Black Conservatives

[DDBY]

Outlawing abortion won't end abortion. Working to end poverty and improve access to education will.

This may be the first time I agree with you!  Where's the Champagne?

We probably agree more than you think.

You lost me


 

[«ě»]

I'm sure there's some completely lunatic women out there, yeah

Nnotwithstanding the smiley, your ad hominem is not cool.  Someone who disagrees with you on an issue upon which the general population is sharply divided must be insane, eh?  Interesting that one moment you suggest that you "literally" can't believe there are those who think their views should be forced upon others, and the next you suggest that anyone who doesn't share your views is insane. 

No, it's actually not about disagree with me. It's about people feeling so entitled about their own principle and beliefs they feel it should apply to absolutely everyone. I have no problem what-so-ever if you and your wife chose not to have an abortion based on your beliefs or whatever. However the "because I think its wrong, nobody should do it" - that part I have very big problems with, and I'd hope more people did.

Actually more men are pro-choice than women percentage-wise in the US.

Could be, I haven't actually checked it at all. Anything less than 100% support is ridiculous to me.

[7S]

Outlawing abortion won't end abortion. Working to end poverty and improve access to education will.

This may be the first time I agree with you!  Where's the Champagne?

We probably agree more than you think.

You lost me


 

[«ě»]

No, it's actually not about disagree with me. It's about people feeling so entitled about their own principle and beliefs they feel it should apply to absolutely everyone. I have no problem what-so-ever if you and your wife chose not to have an abortion based on your beliefs or whatever. However the "because I think its wrong, nobody should do it" - that part I have very big problems with, and I'd hope more people did.

Isn't thinking something is wrong, and thus no one should do, the very basis of law?

"I think segregation is wrong, so no one should do it."
"I think polluting is wrong, so no one should do it."
"I think forcing workers into 18 hour days is wrong, so no one should do it."

Or am I missing something?

Every example you mentioned were cases that has severe consequences in other people's lives. An abortion affects nobody but the person making the decision to do so. So no, it's not the same thing.

[Hank Rearden]

Isn't thinking something is wrong, and thus no one should do, the very basis of law?

I think wearing burnt orange and red together is wrong.

If you think the fetus is a person, I don't see how you could possibly think abortion should be legal.  

[stsherri]

No, it's actually not about disagree with me. It's about people feeling so entitled about their own principle and beliefs they feel it should apply to absolutely everyone. I have no problem what-so-ever if you and your wife chose not to have an abortion based on your beliefs or whatever. However the "because I think its wrong, nobody should do it" - that part I have very big problems with, and I'd hope more people did.

It seems to me that those who have come to the metaphysical conclusion that personhood is instantiated at some point before birth have an ethical duty to raise their voice against the destruction of these persons.  This paradigm of thought is no different than seeking a codified prohibition on murder (in the strict sense of the word).  Do you also assert that those who oppose murder should not seek to have such opposition substantiated in public policy (in the hypothetical event that such public policy did not exist)?  We apply ethics, as we understand them, to the world, and generally we seek to have our ethics substantiated in public policy.  Your ethic with respect to abortion obviously differs from mine, but you nonetheless seek to have yours substantiated by public policy (abortion on demand, I assume). 

Your appeals to liberty and individuality do not sway me.  I am a product of my environment, of course, so I think freedom is a good thing, generally.  But I also respect a classical, Aristotelean view of the world in which freedom is not always (not even often, perhaps) paramount.  You think I'm intolerant and dogmatic because I would dare to impose my principles and values upon others; yet, you presume to impose the preeminence of liberty upon me.  In short, you operate under an assumption, but my views do not follow from this assumption and, indeed, I may not even share this assumption.  Thus, I am insane.

[«ě»]

Well, if you believe that a fetus is a child, as many people honestly and sincerely do, then we've now affected several generations of people.  And it does have societal consequences - it's a statement about what society values.  Who does and does not deserve protection under the law.

For the record, I am not for criminalizing abortion.  I am, however, for admitting that abortions ends a human life.

Well, so does jerking off then, if you have no concern about the evolvement of the fetus. And yet again, you come back to if the people believe this, not an objective fact. Depending on what week you take abortion, biology can very clearly explain to what degree a fetus has become a child. As for societal value, who are you making that statement to? A majority of the civilized world consider it quite medieval of the US to still be arguing this point, so for outsiders you certainly wouldn't show any negative values by allowing abortions.

It seems to me that those who have come to the metaphysical conclusion that personhood is instantiated at some point before birth have an ethical duty to raise their voice against the destruction of these persons.

If the word metaphysical is needed to explain something, it doesn't belong in public policy.

Do you also assert that those who oppose murder should not seek to have such opposition substantiated in public policy (in the hypothetical event that such public policy did not exist)?

There's no metaphysical assumption needed to understand a murder victim is a fully developed human being. So the comparison is ridiculous.

You think I'm intolerant and dogmatic because I would dare to impose my principles and values upon others; yet, you presume to impose the preeminence of liberty upon me.

No, actually my view on this imposes nothing on you. If abortion is legalized, that does by no mean force you to having to have an abortion. You still have the choice to stand by your principles. The only thing in question here is the other way around, that you feel that your rules should apply to everyone. Where as I feel that everyone needs to be allowed to make that decision themselves. We know, scientifically, that it takes several weeks for a fetus to develop into a human, and while you may want to be conservative in setting that timelime, it's a different matter than blank criminalization.

[stsherri]

Well, so does jerking off then, if you have no concern about the evolvement of the fetus. And yet again, you come back to if the people believe this, not an objective fact. Depending on what week you take abortion, biology can very clearly explain to what degree a fetus has become a child. As for societal value, who are you making that statement to? A majority of the civilized world consider it quite medieval of the US to still be arguing this point, so for outsiders you certainly wouldn't show any negative values by allowing abortions.

Masturbation is irrelevant.  Sperm is not a living human individual any more than the cells in my fingernails when I trim them off.

If the word metaphysical is needed to explain something, it doesn't belong in public policy.

When does a human individual become a person (and thus inherit the legal rights and protections that we assign to that the status of person)?  This is a metaphysical question, as it calls into question a distinction between simply being biologically human and being a person.  And, whether you acknowledge it or not, many of our public policy questions rely on metaphysical conclusions such as this.

[stsherri]

It's also interesting that your intolerance for others' views has reared its head again.  Who are you to tell everyone that metaphysics has no place in the public square?

[stsherri]

Sorry to have hijacked this thread, to those still tuned in.  I'm not black, and I'm not really talking about black conservatism...