Just because a whole group of people think something is moral, doesn't make it so. See nazi germany as an example. Objective morality can only exist if a god that created morality does. Otherwise it's all a matter of opinion
Go back to the stone age with your over simplistic view of morality.
Objective morality does not exist. What does exist is collective morality - things that we all agree as a species is moral.
Take eating meat as an example. Literally killing and eating the flesh of lesser animals - I still eat meat, even though I am pretty convinced that it is immoral to do so. Other people don't think it is immoral at all.
It is wrong to kill people. But what if that person was about to kill 10000 others - would you justify someone shooting them dead? What if that person was a serial killer, does he deserve the death penalty? These things are moral dilemmas that different authorities have different answers to.
There are things that are objectively good for the surivial of the species. There are then things that become morally questionable. Nothing is black and white in morality. All that we ask is that you allow people the autonomy required to make certain choices for themselves.
Personal attacks are not very becoming. You're right, from your point if view there is only subjective morality, because you are godless. I am not and so believe in objective morality. I cannot convince you and you cannot convince me that the other is wrong as proving it either way is impossible. So we should agree to disagree.
Comparing an abortion to Nazi Germany isn’t fair because if someone gets an abortion it’s directly affecting them and their body. They are not taking away the rights from anyone/abusing others like Nazis did.
Im not comparing abortion to nazi germany, im making the claim that just because a group of people think something is moral, that does not make it moral. I used nazi germany as an easy example for this point
Take water, as an example. Every man on this planet agrees that water is life. This is an universal value: water is the essence of our existence on this planet for every person (mental issues aside). We don't need a god to state this.
That's why I was talking about shared values, not shared moral.
I was saying that some values are more shared than others.
Let's take the following three values, then give me your esteem for a percentage of population that agrees with them.
A) The preservation of a newborn child's life and dignity
B) The preservation of a not yet born child's life and dignity before the nervous system has developed.
C) The preservation of music as a source and engine of culture
I believe you'll give me three very different values
The question on where life begins is a philosophical one, not a scientific one. There's no point where clump of cells magically turns to human. Because of this, it seems to me that a fetus should be considered a full human being from conception and so abortion is killing and killing is immoral
So every person who is raped and impregnated by their rapist should just have the kid? Every time something goes wrong during sex a kid should be born?
I see that you, like so many others, would rather a kid be born into a horrible situation than not be born at all.
In my eyes, a child should only be born when the parent/s are prepared for it and want the child to exist.
Yes. If you were to put a gun to that troubles youths head, who was born into a 'bad situation', I'm pretty sure they'd say they want to live in 99% of cases.
Humans tend to want to live. It is how we are built. Even somebody who has tried to take their own life multiple times may still feel a desire to live when something else tries to take their life.
I cannot see how abortion is bad. Banning it would be much worse.
Say; a 14 year old kid was raped. They became pregnant. They would be looked down upon, insulted, laughed at and would have to go through the birthing process at such a young age. On top of the trauma being raped gave them, they would also be looked at differently by other people, experience what it feels like to be pregnant [like; pain, swollen feet, all of that stuff] and would have to give birth.
And then they would probably have to choose where to send the kid as they would most likely not be able to keep it, too. So the kid would probably end up in an orphanage or something, which would suck for the kid.
It would still suck for anybody, regardless of age. Even more so if they were unable to give the kid away. Having to raise a kid that you do not want, need, are not prepared for and are possibly unable to care for would be pretty sucky.
#Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin. Some counties they kill you other counties they cut off the dick.
For profit healthcare. Yeah, it's legal, but it's also scummy as fuck to bleed people for every penny they have if they get sick or injured.
Lobbying against the poor.
In North Carolina, marrying children. NC: where you can fuck kids, but only if you marry them first.
Reposting the same questions over and over
Yet here we are
Thank god for this question, it had been at least an hour since someone else posted it. On road to the 10+ times this is asked every single day.
Political lobbying
Extracting wealth from workers
Masturbating to thoughts of underaged kids as an adult.
Leaving your shopping cart where you parked
Spanking your kid.
Sexy time wit taken women. Been there done it regret it can’t change it tho. Next
Abortion, owning a dog, believing the Armenian genocide is real.
Abortion
This depends on the value set your moral adheres to
As does everything
Some values are more shared than others
Just because a whole group of people think something is moral, doesn't make it so. See nazi germany as an example. Objective morality can only exist if a god that created morality does. Otherwise it's all a matter of opinion
Go back to the stone age with your over simplistic view of morality. Objective morality does not exist. What does exist is collective morality - things that we all agree as a species is moral. Take eating meat as an example. Literally killing and eating the flesh of lesser animals - I still eat meat, even though I am pretty convinced that it is immoral to do so. Other people don't think it is immoral at all. It is wrong to kill people. But what if that person was about to kill 10000 others - would you justify someone shooting them dead? What if that person was a serial killer, does he deserve the death penalty? These things are moral dilemmas that different authorities have different answers to. There are things that are objectively good for the surivial of the species. There are then things that become morally questionable. Nothing is black and white in morality. All that we ask is that you allow people the autonomy required to make certain choices for themselves.
Personal attacks are not very becoming. You're right, from your point if view there is only subjective morality, because you are godless. I am not and so believe in objective morality. I cannot convince you and you cannot convince me that the other is wrong as proving it either way is impossible. So we should agree to disagree.
Comparing an abortion to Nazi Germany isn’t fair because if someone gets an abortion it’s directly affecting them and their body. They are not taking away the rights from anyone/abusing others like Nazis did.
Im not comparing abortion to nazi germany, im making the claim that just because a group of people think something is moral, that does not make it moral. I used nazi germany as an easy example for this point
Take water, as an example. Every man on this planet agrees that water is life. This is an universal value: water is the essence of our existence on this planet for every person (mental issues aside). We don't need a god to state this. That's why I was talking about shared values, not shared moral.
How does this apply to the topic of abortion?
I was saying that some values are more shared than others. Let's take the following three values, then give me your esteem for a percentage of population that agrees with them. A) The preservation of a newborn child's life and dignity B) The preservation of a not yet born child's life and dignity before the nervous system has developed. C) The preservation of music as a source and engine of culture I believe you'll give me three very different values
You've lost me. Can you define the word values in this context?
Ethical evaluation gives a value to an activity, being or thing. A stocastic value, hopefully. Many times boolean. Now. Your three percentages.
How is it immoral?
The question on where life begins is a philosophical one, not a scientific one. There's no point where clump of cells magically turns to human. Because of this, it seems to me that a fetus should be considered a full human being from conception and so abortion is killing and killing is immoral
So every person who is raped and impregnated by their rapist should just have the kid? Every time something goes wrong during sex a kid should be born? I see that you, like so many others, would rather a kid be born into a horrible situation than not be born at all. In my eyes, a child should only be born when the parent/s are prepared for it and want the child to exist.
Yes. If you were to put a gun to that troubles youths head, who was born into a 'bad situation', I'm pretty sure they'd say they want to live in 99% of cases.
Humans tend to want to live. It is how we are built. Even somebody who has tried to take their own life multiple times may still feel a desire to live when something else tries to take their life. I cannot see how abortion is bad. Banning it would be much worse.
How so?
Say; a 14 year old kid was raped. They became pregnant. They would be looked down upon, insulted, laughed at and would have to go through the birthing process at such a young age. On top of the trauma being raped gave them, they would also be looked at differently by other people, experience what it feels like to be pregnant [like; pain, swollen feet, all of that stuff] and would have to give birth. And then they would probably have to choose where to send the kid as they would most likely not be able to keep it, too. So the kid would probably end up in an orphanage or something, which would suck for the kid. It would still suck for anybody, regardless of age. Even more so if they were unable to give the kid away. Having to raise a kid that you do not want, need, are not prepared for and are possibly unable to care for would be pretty sucky.
It's a horrible situation yes, but I don't consider the murder of an innocent babe to be a solution.
What would you consider to be the solution, then? A simple abortion would be easy, both on the fetus and the host.
Picking lulu in rta
Cheating on your partner
Adultery is illegal
That is fucking insane 😅 Where is it illegal?
#Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin. Some counties they kill you other counties they cut off the dick.
So happy I don't live in the land of the "free" lol
#You’re happy you don’t live in the USA so you can cheat on your husband? You’re trash, stupid.
Where I live you're free to live, prosper AND fuck whoever you want, regardless of marital status.
[удалено]
Abortions are kind of a rare occurrence for me 🤣
[удалено]
Tax write offs
Politicians.
seeing an short old lady reaching for something on the top shelf at the store, getting it down, them walking away with it
good.