What happend to morality?

Bebezinho

Est. Contributor
Messages
37
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Other
Abortion is all over the news right now and I am shocked at how immoral people have become.

To set this up I first need to establish a background:

1st. I belive that life begins at conception. That is that at conception, a brand new genetic code is created that will determine weight, hair color and patterns, eye color etc.

2nd I believe that a women can do anything she wants with her own body but does not have the right to harm another person's body. I.e. her baby

3rd Rape and incest are terrible acts, one of the worst that can be committed and those that do it should be castrated or killed, but these horrible acts still shouldn't be followed by the killing of a child. Yet I will concede this ground for argument sake and agree that the Alabama bill should have at least considered these.

4th I don't believe that men are at all interested in controlling a womens uterus (a common argument) and are simply concerned with the human life inside.

5th the constitution does not have anything in it about a womens right to abortion, it protects all life and gives these rights to all humans including those are yet to be born.

6th viability is a strawmans argument because it can not draw a straight line as to what is viable or not i.e. a baby born in the boondocks vs a baby born in the city.

7th I am pro choice. There are several choices i.e. contraception, adoption, motherhood, or the easiest of all abstinence. I am simply against the choice of the killing of a child.

8th the Dred Scott and Roe vs wade cases are the worst decisions ever passed by the supreme court because they both serve to de value human life.

With this set up as to where I am coming from, my main greavence is the current argument of killing the baby for monetary gains. It shocks me to hear some feminists come out and say that the baby should be killed because the mom wouldn't be able to financially support the child. Or the even worse argument that men should come out and say how much better their lives are because their baby momma aborted the child.

These arguments make my sick. How far has society fallen to think that it's justified to kill something so innocent for a monetary gain? Kids are expensive, they always have been and always will be, but everyone that has had one knows that they are the most amazing things you can possibly have as a human. But to kill one because it would make your career better? Really?

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this
 

KimbaWolfNagihiko

Pokemon Trainer in, err, Training... Pants
Est. Contributor
Messages
3,598
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Babyfur
I think it all boils down to ''don't force your beliefs or morality on another person.'' I don't need an extended argument for this.

I've seen these new abortion laws being called ''Christian Sharia laws,'' which I think sums it up pretty nicely. They're little more than religious people trying to make others abide by their beliefs.

And the same people who claim they care so much about the unborn baby, well when it arrives, I can almost guarantee they'll moan about their taxes being used to hand out welfare checks and food stamps.

I personally, would rather see a baby aborted (the earlier the better), than be born and have to grow up in some of the terrible situations we've all heard about, or shuffled from family to family in foster care. To me, that is a far more moral option.

If someone doesn't like abortion then they don't have to get one, but that doesn't mean we should prevent everyone from doing so.
 

Calico

Est. Contributor
Messages
4,788
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little
You mean you're pro life. Pro choice means for abortion.

People often whine about people having kids they cannot afford and we have so many kids in foster care and orphanages and if everyone would just get an abortion, we wouldn't have all these unwanted kids and fucked up adults as a result of their childhood and we wouldn't be paying taxes to people to help them support their kids they cannot afford. Make up your damn minds people.

And if you don't like abortion, don't screw around with women.
 

BoundCoder

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,177
Role
Adult Baby
Meh, this debate got tiring a long time ago. It hinges on some fundamental views for which their are largely two completely opposing views, each held by a large chunk of the population. Neither side is likely to budge on those views, and the arguments and counter-arguments for those views also hinge on core beliefs which again, are largely non-debatable.
 

Bebezinho

Est. Contributor
Messages
37
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Other
I think it all boils down to ''don't force your beliefs or morality on another person.'' I don't need an extended argument for this.

I've seen these new abortion laws being called ''Christian Sharia laws,'' which I think sums it up pretty nicely. They're little more than religious people trying to make others abide by their beliefs.
The value of human life has nothing to do with religion. Just because the Christian bible says don't kill, dont steal, don't lie, and don't cheat doesn't make abiding by and enforcing these things pushing someone's belief. these are the same arguments that slave owners made when they wanted to keep their slaves. That they were not considered a human life and that the north was just pushing their beliefs on the south. This is why I said that the dred scotscott and roe v wade cases are terrible.

I agree that most public adoption and foster agencies are crap but that's mostly because they are government and there are several privately ran ones that are amazing. But this still should not justify the killing of an innocent child because the parent's are not responsible enough to take care of their child.
 

Bebezinho

Est. Contributor
Messages
37
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Other
You mean you're pro life. Pro choice means for abortion.

People often whine about people having kids they cannot afford and we have so many kids in foster care and orphanages and if everyone would just get an abortion, we wouldn't have all these unwanted kids and fucked up adults as a result of their childhood and we wouldn't be paying taxes to people to help them support their kids they cannot afford. Make up your damn minds people.

And if you don't like abortion, don't screw around with women.
No, I am all for choices, I provided 4 of them. I am simply agaisnt the 5th choice of murder which in turn makes me pro life. The "pro choice" argument is set up to instantly say that if you disagree, you are automatically taking away someone's right to choose. The same can be said with the "pro life" that anyone that opposes is automatically agaisnt life. It's a little more complicated than that.

And like I said, I don't care what women do with their bodies, they have every right to do whatever they want. The problem comes in when it involves a 3rd party body i.e. the baby, at the point the women does not have the right to that body no matter what decisions led up to that point. At that point there is a new life (if you follow point of conception) that has protected rights as an individual.
 

KimbaWolfNagihiko

Pokemon Trainer in, err, Training... Pants
Est. Contributor
Messages
3,598
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Babyfur
To add: in an ideal world, we wouldn't need abortion. But there's no such thing, so in the meantime, I think it would be helpful to be open and honest when it comes to sex and sexuality. Give kids real sex ed that basically says ''Look, we all know you're going to have sex sooner or later, so here's how to do it safely.'' But of course, people are stupid, so that's where the back-up plan of abortion comes in.
The value of human life has nothing to do with religion. Just because the Christian bible says don't kill, dont steal, don't lie, and don't cheat doesn't make abiding by and enforcing these things pushing someone's belief. these are the same arguments that slave owners made when they wanted to keep their slaves. That they were not considered a human life and that the north was just pushing their beliefs on the south. This is why I said that the dred scotscott and roe v wade cases are terrible.

I agree that most public adoption and foster agencies are crap but that's mostly because they are government and there are several privately ran ones that are amazing. But this still should not justify the killing of an innocent child because the parent's are not responsible enough to take care of their child.
I just don't think it's fair to say that the life of a few-month-old fetus has the same value as that of a newborn, child, adult, etc. It's not a sentient, conscious being. But it's like BoundCounder said: the arguments hinge on beliefs that are usually non-debatable. None of us are likely to sway the others' opinions.

So how I look at it is this: we have one section of people who think abortion is OK and another that think it isn't. Does saying ''I don't think you should be able to do this just because I think it's wrong?'' sound fair when many people do not agree with that statement? Doesn't it seem much fairer to allow people to have that choice, while you also have the choice not to engage in it?

Also: embryos left over from in vitro fertilization are often destroyed, but yet no seems to be calling for that to be banned...
 
Last edited:

DanielW

Est. Contributor
Messages
882
Role
Little, Incontinent, Other, Private
Just because someone else's morality doesn't align with your own doesn't make a person immoral. When you are capable of becoming pregnant, I'm all for you making whatever choices you want with regard to your body. As you should be with anyone else's
 
Last edited:

Sapphyre

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,254
Role
Diaper Lover, Diaperfur, Incontinent
The value of human life has nothing to do with religion....
Actually, Kimba raised a valid point. Your definition of what constitutes "human life" has everything to do with your beliefs (it was explicitly stated as background assumption #1 in the OP). Those who support the option for abortion certainly do not believe that they are supporting murder, because their assumptions / beliefs differ from your own.
 

CutePrincess

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,097
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little
You mean you're pro life. Pro choice means for abortion.

People often whine about people having kids they cannot afford and we have so many kids in foster care and orphanages and if everyone would just get an abortion, we wouldn't have all these unwanted kids and fucked up adults as a result of their childhood and we wouldn't be paying taxes to people to help them support their kids they cannot afford. Make up your damn minds people.

And if you don't like abortion, don't screw around with women.
its word twisting, i wouldn't even of bothered, hence the reply you got.
I think it all boils down to ''don't force your beliefs or morality on another person.'' I don't need an extended argument for this.

I've seen these new abortion laws being called ''Christian Sharia laws,'' which I think sums it up pretty nicely. They're little more than religious people trying to make others abide by their beliefs.
Yup
The value of human life has nothing to do with religion. Just because the Christian bible says don't kill, dont steal, don't lie, and don't cheat doesn't make abiding by and enforcing these things pushing someone's belief.
You are a bit off here. The view you hold is Christian view. If you where in complete isolation, outside these social influences, would you still be saying the same thing? I can give myself as an example, I have no memory of self awareness till I was 2 or 3. If I was killed before then would I really feel "pain"? How would I have a logical thought to judge if I was murdered? Why should my wants and needs be more important then w/e the reason would of been for the abortion? I think you are simplifying the matter too much.

There is also situations where you may have to kill one unborn baby to save the other due to conjoined twin development defects. You also may need to abort in the case if you don't baby and mother will die. I do not see situations like this outlined in your post, did you think about this? This is not the first time south states try to enforce christian based laws, it drives me up the wall.

With that said, I am actually pro-life. I do not see the harm in setting up adoption centers for unwanted births. However I also belive it is not my place to force my views on others. I also think we need abortion options so people are not harming themselvs trying to do it off their own because of bad religious based laws.
 
Last edited:

Bebezinho

Est. Contributor
Messages
37
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Other
To add: in an ideal world, we wouldn't need abortion. But there's no such thing, so in the meantime, I think it would be helpful to be open and honest when it comes to sex and sexuality. Give kids real sex ed that basically says ''Look, we all know you're going to have sex sooner or later, so here's how to do it safely.'' But of course, people are stupid, so that's where the back-up plan of abortion comes in.

I just don't think it's fair to say that the life of a few-month-old fetus has the same value as that of a newborn, child, adult, etc. It's not a sentient, conscious being. But it's like BoundCounder said: the arguments hinge on beliefs that are usually non-debatable. None of us are likely to sway the others' opinions.

So how I look at it is this: we have one section of people who think abortion is OK and another that think it isn't. Does saying ''I don't think you should be able to do this just because I think it's wrong?'' sound fair when many people do not agree with that statement? Doesn't it seem much fairer to allow people to have that choice, while you also have the choice not to engage in it?

Also: embryos left over from in vitro fertilization are often destroyed, but yet no seems to be calling for that to be banned...
I completely agree with your first statement. Kids and adults do need to be openly taught what sex is and what happens when you have sex but murder shouldn't ever be a back up plan. Just becaus something isn't wanted doesn't mean it should be killed?

As to the value of life, isn't all life valuable? Any baby after conception, barring complications, has the potential to become sentient. it is has a unique genetic code that determines personality, gender, hair etc. this has nothing to do with religion or belief but is basic science (same goes for frozen embryos). It could be argued that people that are severely mentally disabled or in a coma are not sentient/conciousness does that justify killing them?

As to allowing the choice to abort because some people think its wrong and some don't. Some people think it's okay to steal/murder and some don't. Is it unfair that those thing's are against the law?

My basic argument is that all human life should be protected no matter what age, race, or ideology.
 

Bebezinho

Est. Contributor
Messages
37
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Other
its word twisting, i wouldn't even of bothered, hence the reply you got.

Yup

You are a bit off here. The view you hold is Christian view. If you where in complete isolation, outside these social influences, would you still be saying the same thing? I can give myself as an example, I have no memory of self awareness till I was 2 or 3. If I was killed before then would I really feel "pain"? How would I have a logical thought to judge if I was murdered? Why should my wants and needs be more important then w/e the reason would of been for the abortion? I think you are simplifying the matter too much.

There is also situations where you may have to kill one unborn baby to save the other due to conjoined twin development defects. You also may need to abort in the case if you don't baby and mother will die. I do not see situations like this outlined in your post, did you think about this? This is not the first time south states try to enforce christian based laws, it drives me up the wall.

With that said, I am actually pro-life. I do not see the harm in setting up adoption centers for unwanted births. However I also belive it is not my place to force my views on others. I also think we need abortion options so people are not harming themselvs trying to do it off their own because of bad religious based laws.
It's not simply Christian view to not want people killed, things stolen, etc.

If you were 2 or 3 you would still feel things even if you dont remember. that's a ridiculous argument.

As to saving another life, i.e. the mother, isn't the loss of one life better than 2 howver tragic? My issue isnt with these rarer cases. The general reason for abortion however is convenience.

And sadly yes there are stupid people that will commit self harm no matter what laws are in place. Unfortunately there is nothing we can do about them but educate them
 

CutePrincess

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,097
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little
As to allowing the choice to abort because some people think its wrong and some don't. Some people think it's okay to steal/murder and some don't. Is it unfair that those thing's are against the law?

My basic argument is that all human life should be protected no matter what age, race, or ideology.
You can say laws are made based on what will keep social order and socility as a whole to progress. Like I said you are simplifying the manner too much. If I steal/ kill/ etc I am causing direct harm and may even impede the ability of one to advance society. We can very well apply such a view on aborting a baby, may kill next einstein or whatever. Sure that can be the case if raised in the right envorment. What if the person was to be raised in torture and misery and not see the light of day because the "parents" are unfit. Or lets pretend we have full pro-life laws in the US, what is going to stop people from harming themselves to have abortions?

this is not an absolute black and white siutation here, and you can't have laws favoring one over the other. As I said there can very well have subsidized adoption clinics for the situations where abortion would be wrong. However abortion still needs to be optional when there is unfavorable situations such as the ones I outlined in a past post of mine.
It's not simply Christian view to not want people killed, things stolen, etc.

If you were 2 or 3 you would still feel things even if you dont remember. that's a ridiculous argument.
this dismissing comment you made here for me to give you something to think about can be appled to your first statment. You have more then one person telling you it is purely a CHRISTIAN view! we should not have Christian beliefs as laws. Again this is not the first time a south state tried to do this. Just because you think it is not a christian view does not mean you are correct on that idea. I also dislike how you completey ingored situtations that exist when abortion may be needed. you cannot have laws that blanket ban this... I really wish the south states just become their own country already because they surely have no respect to our basic founding constitution.
 
Last edited:

Bebezinho

Est. Contributor
Messages
37
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Other
Actually, Kimba raised a valid point. Your definition of what constitutes "human life" has everything to do with your beliefs (it was explicitly stated as background assumption #1 in the OP). Those who support the option for abortion certainly do not believe that they are supporting murder, because their assumptions / beliefs differ from your own.
That their beliefs differ is completely irrelevant. it is a scientific fact that at conception a genetically unique human being is created and that by ending that you are destroying that unique individual.

I pick conception as the line because of this certainty and clarity. All other arguments, such as heartbeat, viability, or brain function, have no such line and are highly controversial
 

CutePrincess

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,097
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little
That their beliefs differ is completely irrelevant. it is a scientific fact that at conception a genetically unique human being is created and that by ending that you are destroying that unique individual.

I pick conception as the line because of this certainty and clarity. All other arguments, such as heartbeat, viability, or brain function, have no such line and are highly controversial
It is not, no. Sorry it is a fallacy to try prove religions belief as science. Also I made an edit for you, try to take your time on the next reply
1st. I belive that life begins at conception. That is that at conception, a brand new genetic code is created that will determine weight, hair color and patterns, eye color etc.
This is Christian belief, not science. Do not be so dismissive because you do not like what is said.
 
Last edited:

Sapphyre

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,254
Role
Diaper Lover, Diaperfur, Incontinent
And like I said, I don't care what women do with their bodies, they have every right to do whatever they want. The problem comes in when it involves a 3rd party body i.e. the baby, at the point the women does not have the right to that body no matter what decisions led up to that point. At that point there is a new life (if you follow point of conception) that has protected rights as an individual.
I think, particularly in the early phases of pregnancy, it is generally incorrect to draw a line discriminating the mother from the child as altogether separate beings. One very valid reason for abortion is the risk of (or actual manifestation of) health complications for the mother. Surely, she should have the right to make medical decisions impacting her own health?

I think the central problem here is that humans come into existence gradually, and no one can agree (or as yet reliably justify) where to draw the line, when to declare that rights should be bestowed. We all agree that humans rights ought to apply at some point along the way, we disagree on where. You might say it is when the sperm meets the egg; I'm more concerned about the first stirrings of consciousness and ability to feel pain for my personal definition. To some extent it is a little bit of an arbitrary line in the sand, like choosing the age at which people are suddenly responsible enough to buy liquor, but I think focusing on consciousness and pain perception should provide a good ballpark to land within.
 

Sapphyre

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,254
Role
Diaper Lover, Diaperfur, Incontinent
That their beliefs differ is completely irrelevant. it is a scientific fact that at conception a genetically unique human being is created and that by ending that you are destroying that unique individual.

I pick conception as the line because of this certainty and clarity. All other arguments, such as heartbeat, viability, or brain function, have no such line and are highly controversial
Not quite. It is a scientific fact that at conception a single cell with a unique genetic sequence is created. It may or may not even be a viable sequence at that point. Your declaration of this cell as a "human life" is your personal belief and axiomatic definition.

The appeal of clarity and certainty is understandable, it is convenient to say the least, but that does not make it correct.
 

KimbaWolfNagihiko

Pokemon Trainer in, err, Training... Pants
Est. Contributor
Messages
3,598
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Babyfur
The issue of mentally-disabled people/people in a coma etc. is indeed a slippery slope. My personal view considers the quality of life the individual has or is expected to have. Thus, for example, I would not be totally against the euthanasia of a person who is suffering/is so brain damaged they have no sense of awareness. But that is a discussion for another thread.

And saying that it's better for one person to die than two in the case of a woman needing an abortion to survive is just... ridiculous. I think the death of a grown adult is going to have a lot bigger impact on the people close to her than that of an embryo or fetus...
 

Bebezinho

Est. Contributor
Messages
37
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Other
Not quite. It is a scientific fact that at conception a single cell with a unique genetic sequence is created. It may or may not even be a viable sequence at that point. Your declaration of this cell as a "human life" is your personal belief and axiomatic definition.

The appeal of clarity and certainty is understandable, it is convenient to say the least, but that does not make it correct.
Like i said before barring complications, at concpetion a new life is created.

As a kind of cover all to other replies, hypotheticals don't really work when it comes to laws they need to be straight forward clear and black and white, or they will manipulated. also like I said before the Alabama law is too strict and should have considered rape,incest and endangerment.

Like i said in the beginning I'm mainly concerned by the argument that people should abort for monetary gain. This is why i believe morality is slipping. choosing money over a baby for no other reason.


Also side bar, does anyone else have trouble with text lag when typing on a mobile on this site?
 

Bebezinho

Est. Contributor
Messages
37
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Other
The issue of mentally-disabled people/people in a coma etc. is indeed a slippery slope. My personal view considers the quality of life the individual has or is expected to have. Thus, for example, I would not be totally against the euthanasia of a person who is suffering/is so brain damaged they have no sense of awareness. But that is a discussion for another thread.

And saying that it's better for one person to die than two in the case of a woman needing an abortion to survive is just... ridiculous. I think the death of a grown adult is going to have a lot bigger impact on the people close to her than that of an embryo or fetus...
Exactly that's why I'm for saving the mother, sorry if that's not clear
 
Top