many foster homes. Statistically, those children who are not adopted are older children. Babies are typically adopted before they're even born.

Your argument about everyone dying doesn't make sense. It isn't appropriate to kill just anyone, right? You've already said that. So obviously the fact that everyone dies is not an argument that demonstrates the merciful nature of killing someone to prevent a painful life. Much better to give that person a choice about the life they want to lead.

[Archon]

So obviously the fact that everyone dies is not an argument that demonstrates the merciful nature of killing someone to prevent a painful life.

I said that everybody is going to die someday anyway. What I wanted Ookla to realize that death should not be something that everyone is afraid of even mentioning. Death is regarded with a sort of negative reverence, as being the very worst thing that could happen to someone. I dont think that it should be portrayed as the most terrible thing that could happen. If people see that there are things worse, then they would be more willing to consider the possibility of abortion being humane.

Archon, your biggest problem is that you assume that abortion is the only way to prevent a child from being raised by parents who don't care for him/her, which is ridiculous.

No. I believe that the parents should not be barred from the choice. If they are not ready to have a child, and do not want to have to carry the pregnancy through, and then give the infant up, I believe that they should be allowed to have an abortion. I believe that it should be AN option not THE option.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

so... preserving someone's choice (the person who made a choice and is now seeing the consequences of that choice) is more important than preserving someone's life? That makes zero sense.

You make a choice, you have consequences. When you drink, you have to accept the consequences that losing full control of your body and emotions will bring. Because that's what happens. When you have sex, you have to realize that, even when using protection, one of the consequences may be pregnancy. Those people MADE their choice. Ending an infant's life is, in my mind, FAR beyond the scope of choice that anyone should have in order to escape the consequences of that choice.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

I think Im going to have to agree with you Stacer

 
Hence the post earlier that maybe this is not a good place for this.
 
I am staying out of this, possibly in another solar system.

[EUOL]

When you have sex, you have to realize that, even when using protection, one of the consequences may be pregnancy. Those people MADE their choice. Ending an infant's life is, in my mind, FAR beyond the scope of choice that anyone should have in order to escape the consequences of that choice.

Very good way of putting things, SE.  

[Archon]

so... preserving someone's choice (the person who made a choice and is now seeing the consequences of that choice) is more important than preserving someone's life? That makes zero sense.

How then do you justify the wars we fought to preserve the freedoms and the choices that we have today?

[Peter Ahlstrom]

hat's exactly what Satan's plan was before the world was created, to save us from a life full of pain, strife, and hardship.

I don't know what you are talking about here. What was his plan exactly?

Oh. I guess the syntax is tripping you up.

Saving us from a life full of pain, strife, and hardship was Satan's plan. Satan's plan was to save us from a life full of pain, strife, and hardship.

What I didn't say was that he planned to do this by not giving us free will, but that isn't relevant unless you were actually asking how Satan planned to save us from a life full of pain, strife, and hardship.

[Archon]

That was my question, I was asking for you to go more in depth, so I would know the situation and would be able to form an opinion as to the morality or immorality of it.