Female. male or embryo rights? - by SubJeff
Vasquez on 9/3/2006 at 16:52
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
because it's a personal belief of mine that the mother, as the bearer and giver of life, should be given the balance of power where the mother and father are in conflict, and all else is neutral.
How is this situation "neutral", because the guy a) isn't a father (unless you count fertilised embryos, which would put your pro-choiceness into a strange light IMO) and b) does not want to be a father?
Quote Posted by Shadowcat
Intentionally having children is a purely selfish act. Not that people like to think of it that way (for obvious reasons), but it's still true.
Shush, this must not be uttered aloud, ever.
Sap'em on 9/3/2006 at 20:23
Quote:
Intentionally having children is a purely selfish act. Not that people like to think of it that way (for obvious reasons), but it's still true.
:ebil:
The only selfish act involved in the conception of my 2 kids was the 20 minutes leading up to it. (ok it was more like 3 minutes, but you get the idea.:o The rest of it is about as selfless as life gets.
Dia on 9/3/2006 at 20:35
Shadowcat; living creatures are biologically hardwired with the urge/instinct to procreate. Selfishness has nothing to do with it.
Sap'em; thanks for sharing. ;) You can PM the pics to me.
Uncia on 9/3/2006 at 21:01
Quote Posted by Sap'em
The only selfish act involved in the conception of my 2 kids was the 20 minutes leading up to it. (ok it was more like 3 minutes, but you get the idea.:o The rest of it is about as selfless as life gets.
Both conception and adoption yield a child, yet people will usually go for the first unless left without a choice. Think about the reasons, then tell me if said reasons are closer to "selfless" or "selfish".
steo on 9/3/2006 at 22:30
One could argue that there is no such thing as a selfless act. Even if you do something seemingly 'selfless' it is actually done to make you feel better about yourself or because you think there will be some kind of reward.
Shadowcat on 9/3/2006 at 22:37
Sap'em: Oh, I'm not suggesting that raising a child is in any way devoid of selflessness :) Your priorities are more or less firmly affixed to them for about 20 years, after all!! I'm just talking about an intentional choice to have them in the first place.
Dia: For sure, all evolved organisms are necessarily compelled to procreate. That just means we're hard-wired to perform a selfish act (people often want to continue their own personal lineage, but I'll eat my hat if anyone has children for the stated grander purpose of continuing the human race).
I'm not necessarily saying that parents-to-be are in a consciously selfish frame of mind at the time such a decision is made. The existance of a 'biological clock' in these matters seems beyond question, and surely plays all kinds of havoc with our thought processes to achieve its aim.
(Uncia's comment obviously comes into play here, as well).
By 'selfish' I mean that it is of no benefit (whatsoever) to the child (hence my original comment). I mean, they can't benefit -- you cannot improve the lot of something that does not exist. (Consider here also the phrase "gift of life" which clearly has no real applicability to creating a life, but nevertheless is used in this context a great deal).
Scots Taffer on 9/3/2006 at 22:40
Quote Posted by Shadowcat
I'm just talking about an intentional choice to have them in the first place.
Bull-fucking-shit, pal. It's what our bodies are designed to do, how is it selfish to do what comes very naturally and requires self-sacrifice of so much?
Stitch on 9/3/2006 at 22:46
That argument isn't your best work, Scots. Your ass is designed to let toxic flatulence fly freely but start dropping f-bombs around the missus and see what goes down.
I disagree with this "having kids is selfish" bullshit (it's every bit as retarded as the "abortions are selfish" flipside) but it pretty much is a given that putting more people in an overpopulated world ain't selfless.
Uncia on 9/3/2006 at 22:47
Last I checked, all our "natural urges" were pretty damned selfish. They have to be, they're our survival instincts.
Also, eating cake all day long is selfless. Because it comes naturally, and you're doing it knowing full-well that you'll become fat and die of a heart-attack, but you're just that great of a guy to do it anyway.
Scots Taffer on 9/3/2006 at 22:48
Not my finest, I'm sure, but the over-populated world token is a bit weak, isn't it? I'm not living in an overpopulated part of the world... in fact, it's one of the most underpopulated. Surely there must be different considerations for different countries etc, I get it if you're talking about Africa or China, but in the US and UK and Australia, are we really that overpopulated that we have to introduce mandatory measures?
So yeah, I guess having loads of kids in a country or environment that can't support them is selfish, just as aborting kids that you can't be bothered having is selfish.
And out roll the fucking retarded examples of SELFLESS AND SELFISH, thanks! Consider this thread +INFORMATIVE!
