|
Author
|
Topic: Are you for/against abortion/death penalty/ euthanasia?
|
BlueRoamer
Knowflake Posts: 95
From:
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted January 12, 2006 01:49 PM
  
All three of these invovle the taking of a life in some form or another. Although some might question whether a fetus is a person, it is definitely alive.Unless you are either for all of these, or against all of these, there is a discontinuity in your logic. You basically make exceptions about when it is acceptable to take a life or not. How do we apply this sliding scale about when its ok and when its not? Is anyone against all or for all? IP: Logged |
proxieme
unregistered
|
posted January 12, 2006 03:10 PM
quote:
Unless you are either for all of these, or against all of these, there is a discontinuity in your logic.
I'll have to disagree with you there, BR.One could, for instance, be against abortion and the death penalty but in favor of euthanasia with the condition that the euthanized requested that it be done.
In that case it would be a matter of choice and will, no? One could be in favor of the right to early term abortion but against the other two with the belief that while the latter two are thinking, acting people, the prior is a mass of cells or an organism primitive relative to man - to them, it may be like killing a tadpole or a mouse. And then someone could be horrified by abortion (in their eyes the taking of innocent life) but for the death penality, citing that, of the being's own free will, it chose do grievious/fatal harm to another or others.
(But then you could get into a lovely but perfectly logical argument about what should be done with executioners or those who facilitated the execution.) IP: Logged |
BlueRoamer
Knowflake Posts: 95
From:
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted January 12, 2006 03:20 PM
Yes but thats using a sliding scale for abortion, deciding when and when a fetus isn't a human being, either way it IS a human life, regardless of what stage it is.All three are cases of taking a human life, albeit in different forms, even though a fetus isn't necessarily a person, it has the potential to become a person. IP: Logged |
ScotScorp
unregistered
|
posted January 12, 2006 06:23 PM
I believe that abortion, death penalty and euthanasia should be options open to choice for a competent, sane person. You CAN be for one or two or vice versa. After my mother commited suicide, my thoughts changed on assisted suicide. She was extremely sick and in much pain; she was going to die a very slow death. She should have the "legal" right to end her life if it would make her more comfortable. It would have been a planned event where she could tell everyone goodbye instead of ending in a huge physical and emotional mess. But alas, her own decision. I don't personally believe in abortion. I take care of my contraception and fertility with condoms and the Billings method. I haven't even had a true scare in YEARS. Of course, if the American public was more educated about sex and allowed to have access to birth control we wouldn't have as many abortions. IMHO, until sex and birth control is taught and understood in the USA, it's pointless for the anti-abortionists to open their mouths and protest. Abstinence is a dirty word for me... you can't expect hormonal teens and people in their 20s to abstain!!!! (Favorite subject to blog on...I always get a slight bit preachy on this subject!) Death penalty? Believe in it in one way: Punishment for breaking the law is supposed to be a determent!!!!!! So, threatening to kill someone for doing something very bad is supposed to prevent the person from doing it in the first place. Seems like these days though, death penalty is not taken seriously enough. So... why bother with it? Free housing, meals, entertainment, gym privilages, getting a degree or running a business out of prison is a posh way of living for alot of inmates. Since when is this a determent!?! *sigh*
Angela
------------------
Scorpio/Leo/Leo
"Life is like playing a violin solo in public and learning the instrument as one goes on." -Samuel Butler IP: Logged |
TINK
unregistered
|
posted January 12, 2006 07:13 PM
Damn you, prox. You made my argument before I did.I'll defend a woman's divinely given right to guard the portal of life with my last sword(ahem ... sorry ...a little melodramatic there), begrudgingly admit it is not within our right as a nation to render suicide illegal, and believe with all my heart that state sponsored executions are an affront to all that is good and holy in the world .. not to mention illogical, primitive, barbaric and just plain ineffective. So there you have it.  Call me crazy if you must, but I still consider myself a rational person. (despite being a girl. *waves* hi jwhop!) A logical deduction is based on insight and facts. Possibly that's the true sliding scale? IP: Logged |
jwhop
Knowflake Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted January 12, 2006 09:54 PM
Of course BlueRoamer, there is another way to divide the field you've set up.Two categories of those subject to the death penalty are totally innocent of any crime and the other is guilty to taking life. I'll let you decide which is which. Ummm, medically, if there's a heartbeat and brainwaves, there's life...by medical definition. Waves to "crazy"  TINK IP: Logged |
AcousticGod
Knowflake Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted January 13, 2006 02:10 PM
I was going to say that the topic of abortion can't be reduced to that argument alone. It is a logical argument, but it doesn't account for all aspects of the matter.I have given this topic loads and loads of thought, and I'm willing and committed to backing up my belief system in this area. Kind of a cryptic answer I know. I'll go over more of it further with some of you later.  IP: Logged |
SecretGardenAgain
unregistered
|
posted January 13, 2006 03:34 PM
They are not the same, depending on what view you choose. Different philosophical and ethical views treat the subjects differently. For example, Kants categorical imperative would rule all three impermissible except euthanasia, but deontology has been used to argue all three to be wrong. Personally, I am anti-abortion and anti-euthanasia but pro-death penalty. Not pro in the sense that I want to see people put on death row. But also, noting the alternatives (the penitentiary system has to be the most ineffective system in the world, producing mentally depressed and affected people if they werent already disturbed when they went in), and also in the spirit of justice and retribution, death penalty is quite a different matter from abortion or euthanasia, in which the issues don't center around retribution at all. Love
SG IP: Logged |
proxieme
unregistered
|
posted January 13, 2006 06:02 PM
~~~Just to Clarify~~~I'm not saying that the arguments that I gave as examples necessarily represent my viewpoint(s) or that they're the only possible arguments available...just that they're possible exceptions to the given statement of BR's. IP: Logged |
Mystic Gemini
unregistered
|
posted January 13, 2006 06:42 PM
Are you for/against abortion/death penalty/ euthanasia? Against abortion but women must have a choice so I guess for.
Dealth pentaly for but only for cold hearted murderers. They must not make any more mistakes and should always make sure that people really are guilty.
I am for euthanasia. It's not good to suffer.
IP: Logged |
TINK
unregistered
|
posted January 13, 2006 07:03 PM
I totally understand, proxieme. I didn't mean to imply that we agree on the subjects at hand ... I imagine we don't. I meant that your argument against the supposed discontinuity in logic closely echoed what I would have said.IP: Logged |
LibraSparkle
unregistered
|
posted January 13, 2006 07:11 PM
Well... I can't necessarily say I'm FOR abortion, as I couldn't see myself ever going through with it... BUT I don't believe it is my place to make that choice for another woman. Therefore I am Pro Choice.I am against the death penalty, but not because it is taking a life... but because of the margin of error. I don't believe it should be practiced because there is always a possibility the person whose life is ending could be innocent. I am in favor of euthanasia... well, because I don't see why we treat our dying pets with more humanity than we do our dying humans. I suppose if that makes me crazy, then so be it. I'd rather be crazy than normal any day. IP: Logged |
Mystic Gemini
unregistered
|
posted January 13, 2006 10:57 PM
quote:
I don't see why we treat our dying pets with more humanity than we do our dying humans.
Ever heard of all living creatures suffering?
I had to have my dog put down 2 months ago because he was suffering. He was already 16 years old.
Animals have feelings also and I don't think a human is superior to an animal just because it is an animal.
Nothing should suffer.
He was a child to me. No one wants their child to suffer.
IP: Logged | |
Lindaland
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
