how do we survive our soul crushing world?

[Wizard22]

how do we survive our modern world which is not only soul
crushing, but demeaning, disheartening and joyless?

It's quite simple Kropotkin.

Vote Trump 2024, and Republican down-ticket every time. You're welcome.

[Gary Childress]

drill baby, drill. Drill deep if you must and if you can, but if you can't then shale oil will take up the slack.

And keep cranking out those babies too, eh? Brilliant!

That's how the human race persists, Einstein. Are you one of those crazies who says humans should not exist, for the sake of the planet?

Yes. The human race "PERSISTS" by overpopulating the planet to the point that we destroy our habitat. There's just no other way than to overpopulate. We can't have anything in between.

[Walker]

Check your premises, Gary.

The planet is not overpopulated with people. The situation is: population has increased and humans beans are slow in adaptation due to government regulations restricting organic growth, or inhibiting the freedom to grow, and this forces greater numbers through the same narrow pathways of brick and mental alleyways, fighting for space while surrounded by zones restricted, off-limits due to one government reason or another causing a disruption in demand for land, amid abundant supply. California is a classic example. It's crowded, but mostly empty.

The world population could fit into Texas and Oklahoma. They're not that huge a patch on the planet.

There is not a food shortage. Food is a tool of power to control folks. There's plenty of food, the situation of shortage is distribution and that's caused by politics.

Check your premises. This over-population myth has been hollering since at least the fifties of the last century. You've heard it from the cradle and never questioned it.

It's a matter of population concentration. Spread out, man.

No wonder folks feel justified in slaughtering the innocent.

Wake up, Gary. Wake up.

[Sculptor]

how do we survive our soul crushing world?

Easy.

1) Realise that you do not have a soul to crush.

2) Stop pretending to yourself that you are entitled to happiness.

3) Enjoy what you have, and smile.

4) Stop being such a pussy.

[Sculptor]

Check your premises, Gary.

The planet is not overpopulated with people. The situation is: population has increased and humans beans are slow in adaptation due to government regulations restricting organic growth, or inhibiting the freedom to grow, and this forces greater numbers through the same narrow pathways of brick and mental alleyways, fighting for space while surrounded by zones restricted, off-limits due to one government reason or another causing a disruption in demand for land, amid abundant supply. California is a classic example. It's crowded, but mostly empty.

The world population could fit into Texas and Oklahoma. They're not that huge a patch on the planet.

There is not a food shortage. Food is a tool of power to control folks. There's plenty of food, the situation of shortage is distribution and that's caused by politics.

Check your premises. This over-population myth has been hollering since at least the fifties of the last century. You've heard it from the cradle and never questioned it.

It's a matter of population concentration. Spread out, man.

No wonder folks feel justified in slaughtering the innocent.

Wake up, Gary. Wake up.

People love to slaughter the innocent because idiots like you allow them to have the tools.
No amount of libertarianism or rejection of rules is going to change that.
YOU are the problem.

[iambiguous]

Also, this particular political prejudice...

"Abortions on demand are the very definition of de-humanisation..."

...can easily be turned around by the other side:

"Forcing women to give birth against their will is the very definition of de-humanization."

After all, how, politically, can women ever really acquire equal rights with men in a world they can be forced to give birth? In a world where only women get pregnant?

In other words, given the political prejudices of those on both sides of this moral conflagration, the world is soul crushing when the other side is politically able to prevail.

Nature forces women to give birth in the taxi, in the car, in the elevator, in the subway, on the sidewalk, in the bathtub, or under medical supervision. Wherever. Nature brings the issue to a head, not man, not woman. In the quest to imitate nature, doctors can now induce labor and with drugs make it rather painless to give birth. Not like the old days. Not like our first. No need to die anymore from the complications caused by pain and exhaustion and blood loss while in labour. This is the advantage of intelligence. Childbirth is relatively easy for women, a break from the grind of scrubbing floors and doing the wash by hand, down at the river, 7 days a week with a break on Sunday to drop another kid. With such an advantage and intelligence and civilization, not to mention a lot of trained medical folks, why slaughter the innocent who are the most vulnerable among us? Why indeed, you selfish ... we'll leave it at that, no need for name calling. History will look back and say, my God, what Monsters they were. How, un-evolved they were back in those centuries. When was it that they said, "Never again?" and actually made it stick? Of course, this truth is obvious to The Time Lords pre-Dr. Who, with their broad perspective, and they share these truths with us in the way Time Lords do. If we would but listen civilization would finally advance, again.

And this has exactly what to do with my point above? That some see aborting the unborn as an example of an uncivilized soul crushing world while others see forcing women to give birth as an example of an uncivilized soul crushing world.

My point above is not what Maia believes but how she [like all the rest of us] came to believe what she did based largely on the existential parameters of the life she lived.

That, in other words, those on both sides of the issue are able to make reasonable arguments. And that, in regard to scientists, philosophers, ethicists, etc., there does not appear to be a conclusive argument able to finally establish once and for all how all rational and virtuous men and women are [re Kant and others] obligated to react to abortion as a moral issue.

Unless, perhaps, we count yours?

[Walker]

And this has exactly what to do with my point above?

That's for you to figgure out.

The moral issue is life. The divider is death. Since death is not a do-over, then the finality of death is the absolute line once crossed, that cannot be uncrossed.

Therefore, life is the objective measure of all things. Danger is judged by the probability of its adverse affects upon life.

This is why death sanctioned by society absolves the individual who performed the duty within the societal role. A soldier who kills is sanctioned by society to kill, as are many others who cause death, and that is the sanction that absolves any guilt decreed by society that may be directed towards an individual, in theory.

The divide between life and death is the objective standard you seek, glasshopper.

[Walker]

YOU are the problem.

You can only speak for yourself, and if I'm your problem, that's an indication of way-hay-hay too much self-cherishing on your part, hombre.

[iambiguous]

And this has exactly what to do with my point above?

That's for you to figgure out.

The moral issue is life. The divider is death. Since death is not a do-over, then the finality of death is the absolute line once crossed, that cannot be uncrossed.

Therefore, life is the objective measure of all things. Danger is judged by the probability of its adverse affects upon life.

So, you are opposed to the death penalty? You're an anti-war pacifist? You don't step on bugs?

Of course, lucky for you, you are not likely to get pregnant yourself.

Right?

You are not likely to face "the agony of choice in the face of uncertainty" that many women do when confronted with an unwanted pregnancy. Because of rape, because of incestuous rape...when giving birth might jeopardize your physical and mental health, when the newborn baby is afflicted with one or another ghastly God-given health condition, when being forced to give birth takes you out of school, causes you to lose your job, brings havoc to your life.

And how far do you take this pro-life stand? Suppose a woman you know and love has an abortion in a place where it is illegal? Do you turn her in? Do you stand by the state convicting her of first degree murder...sending her to prison. As long as they don't sentence her to death?

This is why death sanctioned by society absolves the individual who performed the duty within the societal role. A soldier who kills is sanctioned by society to kill, as are many others who cause death, and that is the sanction that absolves any guilt decreed by society that may be directed towards an individual, in theory.

Huh?

How is that squared with this:

The moral issue is life. The divider is death. Since death is not a do-over, then the finality of death is the absolute line once crossed, that cannot be uncrossed.

Like going to the Bible and reading "thou shalt not kill"...only with an * after it.

* Except when God kills:

To wit:

"Fifteen to twenty percent of all pregnancies (or approximately 1 million a year in the U.S.) will end in a miscarriage or stillbirth."

Your God perchance?

God's own abortions let's call them.

[promethean75]

Maia:

"i think it starts with education. The school system is simply no longer up to the job of creating new, responsible citizens, and the consequences of this are all around us."

it probably 'starts' at home with the family, then the child becomes further socialized when it enters school. I'd even wager that you could take the same kids that end up getting abortions, give them a perfect quality schooling, and they'd still end up being the ones getting accidentally pregnant and/or getting girls pregnant (if you're a guy). that irresponsibility we are talking about is not instilled by education or a lack thereof, I don't think.

the hard truth is, human beings have no special instinct, beyond protecting their young post-birth, that makes them feel especially distraught by the idea of abortion. one naturally intuits that a single fertilized ovum is not a person. that's the default sense. but if one is taught, indoctrinated, whatever, to believe that souls enter a body or originate at the moment of conception, the idea of abortion becomes a big deal.

[Walker]

So, you are opposed to the death penalty? You're an anti-war pacifist? You don't step on bugs?

You display a need to place labels on things that you perceive. Interesting. Did you also collect bugs as a child, each one in a cubbyhole, or each one pinned to a foam core board and labeled with Latin, and its colloquial name?

The death penalty is a punishment. The ultimate punishment, so they say. How do you punish someone? You do them wrong. You do them dirty. You do them an unfairness. You flame their thread. Thus, the ultimate punishment is to do the ultimate wrong to another. For what are the innocent punished with any wrong, let alone the ultimate wrong? Riddle me that.

[Maia]

Maia:

"i think it starts with education. The school system is simply no longer up to the job of creating new, responsible citizens, and the consequences of this are all around us."

it probably 'starts' at home with the family, then the child becomes further socialized when it enters school. I'd even wager that you could take the same kids that end up getting abortions, give them a perfect quality schooling, and they'd still end up being the ones getting accidentally pregnant and/or getting girls pregnant (if you're a guy). that irresponsibility we are talking about is not instilled by education or a lack thereof, I don't think.

the hard truth is, human beings have no special instinct, beyond protecting their young post-birth, that makes them feel especially distraught by the idea of abortion. one naturally intuits that a single fertilized ovum is not a person. that's the default sense. but if one is taught, indoctrinated, whatever, to believe that souls enter a body or originate at the moment of conception, the idea of abortion becomes a big deal.

On the other hand, I think most people are repelled by the idea of killing babies. But any line between the two is purely arbitrary.

Incidentally, just to put my cards on the table, in cases of rape, I think a good case can be made for abortion, because the baby is an intruder, as it were. But there is no good case when the sex was consensual, since no precautions are 100% reliable, and everyone knows that. Again, it's responsibility.

The other scenario often brought up is cases of disabled babies. I was born with atrophied and non-functioning eyes, and they were removed when I was little, as an infection risk. If my parents had known this, should they have aborted me?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Maia:

"i think it starts with education. The school system is simply no longer up to the job of creating new, responsible citizens, and the consequences of this are all around us."

it probably 'starts' at home with the family, then the child becomes further socialized when it enters school. I'd even wager that you could take the same kids that end up getting abortions, give them a perfect quality schooling, and they'd still end up being the ones getting accidentally pregnant and/or getting girls pregnant (if you're a guy). that irresponsibility we are talking about is not instilled by education or a lack thereof, I don't think.

the hard truth is, human beings have no special instinct, beyond protecting their young post-birth, that makes them feel especially distraught by the idea of abortion. one naturally intuits that a single fertilized ovum is not a person. that's the default sense. but if one is taught, indoctrinated, whatever, to believe that souls enter a body or originate at the moment of conception, the idea of abortion becomes a big deal.

On the other hand, I think most people are repelled by the idea of killing babies. But any line between the two is purely arbitrary.

Incidentally, just to put my cards on the table, in cases of rape, I think a good case can be made for abortion, because the baby is an intruder, as it were. But there is no good case when the sex was consensual, since no precautions are 100% reliable, and everyone knows that. Again, it's responsibility.

The other scenario often brought up is cases of disabled babies. I was born with atrophied and non-functioning eyes, and they were removed when I was little, as an infection risk. If my parents had known this, should they have aborted me?

You are exploiting your own circumstance to tell others what to do? How low can you get?

[Maia]

Maia:

"i think it starts with education. The school system is simply no longer up to the job of creating new, responsible citizens, and the consequences of this are all around us."

it probably 'starts' at home with the family, then the child becomes further socialized when it enters school. I'd even wager that you could take the same kids that end up getting abortions, give them a perfect quality schooling, and they'd still end up being the ones getting accidentally pregnant and/or getting girls pregnant (if you're a guy). that irresponsibility we are talking about is not instilled by education or a lack thereof, I don't think.

the hard truth is, human beings have no special instinct, beyond protecting their young post-birth, that makes them feel especially distraught by the idea of abortion. one naturally intuits that a single fertilized ovum is not a person. that's the default sense. but if one is taught, indoctrinated, whatever, to believe that souls enter a body or originate at the moment of conception, the idea of abortion becomes a big deal.

On the other hand, I think most people are repelled by the idea of killing babies. But any line between the two is purely arbitrary.

Incidentally, just to put my cards on the table, in cases of rape, I think a good case can be made for abortion, because the baby is an intruder, as it were. But there is no good case when the sex was consensual, since no precautions are 100% reliable, and everyone knows that. Again, it's responsibility.

The other scenario often brought up is cases of disabled babies. I was born with atrophied and non-functioning eyes, and they were removed when I was little, as an infection risk. If my parents had known this, should they have aborted me?

You are exploiting your own circumstance to tell others what to do? How low can you get?

And your answer is?

[Gary Childress]

On the other hand, I think most people are repelled by the idea of killing babies. But any line between the two is purely arbitrary.

Incidentally, just to put my cards on the table, in cases of rape, I think a good case can be made for abortion, because the baby is an intruder, as it were. But there is no good case when the sex was consensual, since no precautions are 100% reliable, and everyone knows that. Again, it's responsibility.

The other scenario often brought up is cases of disabled babies. I was born with atrophied and non-functioning eyes, and they were removed when I was little, as an infection risk. If my parents had known this, should they have aborted me?

You are exploiting your own circumstance to tell others what to do? How low can you get?

And your answer is?

If your mother had aborted you in her first trimester, then I don't think it would make a whit of difference to you any more than it would to me if my mother had aborted me in my first trimester. I'm not particularly worried about it. We're both here now and that undeniably makes us privy to being worthy of life, however, I don't think I was here to feel or know anything during my first trimester. Maybe my developing body was but I don't recall being in it. I mean, people generally aren't kept on life support forever if they are deemed to be unconscious with little to any hope of reviving. Is it 'murder' to pull the plug on a human body that is completely unresponsive other than having a pulse but is forever tied to life support? And if not, then why is it not murder? It doesn't seem like murder to me, yet we have a fully developed human body lying in a bed with a pulse and wires and tubes sticking out of it.