Death penalty, Abortion, Gun Control, War in Iraq-give your 2 cents

[2NaFish]

If you are against abortion, basically, you believe in 2 premises.

1. It is wrong to kill a human being.
2. A foetus is a human being.
erego, its wrong to kill a foetus.

Reversing that if you believe it is wrong to kill a foetus then you must believe it is wrong to kill a human being.

I can't see an argument that would allow someone to be able to morally support the death penalty but not support the right to abortion. However it's quite plausable to support abortion and not the death penaltly as all you have to do is reject premise number 2.

Please.

I realize that many use your second premise. It's a cop-out. Just like the "it's the woman's body" argument...

No, you misunderstand. I'm not claiming that to be against abortion you can pick either one. It's a pretty set in stone idea that to be anti abortion you must believe both. To be anti-abortion you must believe in, or amend succesfully, the first premiss.

This isn't a matter of opinion. It's saying to believe in something you must accept the first two as fact. There's no room for maneuvering.

[jgfnsr]

If you are against abortion, basically, you believe in 2 premises.

1. It is wrong to kill a human being.

I'm against abortion but I don't believe it is inherently wrong to kill if under specific cirucumstances, i.e. war, capital-punishment.

2. A foetus is a human being.
erego, its wrong to kill a foetus.

I believe a fetus is a human being and it obviously doesn't fall under the special categories I listed above.

Hence your reasoning for the beliefs had by someone who opposes abortion might need some re-evaluting...

[GnRNightrain]

European nations don't have the immigration u have??

Certainly.? Im not sure what country you have in mind for a direct comparison.? Many European countries have immigration, but not like the US, where it is poor, poor people coming from a neighboring country.? These people move to the inner-cities, are not educated and end up joining gangs and committing crimes.? There are very few European countries that have immigration from poor countries in such high numbers.

thats so naive

http://www.ecre.org/factfile/facts.shtml

asylum applications 2000-2002, every year in the UK there were more applications than in the USA, and the US is 5 times larger than the UK...European Union has had 4 times more applications than the USA which is a closer comparison...do you not regard Ukraine, Czech Republic, Romania etc etc as poor countries?

have you ever been to london? you will see that all the menial jobs are taken up by blacks and foreigners....and there are plenty of gangs here...in fact its quite an issue at the moment with new legislation going though parliament...

Actually you my friend are the naive one. ?Maybe you should look at the entire picture before you call me the naive one.  Your website shows nothing. ?I was talking illegal immigration. ?We have more people coming over here illegally every year then your combined 3 year asylum "applications" combined. ?Do any web search and you can see this for yourself. ?Those countries you listed are poor. ?However, your country can also control the numbers of poor that they let in which allows an easier assimilation into society.

Ive been to London many times. ?It is probably one of the most diverse cities in the world. ?You guys are beginning to see the whole gang thing. ?Imagine what it would be like if you had double the number of poor people entering your country. ?

[2NaFish]

If you are against abortion, basically, you believe in 2 premises.

1. It is wrong to kill a human being.

I'm against abortion but I don't believe it is inherently wrong to kill if under specific cirucumstances, i.e. war, capital-punishment.

2. A foetus is a human being.
erego, its wrong to kill a foetus.

I believe a fetus is a human being and it obviously doesn't fall under the special categories I listed above.

Hence your reasoning for the beliefs had by someone who opposes abortion might need some re-evaluting...

I'm playing devil's advocate, but....

If you alter premise 1 then your whole argument is weakened considerably as you then allow the anti-abortionist to say "Well my special circumstances are different". The purpose of a moral argument is to invalidate your opponent's position, not to triumph your own, and by altering premise one you've made it very difficult to destroy your opponents reasoning.

[jgfnsr]

a foetus/embryo is not a human being, a human being is conscious thing with emotions ...but a foetus doesnt have that ability until a certain development age...when does a foetus change to a conscious human?...when it splits into 2 cells? 4 cells? 120000 cells?...i dont think anyone knows...

That's just it. ?No one knows exactly. ?If anything, that is an argument against abortion.

there is also the issue of choice...if a person chose to become pregnant then they should have the choice up until the foetus becomes conscious to have an abortion...

While "choice" is the operative term often used, when it comes right down to it, selfishness is a more central term to the subject of abortion.

[GnRNightrain]

If you are against abortion, basically, you believe in 2 premises.

1. It is wrong to kill a human being.
2. A foetus is a human being.
erego, its wrong to kill a foetus.

Reversing that if you believe it is wrong to kill a foetus then you must believe it is wrong to kill a human being.

I can't see an argument that would allow someone to be able to morally support the death penalty but not support the right to abortion. However it's quite plausable to support abortion and not the death penaltly as all you have to do is reject premise number 2.

I said I do have reservations about the death penalty. ?There are two basic underpinnings of those that believe in it: retribtivism and deterrence. ?Retributivists believe in the whole eye for an eye theory of revenge. ?Those that believe in deterence believe that by having the death penalty as an option it deters people from committing certain crimes and saves lives. ?I dont base my support of the death penalty on an eye for an eye justification. ?I base it on deterrence. ?Also on the fact that I dont trust our system to put these people away for ever. ?However, I recognize that there is wide spread debate on whether there is any deterrence effect of it. ?If there isnt deterrence and I know for sure that these people will be put in prison for their "entire lives" my support for the DP goes out the window. ?However, it is consistent because you believe that it saves more lives in the long run.

The Dude expressed my feelings about it. ?There is a big difference between supporting the death of a convict to save lives, and supporting a womens right to choose for the convenience of the mother.

Dude made a good point.  If you are for human lives (as is the claim of those against the death penalty) wouldnt you error on the side of calling a fetus a human?

[jgfnsr]

If you are against abortion, basically, you believe in 2 premises.

1. It is wrong to kill a human being.

I'm against abortion but I don't believe it is inherently wrong to kill if under specific cirucumstances, i.e. war, capital-punishment.

2. A foetus is a human being.
erego, its wrong to kill a foetus.

I believe a fetus is a human being and it obviously doesn't fall under the special categories I listed above.

Hence your reasoning for the beliefs had by someone who opposes abortion might need some re-evaluting...

I'm playing devil's advocate, but....

If you alter premise 1 then your whole argument is weakened considerably as you then allow the anti-abortionist to say "Well my special circumstances are different". The purpose of a moral argument is to invalidate your opponent's position, not to triumph your own, and by altering premise one you've made it very difficult to destroy your opponents reasoning.

So what was it?  Debate club?  Chess club? 

Where is it written that the purpose of a moral argument has to be this or that?

For the record, I fully realize that my having my own "special circumstances" like war and capital punishment might, in of itself, raise the question of conflict on my part.

By the same token, I realize that those who are pro-abortion (oops..."pro-choice"), can come up with their own "special circumstances.

My initial point is there's a certain irony that a convict's "right to live" is more readily defended by some than a child's.

[Will]

Certainly. Im not sure what country you have in mind for a direct comparison. Many European countries have immigration, but not like the US, where it is poor, poor people coming from a neighboring country. These people move to the inner-cities, are not educated and end up joining gangs and committing crimes. There are very few European countries that have immigration from poor countries in such high numbers.

lol, oh boy, that was a funny one. And from someone who supposedly traveled a lot abroad and knows quite a bit about foreign countries. lol I can just imagine what the typical guy from the countryside who never went out of his county (not country) must think about other countries. Wow.

Ok, let's take France (he, that's where I'm from, sorry) as an example. I guess the millions of people from North Africa who moved to France in the 60's and 70's (and afterwards - to this very day) don't count. Yeah, Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco must not be included in the your "poor countries" list. I'm guessing Ivory Coast, Mozambique, Nigeria, etc. are pretty rich countries. And France is not an isolated case, those people moved from their country to Italy, Spain, Belgium, UK to try to find a decent job and improve their lives. Some of their kids did end up in gangs and the whole scheme you were talking about. Believe me my friend on this one, the US are certainly not alone. Far from it.
"Very few European countries"? Let's see: France, Italy, Spain, England. That's already four pretty important Western European countries. I wouldn't call that "very few".

Now concerning this topic:

- Death Penalty: I'm against it for one main reason: the people who were killed because they were "believed" to have committed a crime. Oops, years later, we find out they didn't commit that crime at all. Well, that's too late. I'm kinda split on that issue, especially because of sexual agressions, teen rapes and stuff like that. I know a life in prison is supposed to be "more painful" but in such cases I can understand the families will to end up the person's life right now. If he is indeed proven guilty without any doubt.

- Abortion: For. 100%. Think of the rapes, incestuous relations and crap like that. Stop thinking with your male minds and dicks. Let women tell you what the fuck they want. And you will see most of them are for abortion. And PLEASE leave religion out of it. If your God was so great maybe he would have prevented that 12 year old girl to be raped by her step father. Where was your God when THAT happened?

- Gun Control: weapon sale should be prohibited to anyone except for hunting purposes. Complete ban on assault weapons (are you gonna kill a deer with an AK-47?).

- War in Iraq: I'm pretty sure almost everyone here knows what I think... 200 billion dollars invested, hundreds of US soldiers killed, thousands of iraqi civilians killed. I say America should take care of its own people before trying to change other cultures. Fix education problems, healthcare problems, retirement problems in your own land, and then I'll take "arguments" about unnecessary wars not supported by France, Germany and Russia (among many others) seriously.

[jgfnsr]

- Abortion: For. 100%. Think of the rapes, incestuous relations and crap like that. Stop thinking with your male minds and dicks. Let women tell you what the fuck they want. And you will see most of them are for abortion. And PLEASE leave religion out of it. If your God was so great maybe he would have prevented that 12 year old girl to be raped by her step father. Where was your God when THAT happened?

Oh that's right.  Those who are opposed to abortion are brutish cavemen who only think with their dicks. 

It always amuses me how quick those who favor abortion are to bring up the special cases of rape and incest. 

Nevermind both combined make a very low percentage of abortions performed...despite what organizations like NOW would have you believe.

[norway]

I can understand the families will to end up the person's life right now.

agree, and thats what i said- ?killing is 4 mentally unbalanced people
(as a victims family would likely be)

murder under any circumstanse is wrong

exept jerkin off or shooting a load elsewere

[GnRNightrain]

Certainly. Im not sure what country you have in mind for a direct comparison. Many European countries have immigration, but not like the US, where it is poor, poor people coming from a neighboring country. These people move to the inner-cities, are not educated and end up joining gangs and committing crimes. There are very few European countries that have immigration from poor countries in such high numbers.

lol, oh boy, that was a funny one. And from someone who supposedly traveled a lot abroad and knows quite a bit about foreign countries. lol I can just imagine what the typical guy from the countryside who never went out of his county (not country) must think about other countries. Wow.

Ok, let's take France (he, that's where I'm from, sorry) as an example. I guess the millions of people from North Africa who moved to France in the 60's and 70's (and afterwards - to this very day) don't count. Yeah, Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco must not be included in the your "poor countries" list. I'm guessing Ivory Coast, Mozambique, Nigeria, etc. are pretty rich countries. And France is not an isolated case, those people moved from their country to Italy, Spain, Belgium, UK to try to find a decent job and improve their lives. Some of their kids did end up in gangs and the whole scheme you were talking about. Believe me my friend on this one, the US are certainly not alone. Far from it.
"Very few European countries"? Let's see: France, Italy, Spain, England. That's already four pretty important Western European countries. I wouldn't call that "very few".

Certainly Im not saying that there isnt immigration, and a whole lot of it. ?They dont have it in as of high numbers that the US has it from Mexico. ?That plays some part in the crime rates. ?Do you deny this? ?Furthermore, as you can see by the numbers those that do have the higher rates of immigration have the highest rates of crime. ?City by city, country by country. ?

Now concerning this topic:

- Death Penalty: I'm against it for one main reason: the people who were killed because they were "believed" to have committed a crime. Oops, years later, we find out they didn't commit that crime at all. Well, that's too late. I'm kinda split on that issue, especially because of sexual agressions, teen rapes and stuff like that. I know a life in prison is supposed to be "more painful" but in such cases I can understand the families will to end up the person's life right now. If he is indeed proven guilty without any doubt.

What about those "believed" not yet to be a human.

- Abortion: For. 100%. Think of the rapes, incestuous relations and crap like that. Stop thinking with your male minds and dicks. Let women tell you what the fuck they want. And you will see most of them are for abortion. And PLEASE leave religion out of it. If your God was so great maybe he would have prevented that 12 year old girl to be raped by her step father. Where was your God when THAT happened?

Its not religion, its respect for life. ?Its not thinking with our male minds, its thinking about human beings. ?Its not men versus women, its life versus non-life. ?

[Will]

Oh that's right. Those who are opposed to abortion are brutish cavemen who only think with their dicks.

Not all of them, but some of them, yeah. And I would like to see some women's opinion on the subject. I'm all for it, and nothing ever convinced me it should be a good thing to ban. Of course I'm against "late" abortions and all that weird crap, but there's a limitation defined by law (well, at least in Europe, I don't know about the US, but I think so) and we should respect that law.

It always amuses me how quick those who favor abortion are to bring up the special cases of rape and incest.

Nevermind both combined make a very low percentage of abortions performed...despite what organizations like NOW would have you believe.

Easy to say when you have not been confronted to such a tremendous issue. Even though they're small numbers, they should be accounted for.

[2NaFish]

If you are against abortion, basically, you believe in 2 premises.

1. It is wrong to kill a human being.

I'm against abortion but I don't believe it is inherently wrong to kill if under specific cirucumstances, i.e. war, capital-punishment.

2. A foetus is a human being.
erego, its wrong to kill a foetus.

I believe a fetus is a human being and it obviously doesn't fall under the special categories I listed above.

Hence your reasoning for the beliefs had by someone who opposes abortion might need some re-evaluting...

I'm playing devil's advocate, but....

If you alter premise 1 then your whole argument is weakened considerably as you then allow the anti-abortionist to say "Well my special circumstances are different". The purpose of a moral argument is to invalidate your opponent's position, not to triumph your own, and by altering premise one you've made it very difficult to destroy your opponents reasoning.

So what was it? Debate club? Chess club?

Where is it written that the purpose of a moral argument has to be this or that?

For the record, I fully realize that my having my own "special circumstances" like war and capital punishment might, in of itself, raise the question of conflict on my part.

By the same token, I realize that those who are pro-abortion (oops..."pro-choice"), can come up with their own "special circumstances.

My initial point is there's a certain irony that a convict's "right to live" is more readily defended by some than a child's.

The reason i'm arguing the manner of belief rather than the belief itself is because Sky72 asked "Out of curiosity, what's the logic in those that are OK with the death penalty, but are against abortions?"

And i put down why its difficult to be pro-death penalty and anti-abortion as the now infamous premise 1 conflicts.

As for where it is written; in any search for an answer, whether in a laboratory or of morality, the first thing that must be done is to disprove the opposite theory. Simply proving yourself correct is not enough, untill you have proven the other side wrong they could still tecniqually be right.

Just a quick example. If we were arguing politics and you said (ludicrous as i know this is, but just play along) "Cuba is a fine example that communism works". That doesnt mean that my pro-capatalism point of view suddenly becomes null and void, it merely proves you correct but my belief still stands untouched as both believes can co-exist. However, if you could succesfully prove capatalism to be a crock of shit, then you have defeated me. If you can then prove communism to be viable you have won.

An unrealistic example but i hope you understand me better.

[Will]

- Death Penalty: I'm against it for one main reason: the people who were killed because they were "believed" to have committed a crime. Oops, years later, we find out they didn't commit that crime at all. Well, that's too late. I'm kinda split on that issue, especially because of sexual agressions, teen rapes and stuff like that. I know a life in prison is supposed to be "more painful" but in such cases I can understand the families will to end up the person's life right now. If he is indeed proven guilty without any doubt.

What about those "believed" not yet to be a human.

I understand the sarcasm in relation to the abortion part but I don't think it's relevant, as those are different issues. But if you want to compare them, more power to you...

- Abortion: For. 100%. Think of the rapes, incestuous relations and crap like that. Stop thinking with your male minds and dicks. Let women tell you what the fuck they want. And you will see most of them are for abortion. And PLEASE leave religion out of it. If your God was so great maybe he would have prevented that 12 year old girl to be raped by her step father. Where was your God when THAT happened?

Its not religion, its respect for life. ?Its not thinking with our male minds, its thinking about human beings. ?Its not men versus women, its life versus non-life.

I never understood why abortion was such a big issue in the US. There's a law which says women have the right to terminate their pregnancy in early stages and that's all there is to it. I don't remember hearing about such tensed debates about that issue in other countries. There's a law, women have the right to choose, why deprive them (or debate about depriving them) of that right?

[GnRNightrain]

- Death Penalty: I'm against it for one main reason: the people who were killed because they were "believed" to have committed a crime. Oops, years later, we find out they didn't commit that crime at all. Well, that's too late. I'm kinda split on that issue, especially because of sexual agressions, teen rapes and stuff like that. I know a life in prison is supposed to be "more painful" but in such cases I can understand the families will to end up the person's life right now. If he is indeed proven guilty without any doubt.

What about those "believed" not yet to be a human.

I understand the sarcasm in relation to the abortion part but I don't think it's relevant, as those are different issues. But if you want to compare them, more power to you...

- Abortion: For. 100%. Think of the rapes, incestuous relations and crap like that. Stop thinking with your male minds and dicks. Let women tell you what the fuck they want. And you will see most of them are for abortion. And PLEASE leave religion out of it. If your God was so great maybe he would have prevented that 12 year old girl to be raped by her step father. Where was your God when THAT happened?

Its not religion, its respect for life. ?Its not thinking with our male minds, its thinking about human beings. ?Its not men versus women, its life versus non-life.

I never understood why abortion was such a big issue in the US. There's a law which says women have the right to terminate their pregnancy in early stages and that's all there is to it. I don't remember hearing about such tensed debates about that issue in other countries. There's a law, women have the right to choose, why deprive them (or debate about depriving them) of that right?

I think abortion is wrong.  I simply dont like the way that it was forced upon the people of the US.  Overturning Roe would not outlaw abortion, it would simply make it so each state could choose whether or not to have it.  If we lose the battle of public opinion I can live with it, although I will still disagree with it.

[Eazy E]

The reason i'm arguing the manner of belief rather than the belief itself is because Sky72 asked "Out of curiosity, what's the logic in those that are OK with the death penalty, but are against abortions?"

Just to clarify, I wasn't stating my position on either of those issues.  I was merely making an observation that GnRNightrain said he didn't understand the logic behind being against the death penalty and pro-abortion when he had just stated that he was in favour of the reverse situation (for the death penalty and against abortion).  I'm aware that the two situations are different, and from reading the posts, it seems GnRNightrain is aware of that too.  Basically it is possible for someone to have any combination of views on the two issues since they are different... which is why I commented on the "no logic in being against the death penalty and for abortion".  Did that make sense?   

I think abortion is wrong. I simply dont like the way that it was forced upon the people of the US. Overturning Roe would not outlaw abortion, it would simply make it so each state could choose whether or not to have it. If we lose the battle of public opinion I can live with it, although I will still disagree with it.

Wait a minute.... aren't you for the War in Iraq? Yet you think abortion is wrong because people have the "right to life" and you don't like that it was "forced upon the people of the U.S."??

It sucks when innocent people get killed, or have things thrust upon them that they don't agree with, doesn't it?

[GnRNightrain]

The reason i'm arguing the manner of belief rather than the belief itself is because Sky72 asked "Out of curiosity, what's the logic in those that are OK with the death penalty, but are against abortions?"

Just to clarify, I wasn't stating my position on either of those issues.? I was merely making an observation that GnRNightrain said he didn't understand the logic behind being against the death penalty and pro-abortion when he had just stated that he was in favour of the reverse situation (for the death penalty and against abortion).? I'm aware that the two situations are different, and from reading the posts, it seems GnRNightrain is aware of that too.? Basically it is possible for someone to have any combination of views on the two issues since they are different... which is why I commented on the "no logic in being against the death penalty and for abortion".? Did that make sense?? ?

I still fail to see the logic.

I think abortion is wrong. I simply dont like the way that it was forced upon the people of the US. Overturning Roe would not outlaw abortion, it would simply make it so each state could choose whether or not to have it. If we lose the battle of public opinion I can live with it, although I will still disagree with it.

Wait a minute.... aren't you for the War in Iraq? Yet you think abortion is wrong because people have the "right to life" and you don't like that it was "forced upon the people of the U.S."??

It sucks when innocent people get killed, or have things thrust upon them that they don't agree with, doesn't it?

How do you know they dont agree with it?  They dont want democracy?  They want an evil dictator?  I think they want freedom just like any other country.  First, Iraqis never had free elections where they could choose whether or not to vote our Saddam or not.  He was murdering tons of his own people.  I dont think his people were that sad to see him gone.  If they did have some say in the regime then why didnt they make saddam comply with the UN and tell him to quit violating resolutions.  We gave the guy 20 years and 14 resolutions before we did anything.  We tried quite a few times to get saddam to comply peacefully.  He refused.  Im all for letting countries do what they want to a certain extent, however, my own country's security comes first.

[SLCPUNK]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people have a moral argument against the death penalty, yet are in support of abortion.?

They'll defend the life of an adult convict on death-row before the life of an unborn child.

Maybe if they were against both they would have an argument.? At least their position would be consistent...

Maybe they think it's too different things..ever thought of that?

I completely agree that the death penalty and abortion are two different things.

My point was that, if a person finds themself defending a convict's "right to life" before a babies', they should probably re-evaluate their moral-paradigm...

Right and like I said people think they are two different things. Many people do not believe life starts before birth.

And they are not neccesarily defending the 'right to live' of the murderer. They are questioning if it is a civil way to behave as a society, and obviously they don't think so.

Your argument is flawed because you are ignoring that others have different opinions on when life begins. Also twisting around the wording regarding capital punishment. You can't use your outlook exclusively to poke holes in somebodies opinion, it is not logical. If you looked at both sides and then did so, it would make more sense.

[Eazy E]

I still fail to see the logic.

Well I'm assuming that you're saying it's illogical because people that are pro-choice and against the death penalty are contradicting themselves. ?In one case they are saying the woman should have the option to take the life of her "baby", and in the other case they are saying it is immoral to use capital punishment to take the life of another human. ?You are saying that you are against abortion and FOR capital punishment. ?I'm assuming your stance on abortion is because everyone has the "right" to live, so if you're FOR capital punishment, then by your standards, that's a contradiction as well, and illogical.

How do you know they dont agree with it? They dont want democracy? They want an evil dictator? I think they want freedom just like any other country. First, Iraqis never had free elections where they could choose whether or not to vote our Saddam or not. He was murdering tons of his own people. I dont think his people were that sad to see him gone. If they did have some say in the regime then why didnt they make saddam comply with the UN and tell him to quit violating resolutions. We gave the guy 20 years and 14 resolutions before we did anything. We tried quite a few times to get saddam to comply peacefully. He refused. Im all for letting countries do what they want to a certain extent, however, my own country's security comes first.

Ah, yes... and George Bush is all about "complying with the UN". ?Did the UN decide that invading Iraq was justified? ?No. ?Did George Bush care? No. ?You can't justify war because your country is paranoid.

Anyways, regardless of whether the Iraqi people are "happy" with the U.S. implementing a new government in their country... Innocent people were killed. ?So how can you say "abortion shouldn't be allowed because you're taking the life of an innocent person" and then turn around and proudly wave your country's flag for dropping bombs on innocent people? ?

Your defense of capital punishment is that the criminals have committed crimes that are so serious that their life should be taken. ?Your argument against abortion is that the life of an innocent unborn child should not be taken. ?However you support the War in Iraq which kills innocent people. ?Something there doesn't add up?.... Unless you want to argue that each of these situations is completely different, in which case people CAN have different views on them, in which case some people CAN be pro-choice AND against capital punishment.

[SLCPUNK]

How in the hell can you be pro-life, but then approve the war in Iraq? Which has killed thousands upon thousands of innocent children? Not to mention all the thousands of children with blown off legs, arms , eyes etc etc. Is this a pro-life stance you take?

I guess if it's for a "greater good" then it's ok?

Just the ugly side of war?

With that logic, isn't an abortion then just an ugly side of life?

Could some of you pro-lifers put your money where your mouth is and start adopting the children once abortion is illegal again? If a woman is having an abortion is it for a reason, usually financial. If young poor women receive welfare then you bitch and call them bottom feeders with 4 kids each, and you are tired of your tax money going to them. But if they have an abortion then they are bad people too.

Droping a bomb on civilians, then rebuilding with corporate contracts (that our VP still gets 180k a year from) is pro life? Jeesh...who ever would have thought.