Killing a baby is the same as getting an abortion (1 Viewer)

cssftw

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
207
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
listen - I am against abortion, EXCEPT in the case of rape.

I support abortion in rape not merely because the baby was not wanted by the mother. But because rape is such a horrible inconceivable experience, it is likely that the woman would be unable to feel any love for the child as he/she was the product of such a vicious attack. It is entirely possible that everytime the woman would look at her baby - she would be reminded of the rape attack.

Hence, this is the justification.

But any other situation - NO.
 

a c

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
141
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
1998
Intellect has nothing to do with it. It is simple evolutionary theory. That a species will try its best to ensure its own survival. Therefore a newborn baby is far more important to a human being than an adult dog or pig
You seem to be saying it is never the done thing for an animal to kill a juvenile member of it's own species. Educate yourself on some basic facts about animals pls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide_(zoology)

All sorts of animals practice infanticide all the time, there is commonly advantage in killing your children, therefore humans are justified in killing children when it advantages them (all the time)

um,
http://www.newscientist.com/article...olution-promotes-the-survival-of-species.html

Evolution doesn't preserve 'species', there is often competition between members of the same 'species', competitive exclusion, mothers of other species neglect non-viable offspring.
Keeping a disabled/stupid/ugly/ranga child alive excludes you from raising another child who is reproductively viable (opportunity cost), murdering your unproductive offspring is perfectly valid in this light.

Also your theory that it's justified to act in whatever maximizes my reproductive success, says that it is justified for me to rape all the white women:

http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPa...andle=hein.journals/juraba39&div=20&id=&page=

I personally think we should consider using reason.
 
Last edited:

powlmao

Banned
Joined
Feb 17, 2011
Messages
3,971
Location
Hogwarts
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
Gosh this is simple. I need to ask Why the fuck do people care if you can abort children


Abortion = Less Sino like people in the world (+ less people like shadowdude)

Killing new Born = Fucked up


I rather see a person abort a child if they couldn't look after it, or if the parents would be totally unsuited parents .

To be honest, I understand why people say its murder and I agree it is in some form but I honestly believe it should be allowed



My two cents is that Why the fuck do you care? You have no right to intrude into other peoples decisions and that in the end Its your choice if you want to or not
 

kfnmpah

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
2,242
Location
Motley Crewcastle
Gender
Female
HSC
2009
I didn't say he wasn't allowed mate. Australia's a free country. What I meant was you can't say that as in you can't be sure that they have no quality of life.
If it came across that was please excuse me.
stopped reading at "australia is a free country"

Can someone find some really angry facebook statuses from dumb people who heard about this? I bet they'd be amazing
this is my favourite:

Maria Gioffrè:
Isn't it funny how everyone who is pro-abortion has already been born?.... and given the chance to live!!!!

haha fuck.

do they always test amniotic fluid these days or only if the woman is >35?

How would you go about killing a retarded baby? People who want to be euthansied just up the morphine, so what do you do exactly in that scenario? the kid isn't exactly hooked up to a morphine drip and you can't just kill it so what would you do to make it as humane as possible?
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
3,418
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
Uni Grad
2013
slit throat from eat to ear so it is halal and then chuck em in pies sweeny todd style
 

alstah

Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
511
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
Uni Grad
2016
Urgh. Pro-choice.

If you really had a choice, why did you get pregnant in the first place?

Now, apparently, I'm sexist and anti-female.
 

SnowFox

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
5,462
Location
gone
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2009
Less sino-like people in the world.
Post of the day.
 

mirakon

nigga
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
4,222
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
You seem to be saying it is never the done thing for an animal to kill a juvenile member of it's own species. Educate yourself on some basic facts about animals pls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide_(zoology)

All sorts of animals practice infanticide all the time, there is commonly advantage in killing your children, therefore humans are justified in killing children when it advantages them (all the time)

um,
http://www.newscientist.com/article...olution-promotes-the-survival-of-species.html

Evolution doesn't preserve 'species', there is often competition between members of the same 'species', competitive exclusion, mothers of other species neglect non-viable offspring.
Keeping a disabled/stupid/ugly/ranga child alive excludes you from raising another child who is reproductively viable (opportunity cost), murdering your unproductive offspring is perfectly valid in this light.

Also your theory that it's justified to act in whatever maximizes my reproductive success, says that it is justified for me to rape all the white women:

http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPa...andle=hein.journals/juraba39&div=20&id=&page=

I personally think we should consider using reason.
What sort of advantages would we gain from murdering a newborn human baby?

Similarly, what constitutes a "stupid", or "ugly" baby, is there any objective way you can determine this?

Furthermore, rape=>pissing off other members of the human species (i.e. another potential and more legitimate mate) => violent competiton => neutralisation of a potential mate => reduction of number of potential reporductive partners => reduction in overall reproductive capacity of the species.

In other words if group A starting raping women belonging to group B, group B will obviously not be happy and retaliate which can result in a conflict potentially wiping out group A or B or both, which obviously reduces reproductive success
 

kfnmpah

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
2,242
Location
Motley Crewcastle
Gender
Female
HSC
2009
Urgh. Pro-choice.

If you really had a choice, why did you get pregnant in the first place?

Now, apparently, I'm sexist and anti-female.
let's disregard all those who are stupid enough to have sex without some for of birth control if conceiving a child isn't the aim

what about when it is purely accidental? i've known/known of people who use condoms and are on the pill and have fallen pregnant
of course an abortion is justified if they aren't fit to raise children

but this isn't really a thread about whether or not abortion should be allowed (it should)

is killing a new born really the same as getting an abortion?
i'm inclined to say no.
Emotionally, there would be a significant difference for the parents (i.e. the difference between finding out you've got 16 little cells in your uterus compared to carrying a baby to term, giving birth then deciding to kill it)
morally, there is a difference. Legally a fetus isn't a person until it has breathed so legally killing a newborn is murder.

But then again it's probably just as wrong to bring a retarded child into the world as it is to kill it. both would leave the parents with guilt. the guilt of killing their child vs the guilt of seeing their child fall behind, be bullied etc (inevitable) and also, more often than not, parents blame themselves for something going wrong with their child "could i have done something different during pregnancy" etc even though it's not their fault (most of the time)
Parents are allowed to terminate their pregnancy if their amniocentesis shows the baby is retarded (i'm p sure all women over 35 have them these days) but what if the mother is younger and doesn't have one? it's not fair that she should have to go through bringing up a retarded kid when if she was a few years older she would have found out and had the choice to terminate.

i dunno. It's pretty much the same as euthanasia, in my mind. It's illegal, but it's more wrong (imo) to let someone continue living in pain/their mind completely gone than it is to turn up their morphine drip and let them die. My grandmother was pretty much euthanised. she was in lots of pain and didn't know what was going on half the time (when she did she was p much only frustrated/angry with herself) so her morphine was turned up and the Drs knew she would have breathing difficulties with that dose, but she felt no pain and just 'went to sleep'

tl;dr should be allowed an abortion, should not be allowed to kill a kid because you change your mind, should be allowed to if the kid is retarded.
sounds fucked, but what lolsmoth said, it would place less of a strain on resources, parents, health care, schooling, everything. more humane to end its life than let it live one where it is pretty much going to be ridiculed and is sueless (and probably knows it)
 

cheezcake

Callipygian Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
596
Location
Gliese 581 d
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
Last edited:

SylviaB

sorry if i offended anyon
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
6,018
Location
Lidcombe
Gender
Female
HSC
2021
Most rapists do not have a preference for rape over consensual sex.[1][2][3][4][5][6]


[1]Dreznick MT (2003). "Heterosocial competence of rapists and child molesters: a meta-analysis". J Sex Res 40 (2): 170–8. doi:10.1080/00224490309552178
. PMID 12908124

[2] Barbaree, H.E.; Marshall, W.L.; Lanthier, R.D. (1979). "Deviant sexual arousal in rapists". Behaviour Research and Therapy 8: 229–239.

[3]Baxter, D.J.; Barbaree, H.E.; Marshall, W.L. (1986). "Sexual responses to consenting and forced sex in a large sample of rapists and nonrapists". Behaviour Research and Therapy 24 (5): 513–520. doi:10.1016/0005-7967(86)90031-8
. PMID 3753378

[4] Hall, G.C.N.; Proctor, W.C.; Nelson, G.M. (1988). "Validity of physiological measures of pedophilic sexual arousal in a sexual offender population". Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 56 (1): 118–122. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.56.1.118
. PMID 3346436

[5] Ron Langevin (1985). Erotic preference, gender identity, and aggression in men: new research studies
. Psychology Press. pp. 39–76. ISBN 978-0-89859-445-4. Retrieved 1 October 2011.

[6]Wormith, J.S.; Bradford, J.M.W.; Pawlak, A.; Borzecki, M.; Zohar, A. (1988). "The assessment of deviant sexual arousal as a function of intelligence, instructional set and alcohol ingestion". Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 33: 800–808.
 

soloooooo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2012
Messages
3,325
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
Women should be able to have an abortion up to 26 weeks or whatever it is currently.

Killing a baby that has gone to full term however is murdur.
 

pony_magician

townie for worst user
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
1,048
Gender
Female
HSC
2011
listen - I am against abortion, EXCEPT in the case of rape.

I support abortion in rape not merely because the baby was not wanted by the mother. But because rape is such a horrible inconceivable experience, it is likely that the woman would be unable to feel any love for the child as he/she was the product of such a vicious attack. It is entirely possible that everytime the woman would look at her baby - she would be reminded of the rape attack.

Hence, this is the justification.

But any other situation - NO.
wow no you're retarded. a rape baby is the same as every other baby being aborted. you're saying that because a mother was raped, the ~*~~*~*innocent unborn baby~*~*~~*~* is allowed to be aborted and that they're not allowed to be born and have life, but other ~*~*~~*~*~equally innocent unborn babies~~*~*~*~~* are different? be consistent here.

there are mothers (who weren't raped) who are unable to feel any love for their child. there are mothers out there (who weren't raped) who simply did not want a baby.

basically, abortions should be for everybody!!
 
Last edited:

a c

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
141
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
1998
What sort of advantages would we gain from murdering a newborn human baby?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide_(zoology)

If there are no advantages, explain why it's common animal behaviour in many species, and has been permissible behaviour in many past human socieities.

Some reasons might include:
1. Shit/marginal offspring compete for resources with superior offspring, in a situation of limited resources culling the stragglers will increase resources availability, and decrease wasted energy for the alpha offspring.
2. If you murder your sexual rivals offspring (your wifes children from a previous partner etc), your offspring (genetic lineage) will have less competition in the future, and hence greater possibility of reproductive success.
3. Keeping a disabled/stupid/ugly/ranga child alive excludes you from raising another child who is reproductively viable (opportunity cost), murdering your unproductive offspring, allows you to support 1 more superior viable.

I'm not saying these are the reasons why humans commit infanticide, or that these reasons necessarily apply to any species committing infanticide, I'm simply talking about the theoretical advantages that might rationally apply to infanticide. I'm only discussing this because you think we should avoid 'intellectual' moral arguements, and don't seem to understand that human behaviour, and what is justified behaviour, doesn't strictly follow evolutionary imperatives (self evident).

Outside of this pseudo-'evolutionary' reasoning, in reality people don't do things purely to maximise reproductive success, you could ask anyone who has had an abortion what advantage they gained, there are lots of reasons people feel they are better off without children under given circumstances.

Similarly, what constitutes a "stupid", or "ugly" baby, is there any objective way you can determine this?
There is a subjective way to determine this

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.ch/1/1b/Harlequin_Ichthyosis.jpg

image NSFL

Furthermore, rape=>pissing off other members of the human species (i.e. another potential and more legitimate mate) => violent competiton => neutralisation of a potential mate => reduction of number of potential reporductive partners => reduction in overall reproductive capacity of the species.

In other words if group A starting raping women belonging to group B, group B will obviously not be happy and retaliate which can result in a conflict potentially wiping out group A or B or both, which obviously reduces reproductive success
Oh okay, that explains why no animals commit rape.
 
Last edited:

a c

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
141
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
1998
Fundamentally, it's dumb to say 'it's evolutionary theory' as a reason for permitting or not permitting any given action.

Animals kill, rape, and commit infanticide all the time, etc. biologists who study evolution loathe that kind of discourse, we're gifted with reason and discretion, humans are free to follow a diverse array of moral conduct, permitting or denying a given conduct based on your perceived guidance about the correct course of 'evolution' can justify terrible atrocity.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top