What's your honest reaction to the SCOTUS ruling overturning Roe v. Wade and declaring that abortion should be left up to the states to set policy for?
@dave if you arent ready to/cant have kids atm then dont have sex. its literally so easy. young teens shouldnt be getting pregnant. i say fuck em. they chose this by doing the naughty tango.
@e @salt @dave aside from tribalism generally being bad ...
> if you arent ready to/cant have kids atm then dont have sex
it feels like missing the point. if abortion is murder then you should oppose it on that ground. if you *don't* think its murder then wtf why would anyone have any right to regulate decisions involving someone else's body?
personal views on the morality of premarital sex is irrelevant
> if you arent ready to/cant have kids atm then dont have sex
it feels like missing the point. if abortion is murder then you should oppose it on that ground. if you *don't* think its murder then wtf why would anyone have any right to regulate decisions involving someone else's body?
personal views on the morality of premarital sex is irrelevant
@LukeAlmighty you're missing the point. the question is why it's bad. according to some people abortion is murder. according to other people "trans women are women"
when does a fetus become a separate life form (matter of definition), when does destroying it become murder (matter of definition), and under what circumstances is the act a bad thing? only the last question is actually interesting. the other two are purely definitional debates that are largely pointless to have beyond the practical semantic question of "how can I communicate with someone else effectively"
we kill living things all the time. bacteria and insects clearly don't matter to our legal system. animals do, but not as much as humans. what even is a human? why exactly is killing one bad? we have freedom of religion so falling back on "the bible says ..." isn't a valid legal argument
I've almost never encountered a conservative addressing any of this stuff. they pretty consistently object to "murdering babies" (whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean) followed immediately by going on at length about women acting like whores. if the issue were *actually* murder then other people's sex lives would be completely irrelevant to the discussion
tl;dr conservitards are just as triggered, tribal, and moronic as libtards in their own way. they just have different pet issues
@e @dave @salt
when does a fetus become a separate life form (matter of definition), when does destroying it become murder (matter of definition), and under what circumstances is the act a bad thing? only the last question is actually interesting. the other two are purely definitional debates that are largely pointless to have beyond the practical semantic question of "how can I communicate with someone else effectively"
we kill living things all the time. bacteria and insects clearly don't matter to our legal system. animals do, but not as much as humans. what even is a human? why exactly is killing one bad? we have freedom of religion so falling back on "the bible says ..." isn't a valid legal argument
I've almost never encountered a conservative addressing any of this stuff. they pretty consistently object to "murdering babies" (whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean) followed immediately by going on at length about women acting like whores. if the issue were *actually* murder then other people's sex lives would be completely irrelevant to the discussion
tl;dr conservitards are just as triggered, tribal, and moronic as libtards in their own way. they just have different pet issues
@e @dave @salt
@NEETzsche no. if that's what you think then I'm not sure that you bothered to read what I wrote
I specifically called out arguments of definition as pointless
@LukeAlmighty @dave @salt @e
I specifically called out arguments of definition as pointless
@LukeAlmighty @dave @salt @e
>two weeks ago
@e @dave @NEETzsche @salt @roboneko
I know this might sound surprising, but I don't believe, that philosophical topics like this one are so time limited, that they don't matter anymore mere 2 weeks later.
I mean, have at it
I certainly don't mind you responding. I agree that certain topics remain relevant to carry on potentially indefinitely. actually I think I inadvertently forgot to respond to you elsewhere in this thread. it was consuming too much time so I muted it and then forgot to come back to it
that being said, it's troubling to me that both you and neetz appear to have misinterpreted what I wrote. I think that speaks to just how tribal (and thus largely pointless) discussions of this topic have a tendency to run
I never said "I don't care about babies" or anything even remotely similar. in fact the vast majority of what I wrote had nothing to do with the specifics of my personal views on the topic. I spoke primarily to *why* you think what you think
if someone asks you "why is stealing bad" that's a legitimate philosophical, moral, ethics, etc question. or alternatively, if they ask "why does X qualify as theft". neither of those questions means "I think stealing is ok" or "I don't care if other people steal", they both mean quite literally what they say, namely, a request to articulate your reasoning for holding a particular belief
that being said, it's troubling to me that both you and neetz appear to have misinterpreted what I wrote. I think that speaks to just how tribal (and thus largely pointless) discussions of this topic have a tendency to run
I never said "I don't care about babies" or anything even remotely similar. in fact the vast majority of what I wrote had nothing to do with the specifics of my personal views on the topic. I spoke primarily to *why* you think what you think
if someone asks you "why is stealing bad" that's a legitimate philosophical, moral, ethics, etc question. or alternatively, if they ask "why does X qualify as theft". neither of those questions means "I think stealing is ok" or "I don't care if other people steal", they both mean quite literally what they say, namely, a request to articulate your reasoning for holding a particular belief
@roboneko @dave @NEETzsche @salt @e
Ok, I am seriously confused. You are using way too many words, and the question at the core is hidden in a ton of comparisons.
What is your core question then?
