Dawkinism: Tasteful, as always

Muzman on 22/2/2009 at 07:08

And remember kids, it's only "taking responsibility" if there are grievous, life destroying consequences for not doing something.

Nicker on 22/2/2009 at 09:33

Quote Posted by Muzman

And remember kids, it's only "taking responsibility" if there are grievous, life destroying consequences for not doing something.

And if there are no such consequences resulting naturally from your lapse of moral judgment then we will make damned sure to invent some...

:thumb:
Fett, I think maybe they got it that time.

As far as I am concerned no child should be held accountable or liable in any way for having disadvantaged parents, in any sense of the word. School lunch (breakfast and frigging dinner if they need it) programs, health care, scholastic merit based access to post secondary education... A healthy, happy, well educated populous is a great thing for a country to have. Sure beats war and misery as far as wise use of resources goes.

Kolya on 22/2/2009 at 14:44

R Soul on 22/2/2009 at 15:46

What would be wrong with the mother giving birth to the child and then putting it up for adoption? The natural parents wouldn't have to raise the child they never wanted, and a couple who perhaps couldn't have a child of their own would still be able to be parents, which would also spare the natural mother the physical and mental stress of having an abortion.

Someone has said that that would lead to lots of children waiting to be adopted, so many that there wouldn't be enough couples to adopt them all, but does anyone know the number of couples on IVF programmes, plus the number of couples who aren't, but still wish to adopt, compared to the number of abortions?

Kolya on 22/2/2009 at 16:11

Humans are not a resource you can simply redistribute and think you're done with it. Some very basic human emotions are involved here.

Try to imagine for a second you're a 16 year old girl, accidentally get pregnant, but you can't reasonably sustain a life for you and the child plus you are simply too immature yourself. That doesn't mean you are indifferent towards the future baby. Now you are being forced to go through 9 months of pregnancy, with all the bonding that takes place in this time and during birth. And after that the situation is still no better for you to keep your baby. But you have to give it away.

There is a human whose life needs protection here, and it's not a cell cluster, but a conscious feeling person, whose body you're making part of your politics and self-righteous judgment.

BEAR on 22/2/2009 at 16:37

Quote Posted by R Soul

Maybe when we take care of all the children in the world (see: never) that will be a resonable solution. There are millions of children out there who could really use a home and who's parents aren't even fucking alive, or try really hard to take care of them and just cant. Lets face it, human beings are not half as important to us as we pretend they are. Lets just drop the bullshit, if people really cared, we'd all be adopting children from orphanages in war-torn countries with fucking aids, but we don't because we don't really care about people, just our own people. As long as we are hypocrites about this, don't expect anyone (see: me) to take you seriously.

R Soul on 22/2/2009 at 16:42

Quote Posted by Kolya

Humans are not a resource you can simply redistribute and think you're done with it. Some very basic human emotions are involved here.

I agree, but I also think that a foetus is not just a cluster of cells that can be disposed of because it's existence wasn't planned.

Quote:

Try to imagine for a second you're a 16 year old girl, accidentally get pregnant, but you can't reasonably sustain a life for you and the child plus you are simply too immature yourself. That doesn't mean you are indifferent towards the future baby. Now you are being forced to go through 9 months of pregnancy, with all the bonding that takes place in this time and during birth. And after that the situation is still no better for you to keep your baby. But you have to give it away.

I can't imagine that that would be harder than living with the knowledge that I chose to terminate the pregnancy. Perhaps if I was a 16 year old pregnant girl I'd feel differently, but I'm not and I don't.

fett on 22/2/2009 at 19:46

R Soul - that would be great except for the huge, unsustainable amount of orphanages in the U.S. Now let's go down to Brazil and see how many kids are living on the streets. Now let's force more parents to have kids they don't want.

I can draw a picture in paintshop and post it here if that would help.

Kolya on 22/2/2009 at 22:11

Quote Posted by R Soul

I agree, but I also think that a foetus is not just a cluster of cells that can be disposed of because it's existence wasn't planned

This foetus isn't yours. It is part of someone's body without whom it wouldn't exist or survive. Therefor it's simply not yours to decide.

I think it's not right that you wanked off on your bed sheet this morning. I believe the government should do something about it. I don't know, maybe force you to have sex with fat old wenches, because that's nature's way, isn't it?

Vivian on 22/2/2009 at 22:14

I think Fett should draw a picture of that instead.