Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Politics and Society Contentions, Controversies, and Conflicts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-18-2020, 10:23 PM   #226
Crossnerd
quite smart as well
 
Crossnerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: This is my crime scene
Posts: 38,404
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc View Post
Nobody compared women to animals. The comparison was fetuses to joeys.
And I don't see why that should be considered offensive. No doubt the fetuses would appreciate my argument even. (How the joeys might feel idk).
Please go **** yourself, Cuckbox. I’ve had enough of your bullshit today.

This is actually a serious issue for women’s healthcare, not some philosophical sandbox for you to muck about in for leisure.
Crossnerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 10:24 PM   #227
Luckbox Inc
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Luckbox Inc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 46,745
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crossnerd View Post
Please go **** yourself, Cuckbox.
What did I say?
You agree that nobody compared women to animals I suppose? I'll take that as your retraction.
Luckbox Inc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 10:26 PM   #228
Kelhus999
banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 3,282
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc View Post
Just because we have three different forums on 2p2 for politics, science/philosophy, and religion--doesn't mean that those can actually be separated.
But in this case much of the discussion surrounding abortion--from both a political and moral standpoint--absolutely centers on that question. But to be sure, I've never claimed the debate is all about that--and if I focus on it then it's because I think it's the one area where we can actually reach some sort of agreement.
I am going to give a hard no on that. Because the answer to that question is going to inevitably be arbitrary enough that most people are just going to decide on whatever convention that is most convenient to their politics.
Kelhus999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 10:28 PM   #229
Luckbox Inc
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Luckbox Inc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 46,745
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crossnerd View Post
Please go **** yourself, Cuckbox. I’ve had enough of your bullshit today.

This is actually a serious issue for women’s healthcare, not some philosophical sandbox for you to muck about in for leisure.

I only have one normative position that I'm going for here in 2p2 politics which is don't kill people. And so figuring out what are people is an important part of that. Sorry but it is what is. Try to keep your jimmies in a more dispassionate state like Max does when dealing with me.
Luckbox Inc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 10:31 PM   #230
Max Cut
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Max Cut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,878
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999 View Post
She did give a whole spiel about fetal heartbeat, which would indicate it isn't irrelevant to her politics.

That being said, I think answering metaphysical questions from Luckbox is not particularly high on the her interest list, so hopefully his expectations are sufficiently low.
He's not on some metaphysical inquiry, he's taking a position opposed to abortion rights and JAQing off with a long tedious irrelevant exploration of marsupial gestation.
Max Cut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 10:36 PM   #231
Luckbox Inc
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Luckbox Inc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 46,745
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999 View Post
I am going to give a hard no on that. Because the answer to that question is going to inevitably be arbitrary enough that most people are just going to decide on whatever convention that is most convenient to their politics.
You say it's a hard no, but not a single person has stepped up to the plate to call that penny-sized and totally not "viable" joey not life. So I think we all do agree on at least that. Now when that penny-sized joey became life--whether it was at conception or some point between then and when it reached penny-size is still open for discussion.
Luckbox Inc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 10:39 PM   #232
chezlaw
Limey Bastard
 
chezlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 39,882
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc View Post
I don't think it's necessary to consider a fetus a baby. It probably is necessary to consider it a human though. Fetus/Baby/Toddler/High school student/middle aged/geriatric....those are all just terms for people that we use to make it easier to talk about them in different stages of life. So I definitely don't have a problem with fetus as a term. But it is still important to note that people are fine to use baby. No doubt many cultures don't differentiate in common usage.
'Person' is the key thing for me. A fetus is not a person whereas all the other stages you mention are still people. Again this is not wordplay. This is key to the abortion debate.
chezlaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 10:46 PM   #233
Max Cut
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Max Cut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,878
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc View Post
You say it's a hard no, but not a single person has stepped up to the plate to call that penny-sized and totally not "viable" joey not life. So I think we all do agree on at least that. Now when that penny-sized joey became life--whether it was at conception or some point between then and when it reached penny-size is still open for discussion.
Every dump I take is teaming with life. Do you want a picture with a penny?
Max Cut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 10:47 PM   #234
Luckbox Inc
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Luckbox Inc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 46,745
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Cut View Post
Every dump I take is teaming with life. Do you want a picture with a penny?
I would never deny that you aren't teeming with e. coli.
Luckbox Inc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 10:50 PM   #235
Kelhus999
banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 3,282
Re: framing the abortion debate

It doesn't appear anyone has any problem reconciling a joey being life with whatever ideologically motivated view on abortion they already had. This doesn't surprise me at all.

Let me know if anything changes.
Kelhus999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 10:51 PM   #236
Crossnerd
quite smart as well
 
Crossnerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: This is my crime scene
Posts: 38,404
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc View Post
You agree that nobody compared women to animals I suppose? I'll take that as your retraction.
Nowhere do I agree with you. I think you’re a complete idiot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Cut View Post
He's not on some metaphysical inquiry, he's taking a position opposed to abortion rights and JAQing off with a long tedious irrelevant exploration of marsupial gestation.
I agree with this though.
Crossnerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 10:55 PM   #237
Max Cut
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Max Cut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,878
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999 View Post
It doesn't appear anyone has any problem reconciling a joey being life with whatever ideologically motivated view on abortion they already had. This doesn't surprise me at all.

Let me know if anything changes.
Reminder that a central component of Kel's ideology is the oppression and control of women.
Max Cut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:01 PM   #238
Luckbox Inc
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Luckbox Inc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 46,745
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw View Post
'Person' is the key thing for me. A fetus is not a person whereas all the other stages you mention are still people. Again this is not wordplay. This is key to the abortion debate.
It would seem that most of the most vocal abortion defenders here disagree that these distinctions are important at all.
But what is the basis that you're using to define what a person is? Because I feel like it'll be really hard to justify some sort of distinction between inside a person vs outside a person, or "viable" was non-viable. [And this is sort of the point behind me bringing up marsupials]
And if you want to argue something like "having personality" or something then we're pushing personhood back even further until idk how many months old but at least several.
Luckbox Inc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:02 PM   #239
formula72
veteran
 
formula72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,181
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
Here's one possible answer: this is a politics forum, and a thread about abortion as a political debate. I don't think the political questions (or the moral ones, for that matter) actually hinge on some general answer to "when does life begin" as a science question. I think it's reasonable to say that an embryo is alive but I support abortion rights. Notice that saying it's alive is not quite the same as saying it's a person, but then defining when "personhood" begins is rather more a metaphysical or moral question than a scientific one, but that's to the point.

Although it is clearly relevant to the thread title at least that the anti-abortion rights side of the debate frames things as though the question "when does life begin" is very important. In the same way that it's relevant that I said "anti-abortion" instead of "pro-life." But I don't find it hard to understand why crossnerd would consider it irrelevant to the politics.
Pretty much.

I'm sure that the admirable pro-lifers will continue to fight to defend the gargantuan influx of unwanted babies or pay for the medical needs of the mothers at their expense.
formula72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:03 PM   #240
Luckbox Inc
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Luckbox Inc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 46,745
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crossnerd View Post
Nowhere do I agree with you. I think you’re a complete idiot.
Like we talked about, when you're reduced to silence and/or insults--I'm fine considering that agreement.
Luckbox Inc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:04 PM   #241
Kelhus999
banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 3,282
Re: framing the abortion debate

I do think the comment "women should have control over their own bodies" is interesting, but not in the way intended.

It seems that establishing norms for sexuality and mating for breeding age females is a central concern, if not the central concern, of pretty much all human social organization; to the point where the question can be asked whether human societies can even exist without having some established norm that addresses this issue.
Kelhus999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:06 PM   #242
Kelhus999
banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 3,282
Re: framing the abortion debate

Of course it can simply be an answer where societies comprised of men that are more effective controlling their females breeding (with them) carry on their genes, and the ones that dont don't, so it is an highly selected for norm.
Kelhus999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:07 PM   #243
Max Cut
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Max Cut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,878
Re: framing the abortion debate

Relevance? Idiot.

Also, learn how to edit a post. Idiot.
Max Cut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:10 PM   #244
Max Cut
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Max Cut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,878
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Cut View Post
Reminder that a central component of Kel's ideology is the oppression and control of women.
In case anyone thought I was joking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999 View Post
Of course it can simply be an answer where societies comprised of men that are more effective controlling their females breeding (with them) carry on their genes, and the ones that dont don't, so it is an highly selected for norm.
Max Cut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:12 PM   #245
Crossnerd
quite smart as well
 
Crossnerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: This is my crime scene
Posts: 38,404
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc View Post
Like we talked about, when you're reduced to silence and/or insults--I'm fine considering that agreement.
You shouldn’t confuse being ignored for silence. Your input in most discussions can scarcely be valued above nuisance and white noise. Low quality and low intelligence posters like you don’t get to dictate to me how I spend my time.
Crossnerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:19 PM   #246
Crossnerd
quite smart as well
 
Crossnerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: This is my crime scene
Posts: 38,404
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999 View Post
I do think the comment "women should have control over their own bodies" is interesting, but not in the way intended.

It seems that establishing norms for sexuality and mating for breeding age females is a central concern, if not the central concern, of pretty much all human social organization; to the point where the question can be asked whether human societies can even exist without having some established norm that addresses this issue.
I think based on this thread there’s a pretty solid argument to be made for sexual cannibalism. It improves fecundity, naturally selects against inferior males, and, for incels like Kelhus, ensures paternity considering well-fed females are less likely to mate repeatedly.

Consider the arachnids. Or look what happens when we compare human males to gastropods... It really is so interesting; regard my intelligence and tremble.
Crossnerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:19 PM   #247
Luckbox Inc
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Luckbox Inc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 46,745
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crossnerd View Post
You shouldn’t confuse being ignored for silence. Your input in most discussions can scarcely be valued above nuisance and white noise. Low quality and low intelligence posters like you don’t get to dictate to me how I spend my time.
Ok but can I at least get you to agree to nobody compared women to marsupials?
Really what I compared was all placental mammals to all marsupials. And I didn't appreciate you lying about what I said.
But do you agree with lagtight that God created humans to be special over the rest of the animal kingdom or not? Because it seems like you're still arguing that but I can't tell.
Luckbox Inc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:25 PM   #248
Crossnerd
quite smart as well
 
Crossnerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: This is my crime scene
Posts: 38,404
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc View Post
Ok but can I at least get you to agree to nobody compared women to marsupials?
Really what I compared was all placental mammals to all marsupials. And I didn't appreciate you lying about what I said.
But do you agree with lagtight that God created humans to be special over the rest of the animal kingdom or not? Because it seems like you're still arguing that but I can't tell.
This is a thread framing an issue of women’s healthcare, not all placental mammals.

And no, I don’t have to be a creationist to point out that human beings have a moral code that isn’t shared with other species. For example, if a marsupial aborts her pregnancy nobody will call her a “baby murderer”.

See, these kinds of posts are why I ignore you. You’re constantly forcing me to dictate answers to you that would be astoundingly obvious to anyone with an IQ above 71.
Crossnerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:31 PM   #249
Luckbox Inc
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Luckbox Inc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 46,745
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crossnerd View Post
This is a thread framing an issue of women’s healthcare, not all placental mammals.

And no, I don’t have to be a creationist to point out that human beings have a moral code that isn’t shared with other species. For example, if a marsupial aborts her pregnancy nobody will call her a “baby murderer”.

See, these kinds of posts are why I ignore you. You’re constantly forcing me to dictate answers to you that would be astoundingly obvious to anyone with an IQ above 71.
Part of the moral code that humans have is to not kill other humans. You agree on that I'm sure and so the disagreement consists of "what are other humans?".
Because this question is complex and involves all sorts of obsfucation about fetal heartbeats and viability, sometimes it is necessary to invoke other members of the animal kingdom.
Since you're so smart I assume you followed all that. But you are arguing that humans are special and that other members of the animal kingdom shouldn't be invoked (precisely because they lack a moral code even)--which is probably exactly what lagtight would argue, interestingly enough. I'll need to process that for a second given my low iq so please bear with me.
Luckbox Inc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2020, 11:44 PM   #250
Kelhus999
banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 3,282
Re: framing the abortion debate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc View Post
Part of the moral code that humans have is to not kill other humans. You agree on that I'm sure and so the disagreement consists of "what are other humans?".
Because this question is complex and involves all sorts of obsfucation about fetal heartbeats and viability, sometimes it is necessary to invoke other members of the animal kingdom.
Since you're so smart I assume you followed all that. But you are arguing that humans are special and that other members of the animal kingdom shouldn't be invoked (precisely because they lack a moral code even)--which is probably exactly what lagtight would argue, interestingly enough. I'll need to process that for a second given my low iq so please bear with me.
I am going to go ahead and push back against this.

I imagine that such a pacifist human society if it ever did exist, would be quickly outcompeted and exterminated.

It seems what societies do is create norms for the circumstances for when killing other humans is permitted, but killing other humans in the course of competition is probably an extremely selected for survival behavior.
Kelhus999 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online