Abortion

[Sidus]

What repercussions does abortion have on society? It undermines morality. Presumably, before abortion on demand people found it as difficult as they now find it to be good. But then the call to goodness was not clouded by a society that explicitly said it was a woman’s right to literally kill her mistakes. There was a time when the family was the economic fundament of life, the basic welfare of children could not be assured outside of, or before, the family was established. And since contraception was not reliable and abortions were not acceptable, the reasons for sexual discipline were palpable.

Then I suppose you believe in life in prison without parole. Otherwise what of the innocent people killed by a murderer who does not fear capital punishment.

No, I understand all too well the larger implications of abortion on demand.
Women cannot be equal to men since they are not men. They can never be equal unless you are talking about equality of results, another word for socialism. But history shows that equality of results is not practical, worse it is tyrannical.

The only thing that equality of results has accomplished where it has been implemented is to spread poverty and famine. It has never raised the living standards of those it claimed to benefit, but has only lowered them. As has been noted by many – “capitalism is the uneven distribution of wealth, and socialism the even distribution of poverty.”

In the real world none of us have unrestricted access to much of anything. Unless we are self-centered monsters life will always impose restrictions.

[Ruthless Logic]

Originally Posted by Aedes

It's an issue of if we're prepared to execute innocent people. Sure, some are guilty of terrible crimes. Sure, some people are so horrible that they deserve to die. But our justice system is SO imperfect, especially with respect to the death penalty that I think it's ridiculous to assume that it can actually reliably determine who deserves to die and who doesn't. How many innocent people who are put to death would you consider acceptable in order to have a capital punishment system? I would answer zero.

The problem here is you're looking at abortion in isolation from all the other issues that it's part of. If we are interested in a society in which women are able to fully self-actualize, then they need access to contraception, freedom to divorce, unrestricted access to education and to professional advancement, and unrestricted ownership of their own medical decisions. Pregnancy (let alone delivery and parenthood) places such immense physical, economic, social, and professional constraints on women that we will NEVER have a society in which women enjoy all the freedoms of men when women pay a far bigger price for the same "irresponsible" act.

Why is the predictability of inconsistency so consistent within the liberal ideology. It is not an issue of the flexibility of social enlightenment, but rather the responses to the anxieties of self-imposed moral conformity, and the subsequent immature emotional responses that must follow, invoking their will in entirety

Example; On the topic of Capital Punishment, the liberal establishment indicates that because the process of executions cannot guarantee the absolute rigidity of empirical numerical standards ( zero chance of an innocent person being executed), which by the way is completely unattainable(idealistic), then society should not have access to Capital Punishment, but would extend the complete latitude to a woman as it pertains to the serious issue of considering and executing the inherent permanence of an abortion based on the subjectivity of an assigned mathematical ratio (bigger price). Perceived credibility is profoundly connected to the concept of consistency, and this is where the carelessness of the liberal agenda catastrophically fails.

[Ruthless Logic]

Originally Posted by Sidus

Then I suppose you believe in life in prison without parole. Otherwise what of the innocent people killed by a murderer who does not fear capital punishment.

No, I understand all too well the larger implications of abortion on demand.
Women cannot be equal to men since they are not men. They can never be equal unless you are talking about equality of results, another word for socialism. But history shows that equality of results is not practical, worse it is tyrannical.

The only thing that equality of results has accomplished where it has been implemented is to spread poverty and famine. It has never raised the living standards of those it claimed to benefit, but has only lowered them. As has been noted by many – “capitalism is the uneven distribution of wealth, and socialism the even distribution of poverty.”

In the real world none of us have unrestricted access to much of anything. Unless we are self-centered monsters life will always impose restrictions.

Great overview of Socialism vs. pursuit of self-interest (Capitalism). Your detailing clearly reflects an analysis unhindered from the fatalistic pursuits of idealism, and exponentially more reflective of the inherent behavior of Human Beings.

[Aedes]

Originally Posted by Sidus

What repercussions does abortion have on society? It undermines morality.

At least according to the moral schema of those who share your values. But since when are they universalizable?

Originally Posted by Sidus

Then I suppose you believe in life in prison without parole. Otherwise what of the innocent people killed by a murderer who does not fear capital punishment.

I have no problem with life in prison without parole, because there is recourse for an innocent person to reclaim some of his life. And again, there is no evidence that capital punishment is an actual deterrent to murder. You think Texas and Florida and Virginia have fewer murders per capita than states without the death penalty?

Women cannot be equal to men since they are not men. They can never be equal unless you are talking about equality of results, another word for socialism.

I'm talking about equality of self-actualization. And given that women have every cognitive and professional capability of men in every respect other than physical tasks, they deserve every opportunity to achieve what they want.

Originally Posted by Ruthless Logic

Why is the predictability of inconsistency so consistent within the liberal ideology.

Life and human behavior are both predictably inconsistent. That's why someone with a shred of compassion would find it ridiculous to endorse a government sponsored policy of executing people in a grossly imperfect system under the ideal of "justice".

...but would extend the complete latitude to a woman as it pertains to the serious issue of considering and executing the inherent permanence of an abortion

The difference here is that in the case of abortion it's the individual who gets to decide what she wants for her own body. In the case of execution it's pro-execution "activist judges" that get to decide without any concern for the imperfections of their own system. Ironic how my protest here sounds a great deal like conservative language.

[Pythagorean]

Originally Posted by Aedes

Life and human behavior are both predictably inconsistent. That's why someone with a shred of compassion would find it ridiculous to endorse a government sponsored policy of executing people in a grossly imperfect system under the ideal of "justice".

Excuse me, but if "the system" is in fact "grossly imperfect" then it is the people who make up the system who are to blame and not some abstraction. And it is from this very same group of people that the originators of criminal murder issue forth and it is also from this very same group of people that the cry for "justice" on behalf of the murdered are coming from.

So you have murderers and the loved ones of the murdered and the voters who institute the policy of whether or not to have a death penalty. And of all three of these it seems that the focus might be best if it is upon the act of murder and not some abstractions of "the system" or some "ideal of justice". Or so it seems to me, because without the first act of murder in the community such a policy would be irrelevant. For, what would the death penalty be if there were no murders committed? The death penalty seems to be an understandable response on the part of the murdered victim's loved ones. Our compassion rightly belongs with the victims.

--

[OntheWindowStand]

I'm talking about equality of self-actualization. And given that women have every cognitive and professional capability of men in every respect other than physical tasks, they deserve every opportunity to achieve what they want.

Men have a higher cognitive ability then women. Women have the ability of logic to a extent but opt out often for a emotional response this is of course general some women are very logical

[Aedes]

Originally Posted by OntheWindowStand

Men have a higher cognitive ability then women. Women have the ability of logic to a extent but opt out often for a emotional response this is of course general some women are very logical

That's complete nonsense and it's been shown repeatedly to be so.

[Aedes]

Originally Posted by Pythagorean

Excuse me, but if "the system" is in fact "grossly imperfect" then it is the people who make up the system who are to blame and not some abstraction.

A system that depends on imperfect people using imperfect evidence and poorly defined criteria is a grossly imperfect system.

So you have murderers and the loved ones of the murdered and the voters who institute the policy of whether or not to have a death penalty. And of all three of these it seems that the focus might be best if it is upon the act of murder and not some abstractions of "the system" or some "ideal of justice".

It's not an abstraction if you look at statistics that show that for the exact same crime in the exact same jurisdiction blacks are FAR more likely to be given the death penalty than whites. It's not an abstraction if people on death row are not allowed to challenge their conviction using DNA evidence.

For, what would the death penalty be if there were no murders committed?

Ask Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.

The death penalty seems to be an understandable response on the part of the murdered victim's loved ones. Our compassion rightly belongs with the victims.

So satiating their visceral urge for retribution is compassionate? Nothing will restore a loss like that, and in fact indulging it seems to completely miss the point of what compassion is.

[OntheWindowStand]

Originally Posted by Aedes

That's complete nonsense and it's been shown repeatedly to be so.

On average men have a iq score 5 points higher

they have more brain tissue they score higher on SATs

One billion women or illiterate while only 200 million men

more Nobel prize winners are men

Schools favor women and all of this is still true

study down by J. Philippe Rushton a doctor at Colorado university shows all of this except the last part

[midas77]

Originally Posted by Sidus

What repercussions does abortion have on society? It undermines morality. Presumably, before abortion on demand people found it as difficult as they now find it to be good. But then the call to goodness was not clouded by a society that explicitly said it was a woman’s right to literally kill her mistakes. There was a time when the family was the economic fundament of life, the basic welfare of children could not be assured outside of, or before, the family was established. And since contraception was not reliable and abortions were not acceptable, the reasons for sexual discipline were palpable.

I think you are talking in circles. Society is not there for morality. Morality seeks to benefit society, not the other way around. Besides the morality you sponsor is a male morality. I think it is wrong to funish the female when they are forced into abortion for the reason that a male abandoned her. We must understand that pregnancy is a difficult time for the female. Why is it that its the female that deserves to be funished when its always takes two to tango.

Personally I will never allowed my unborn child to be aborted or any of the unborn child of my extended family. If anyone tries to force an individual for a sacrifice, society must shoulder the expenses. But I will now shoulder people's idiotic mistakes. Will you?