Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Re: framing the abortion debate Re: framing the abortion debate

02-14-2020 , 02:50 PM
Defend or criticize: "Torturing children and killing unborn babies are both bad things for people to do."

Mod Note: this was excised from the "higher education" thread.

Last edited by well named; 02-15-2020 at 03:04 PM.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 07:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagtight
Defend or criticize: "Torturing children and killing unborn babies are both bad things for people to do."
That statement is ridiculous. Torturing children is moral depravity. Much in the same way nobody thinks it is a moral problem to use a condom (and thus denying the world of a human), aborting a fetus is similarly not a problem.

Of course, if you believe in a magical sky fairy who wasn't particularly communicative in his books actually really is against abortion, then i guess that is a reason.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 07:13 PM
Magical sky fairy aborts more babies than everyone else combined
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 07:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
That statement is ridiculous. Torturing children is moral depravity. Much in the same way nobody thinks it is a moral problem to use a condom (and thus denying the world of a human), aborting a fetus is similarly not a problem.


.
It's a good thing we base right and wrong based on what people think otherwise Lagtight might be onto something.
Wait...we don't do that because we aren't moral relativists.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 08:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
It's a good thing we base right and wrong based on what people think otherwise Lagtight might be onto something.
Wait...we don't do that because we aren't moral relativists.
Well, I am sure whether having such beliefs or practices constitutes moral depravity is highly contingent on identity, often formulated around skin melanin concentration, of the person/group in question.

There are several nations where child torture (at least by this metric) is normalized and abortion of fetuses is illegal with very strong punishments, where the moralizing parties would be much more agnostic whether any moral transgression was taking place.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 09:00 PM
Only ****ing Kelhus could "well, actually..." torturing children.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 09:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Cut
Only ****ing Kelhus could "well, actually..." torturing children.
Even though I hate moral relativism, I'll always defend the right of the moral relativist to argue their relativism--so try to read what he wrote again.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 09:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagtight
Defend or criticize: "Torturing children and killing unborn babies are both bad things for people to do."
I'll take criticize. Abortion is a sanctioned medical procedure and does not resemble murder in any sense beyond that of liposuction. I suspect it's sexism that gets you all preachy about it. Take it to the abortion whacko thread.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 09:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
Even though I hate moral relativism, I'll always defend the right of the moral relativist to argue their relativism--so try to read what he wrote again.
No.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
Even though I hate moral relativism, I'll always defend the right of the moral relativist to argue their relativism--so try to read what he wrote again.
I have learned to pretty much block out Max's one liners. Trolly is tougher for me, because he just flat out lies, and for some reason lying irritates me more than insults, which of course is exactly why he does it because his goal is to be irritating. Although I recognize getting better at ignoring his lying is an area where I could improve.

That being said, it seems in practice you pretty much have to be a moral relativist or be extremely inconsistent in application or your morality. Because generally people use moral arguments to defend their tribally motivated feelings, instead of the other way around, so inconsistencies are inevitble.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 09:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999
That being said, it seems in practice you pretty much have to be a moral relativist or be extremely inconsistent in application or your morality. Because generally people use moral arguments to defend their tribally motivated feelings, instead of the other way around, so inconsistencies are inevitble.
I think this just means that everyone (not just both sides but everyone even those not on teams) is a hypocrite.

Last edited by Luckbox Inc; 02-14-2020 at 09:32 PM.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 09:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
I think this just means that everyone (not just both sides but everyone even those not on teams) is a hypocrite.
Yes, but it is interesting to observe in realtime the cognitive gymnastics otherwise very intelligent people go through to rationalize their own doublethink.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999
Yes, but it is interesting to observe in realtime the cognitive gymnastics otherwise very intelligent people go through to rationalize their own doublethink.
One of the reasons why I try to stick to 'truthering' instead of moralizing--because the latter is hard work.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 11:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999
Yes, but it is interesting to observe in realtime the cognitive gymnastics otherwise very intelligent people go through to rationalize their own doublethink.
I identified earlier the significant structural flaw in your thinking where you are confusing nuance/complexity/context etc with "arbitrary". It's coming back here. What you see as very intelligent people doing cognitive gymnastics is - a lot of the time ITT - people observing that complex, contectual situations take nuance and that a simple black and white answer actually isn't sufficient.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 11:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
That statement is ridiculous. Torturing children is moral depravity. Much in the same way nobody thinks it is a moral problem to use a condom (and thus denying the world of a human), aborting a fetus is similarly not a problem.

Of course, if you believe in a magical sky fairy who wasn't particularly communicative in his books actually really is against abortion, then i guess that is a reason.
I DO NOT believe in a "magical sky fairy." And you KNOW that I don't. Kinda surprised you characterized my belief in God that way, since I ( mistakenly, obviously) thought that you were a respectable academic who wouldn't stoop to that level. My mistake.

I believe in God and in His only begotten Son Jesus Christ, and it is my desire to share the Good News of salvation available to EVERYONE who trusts in Jesus Christ alone for their salvation!
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 11:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
That statement is ridiculous. Torturing children is moral depravity. Much in the same way nobody thinks it is a moral problem to use a condom (and thus denying the world of a human), aborting a fetus is similarly not a problem.

Of course, if you believe in a magical sky fairy who wasn't particularly communicative in his books actually really is against abortion, then i guess that is a reason.
Why is torturing children morally wrong? Why is killing babies in the womb NOT morally wrong?
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 11:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
I identified earlier the significant structural flaw in your thinking where you are confusing nuance/complexity/context etc with "arbitrary". It's coming back here. What you see as very intelligent people doing cognitive gymnastics is - a lot of the time ITT - people observing that complex, contectual situations take nuance and that a simple black and white answer actually isn't sufficient.
So, in your nuanced opinion, should all 5 billion or so (or whatever the number is) people on Earth who believe in God be mocked for it, or only lagtight?
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 11:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagtight
Why is torturing children morally wrong? Why is killing babies in the womb NOT morally wrong?
Something like 98%+ think torturing children is morally wrong but only like 38% think abortion is wrong...so you gotta go with the overwhelming majority.
And should those numbers change you reevaluate. I think that's how it works.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 11:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagtight
I DO NOT believe in a "magical sky fairy." And you KNOW that I don't. Kinda surprised you characterized my belief in God that way, since I ( mistakenly, obviously) thought that you were a respectable academic who wouldn't stoop to that level. My mistake.

I believe in God and in His only begotten Son Jesus Christ, and it is my desire to share the Good News of salvation available to EVERYONE who trusts in Jesus Christ alone for their salvation!
Ah good point, I forgot the capitals, I'm sorry. Magical Sky Fairy. Better?
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 11:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Cut
I'll take criticize. Abortion is a sanctioned medical procedure and does not resemble murder in any sense beyond that of liposuction. I suspect it's sexism that gets you all preachy about it. Take it to the abortion whacko thread.
Would you like me to list the medical procedures "sanctioned" by Nazi Germany? How about the medical procedures "sanctioned" to be performed on women in Iran?
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 11:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999
So, in your nuanced opinion, should all 5 billion or so (or whatever the number is) people on Earth who believe in God be mocked for it, or only lagtight?
If they're engaging in dick waving on an internet forum somewhere? Yes. Definitely yes.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 11:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
Something like 98%+ think torturing children is morally wrong but only like 38% think abortion is wrong...so you gotta go with the overwhelming majority.
And should those numbers change you reevaluate. I think that's how it works.
Morality by popular vote!
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 11:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagtight
Why is torturing children morally wrong? Why is killing babies in the womb NOT morally wrong?
Tersely, this is fairly easy. Torturing children causes obvious, measurable harm. Killing an unwanted fetus does not. But that probably isn't really what you are getting at. A question like "why is torturing children wrong" is really more about asking one to expand upon their broader view of morality as almost all of us agree to that statement. Ok, I could do that, but it sort of depends what level of questioning and engagement you are actually hoping for here.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 11:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999
So, in your nuanced opinion, should all 5 billion or so (or whatever the number is) people on Earth who believe in God be mocked for it, or only lagtight?
lagtight is the only one of them in this thread equating medical abortion to ****ing killing babies. It's a hurtful statement. **** him.
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote
02-14-2020 , 11:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Cut
lagtight is the only one of them in this thread equating medical abortion to ****ing killing babies. It's a hurtful statement. **** him.
What makes it hurtful?
Re: framing the abortion debate Quote

      
m