Jump to content

Solomon

Members
  • Posts

    432
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by Solomon

  1. True. My kids should not be forced to do anything. No organized sports, outside activities, whatever food they want, that's going to work out well. I am guessing you are not a parent?

    I am a parent. I encourage my son to do things I think are important.

  2. We decide many things for children before they are old enough to decide for themselves. Arguably most of the important decisions in your life are made for you by your parents / guardians. 

    As parents, that's why we should choose to use our power responsibly. Just because it works for you, doesn't mean it's okay to shove it down your children's throats.

    • Upvote 1
  3. ...

    Religion isn't all negatives, many people actually take comfort in religion, in believing that a higher power exists.

    That's a complicated line. As children, many of us took comfort in believing in the existence of Santa Claus. I have no problem with having been told fantastic stories as a kid but if someone told me now they could make me believe that Santa is real, I'd decline their offer. I'd rather know the truth, even if it's less comforting than the fiction.

  4. Have I said anything about gay people? All I have been speaking about is the "act" of "homosexuality". I have made a point of that but if this chav chooses to ignore it then that's her problem. 

    I don't know what the "act of homosexuality" is any more than I could define the "act of heterosexuality". Is it intercourse? Oral sex? Licking? Kissing? Touching?

  5. A just society would not blindly murder babies in masses and try to cover it up by claiming it's something else. Most of the aborted "fetus" arms, legs, and other parts of their bodies are shown after the abortion, which means it was a baby before it was murder, not a fetus, or else it wouldn't have had those baby parts. Can any abortion advocate disclaim this?

    I don't claim to be an "abortion advocate" but I can answer your question. Fetus (or foetus) is the word for the post-embryonic, pre-birth stage of an organism's development. Only when it is born (or hatched) does it become a baby, kitten, elver, or whatever the word for the young of its species is. Clearly, it has to develop its fins, legs, tentacles, pseudopodia, etc. during the fetal stage as it is not possible for them to appear magically at the point of hatching or birth.

  6. Banning guns is extreme but the restrictions should reflect the society. A country with low gun murder/suicide rates and where killing "sprees" are very rare could consider more lenient laws than a country with clear gun problems.

  7. Self-awareness is a concept that we'll never be able to pin down enough to say it occurs X weeks into fetal development. Becoming self-aware is a process, only parts of which can be tested.

     

    As with many complicated issues involving ethics, it's pointless trying to prove an argument that either end of the spectrum - the spectrum in this case being gestation - is "right" or "wrong". All it gets you to is an impasse. You make more progress when you accept that there is a conflict between the rights of the pregant woman and those of the fetus, and consider how to resolve the conflict.

  8. So are you just going to ignore the fact that blacks and latinos make themselves targets for state violence and mass incarceration by committing a vastly disproportionate number of crimes?

    Please explain what "targets for state violence" means.

  9. I guess the OP is talking about how most churches can claim charitable status to avoid paying taxes on profits. On the one hand, some churches provide charitable services such as helping people with limited mobility or providing meals for people who have very little money. However, when a church disseminates misinformation and lies, does it lose the right to be considered as acting for the benefit of the community?

     

    I think the most important question is why, if a church is acting charitably, would it be making a profit? If it's breaking even or running at a loss, its tax status is moot.

  10. hawkeye, traditional religious teaching on sex was based on the fact that if a man and a woman had sex, there was a fairly high chance the woman would get pregnant. Nowadays, thanks to reliable contraception, it's very unlikely a woman will get pregnant as long as she or the man use contraception correctly. People who have sex - whether married or single - recognize that there is very small chance that conception will happen and that the woman will have to make a difficult choice between continuing the pregnancy and abortion. We're by no means the only species to enjoy sex for the sake of sex, but we are probably the only one to realize how it works.

  11. Abortion has been covered in this forum before, and we all reached a conclusion. That conclusion was something along the lines of:

     

    "Abortion should only be legal until the fetus can feel pain, which is around 9 weeks into pregnancy, which gives the mother 3 whole months to decide whether or not to keep him/her. Although, if the baby was conceived through rape, the mother can decide to abort until the 3rd trimester."

    We certainly did not all reach that conclusion. Firstly, "3 whole months" is 13 weeks, not 9 weeks. Secondly, a pregnant woman does not normally realize she is pregnant until she doesn't get her period, typically 3 or 4 weeks after conception. So, to give a woman 3 months to decide after she found out she was pregnant, abortion would be legal until the 17th week.

     

    The medical argument is based on viability - a fetus can't survive outside the womb before 22 weeks of development. Either way, we're looking at close to 20 weeks, not 9.

  12. It's likely that most children who grow up in families that abhor abortion will end up agreeing with their parents' views whereas, by the same logic, people who choose to abort a fetus lose a probable future pro-choice advocate. Therefore, by allowing abortion, you are potentially strengthening the anti-abortionist movement's support. Sweet irony.

    • Upvote 2
  13. Compulsory voting does nothing for any of the 'problems' that you listed.

    That's not true. In Brazil, for example, voting is compulsory for 18+ year-olds but there is the option to make a null vote if you don't feel any of the candidates are worthwhile. In practice, what this means is that some people take affront at being forced to vote and automatically vote "em branco" but there are other people who consider that since they have to vote, they may as well put a bit of effort into finding out what the candidates and parties stand for. This latter group is particularly interesting because they are more likely to vote on the issues than the party brand.

  14. ...

    Once upon a time men had balls, they'd be willing to do absolutely anything to defend their families and themselves. Relying on government for anything shows the true character of a weak individual.

    ...

    Said like a true cowboy.

  15. ...

    You have to abandon the idea that ''If I can't see it, then it probably isn't real'' and accept that things both happen outside human understanding and outside human comprehension.

    ...

    When you consider that, whatever the origin of the message, it came to you via other people (either through what they wrote or what they told you), accepting that the message they gave you is either inexorably outside your understanding or your comprehension is an invitation to charlatans.

  16. ...

    Last war was more an example of Guard/SK/Mensa incompetence than an example of VE's inherent (or at least visible) strength; unless you want to argue that Guard/SK/Mensa were deliberately lead into a trap.

    ...

    It was only SK's incompetence. Guardian and MensaHQ showed once again that they are both honorable allies and very competent alliances.

     

    As for VE using an exploit, you can't stop individual members breaking the rules but I'd be stunned if their government did. Furthermore, they're not the kind of people who'd turn a blind eye to it.

    • Upvote 2
  17. Have we learned nothing from the War on Drugs? If you ban guns it'll create a black market and thus will actually increase crime and shootings. If you ban guns, it won't get rid of guns. It'll just make gun owners criminals. I will say that Americans love their guns way too much, though.

    Your view of the world is narrow. No country has been successful at banning drugs but most developed countries have been very successful at controlling guns.

    • Upvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.