Abortion

[gh0ster]

If abortion isnt murder, why is it a double homicide when a pregnant women get killed?

[LZA]

Does it have to do with the manner the baby is killed? i.e. baby is killed violently by someone not involved and takes the choice away from the mother is murder since its much different than an "abortion" where the mother (hopefully after careful deliberation) decides that what's best for her body is to terminate the pregnancy? I guess the presence/absence of consent of the mother helps determine if it's murder or not?

That's my off the top of my head attempt at an explanation...

[gh0ster]

Does it have to do with the manner the baby is killed?

Yes of course and I dont see anything wrong with the double homicide law, its legit imo. The thing is tho why are you not allowed to kill yourself, your vegetable grandpa or your downsyndrom son? I mean that's against the law. But if you choose to kill your unborn baby its ok. Since the argument is that the baby doesnt feel anything at a certain state.

I cant grasp this "my own will" rule thing, since its only legal when you want to remove an unwanted child you careless made.

The only abortion I'm for is rape victims or if you're a single mother.

[dueda]

It's law, there's not much logic in it, just common sense and pragmatic social contingency.

[waregim]

Lawws are made in the interests of lawmakers, not so much to prevnent violence and injustice as to monopolize it.

Or to gain political points by more rigid enforcemnt of social presuppositions or prejudices.

Opposition to abortion is based on the outdated religious homonculus theory.

In some countries, like Britain, full personhood and legal recognition is not conferred before the first year.

In this line of thinking, humanity is not conferred until the advent of personality.


Both positions can be taken to absurd extremes.

1. Citizen rights of teratomas.
2. Retroactive abortions of severely retarded.

[dueda]

In this line of thinking, humanity is not conferred until the advent of personality.

Both positions can be taken to absurd extremes.

1. Citizen rights of teratomas.
2. Retroactive abortions of severely retarded.

Being human is twofold: We're animals and sentient beings, that's why babies lack personality and teenagers are still building/acquiring one. As species, humans are whatever comes from a pregnant female; as individuals we must have some characteristics beyond just that.

I think an abortion is better than keeping a vegetative body until natural expiration, an execution is better than letting people roam suffering to die of starvation.
Not the ideal solution, but we're making too many new individuals.

[contrail]

The killing of a pregnant is considered double homicide, because it is the taking of two lives, and an abortion would be an informed decision about terminating that second life.

[waregim]

Being human is twofold: We're animals and sentient beings, that's why babies lack personality and teenagers are still building/acquiring one. As species, humans are whatever comes from a pregnant female; as individuals we must have some characteristics beyond just that.

I think an abortion is better than keeping a vegetative body until natural expiration, an execution is better than letting people roam suffering to die of starvation.
Not the ideal solution, but we're making too many new individuals.

It is important to realize that Malthusian Theory predicates Social Darwinism. It was the result of Brit upper class revulsion to the humanism of the enlightenment of the 18th century, which would crystallize in Marx in the 19th.

At this point overpopulation is not the problem. It is the artificial scarcity caused by neoliberal capitalism that can, is, and will generate disaster. Birth rates are dropping in developing nations. A different story in the third world, but likely to be handled by natural events should world trade stop as we we repeat the course of events that led to the Great Depression. This seems inevitable, but the only question is will the debilitating constant warfare flare up into an Armageddon that so many are literally praying for.

Of interest is that the Nazis did not directly kill the majority of its victims. The Wansee conference of 1942 established the first 'Death Camps' for the Jews but these were to weed out those deemed incapable of efficient labor. And those were sent to labor camps, which kept the Wermacht  supplied despite saturation bombing. However rules were strict, offenders were killed on the slightest pretext, and for the rest the food rations were cut to 1200 calories a day, ensuring slow starvation. Look at the Allied pics of the KZ camps after liberation. Huge stacks od dead bodies are shown. They were starved, not gassed. Gassing did occur at Dachau and Auschwicz, but it was usually in makeshift facilities well out of view of the camp residents.

Indeed the ones who were gassed and shot were the lucky ones.

[dueda]

Social Darwinism is cruel as were any empires and now the superpower countries. Different approaches, same objectives, common points being suppression and exploitation. Nowadays mass killings aren't needed, although poverty can lead to the same result and yet no one to blame. "The cake is a lie" and so is hunger.

Faction wars, dictatorships, cartels, exploitation, inefficiency, camps, opium dens, sweatshops; the only different strategy seems to be the Middle-East, where people don't care about capitalism or communism and explicit direct interference (including uniforms) is more effective. With birth rates declining in the First World and overpopulation of the Third World, predictable outcome can be:

- Overcoming the First World, very unlikely for every reason.
- Migration, with resulting blockage and then conflict, an interesting field shift that's already happening. But meaningless in the end.
- Civil unrest in the Third World, as some countries are near collapse, but those people are mostly too ignorant, selfish and lazy.
- Collapse of the Third World, with violence and epidemic, from frequent outbreaks to all-out crisis.

A professor once told me "people need to lose everything to act".
I'm one hoping for the world-as-we-know-it collapse, we are undead slaves, better to die free; the "land of the brave" is usually a grave yard.

---

The killing of a pregnant is considered double homicide, because it is the taking of two lives, and an abortion would be an informed decision about terminating that second life.

A rare right to the point, correct, and no funny gifs post. gh0ster must be very upset.

[waregim]

The West appears to be committing deliberate suicide:

A. Globalisation - 'post-industrial' gibberish, and the destruction of Western economies.
B. Social Marxism, which is neither social, nor marxiat - instead a totally nihilistic barrage of distractions and conflicts to destroy the basis of a nation and its culture. As much as I hate nationalism, it is preferable to *this* horror.
c. Hayek, and Ayn Rand in the open, with dog-eat-dog the prevailing social ethos.
D. Extreme enviromentalism - Started in the Gilded Age when the bankers did not want to invest in industry, preferring financial hijinx, Now out of control, trying to outlaw cars, and of course, basic industry.
E. Immigration run amuck, with resulting destruction of national social welfare systems.

This goes far beyond anything Spengler had to say in his Decline of the West a century ago. I really dislike conspiracy theories, but it is becoming more obvious that there is an inherent plan in the general insanity - namely the destruction of borders, and a super-Euro type system taking over everything in the World Trade Organization, and run by a handful of corporations.

The right wing kooks have been too distracted by their fantasizing about a UN takeover.....

But not all. As much as Steve Bannon gives me the creeps, I hate it even more when he is right.

Fortunately the Elves have begun their campaign against Mordor. Only question is whether the Hobbits and Trolls will follow.