Philosophy Now Forum

wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 9:43 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 3:18 pm You're living in an alternate reality.

The USA has the most liberal abortion laws in the world.

I think not.
And civilised countries are happy about their laws, and not continually seeking to victimise raped women for wanting a termination

So you feel only virtuous rape victims should have access to safe, legal abortion. You are no better than the kristofucks on here. Women don't need your kind of 'support', wokie hypocrite.

daniel j lavender wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 9:01 pm Those fond of sexuality, of promiscuity are obviously fond of carnality. They operate on the carnal, fleshy side of things. They are oriented toward feeling more so than thinking. Thus reactionary acts such as abortion. What place do such individuals have in philosophy? In thoughtful dialogue? As stated they are feelers, not thinkers.

The sexually promiscuous are nasty, dirty animals. They seek to rub their crotches upon as many other crotches as possible. Even to the point of disease, to the point of terminating pregnancies if the circumstances so arise. It's vile. It's foul. It's nasty. It's mindless, nasty animality. Some of us wish not to partake of the inane, thoughtless, diseased nastiness. Nor do we wish to support or be around those who do.

Did you used to call yourself 'satyr'? He was a woman-hating, Holocaust-denying troll too.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 5:15 am You obviously don't have a clue what abortion involves and don't want to know.

Quite the opposite. I know what it is in detail...graphic, horrid detail.

But pro-abortionists don't want people to know. Have you noticed that?

Their waiting rooms are not filled with pictures of children at the 3, 6 and 9 month stages of development, so "patients-victims" can make informed choices about the thing they're calling "a cluster of cells." They also don't lay out in detail for the "patients-victims" what is going to happen to them psychologically, morally and physiologically as a result of what they're doing. They don't present the abundant alternatives in adoption. They don't do anything, in fact, to inform their victims of the true horrors of what they are doing. Rather, they do all to "medicalize," sterilize and depersonalize the act of murder, so the victims cannot make informed choices, and will just go through with the murder... which they will be told is merely a "therapeutic procedure."

Well, we'll see what the Giver of Life has to say to them when they stand before Him. They have something to answer for.

Ooooh....

Kindly shove your fairytale bullshit up your disingenuous arse and stop pretending you care about embryos.

And stop watching anti-choice porn. You will go blind.

Think on this thing.


May 9, 1960. 62 years ago in the USA the FDA approved The Pill.

- Science enabled women to have sex for pleasure, without the worry of an unwanted pregnancy.
- As a result, there was no more need for abortions.

- But, that didn’t happen, did it.
- What happened was, about 62 million abortions in the USofA, after The Pill.
- That’s probably more abortions than in the 62 years before 1960.
- Availability of abortions created the need for more abortions.
- There was so much demand, abortion was legalized 13 years later, after the effects became obvious.

- So much for the fairy tale of how to turn should be, into be.

- Conclusion: The Pill caused need for abortions to increase, thus proving once again that invention is the mother of necessity.

- Question: Is the symmetry of 62 years and 62 million abortions* a coincidence?

* edited to replace death with abortion.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 7:15 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 6:59 pm

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 6:49 pm But my point revolves less around what you think and what I think and what others think, but what we and they are actually able to demonstrate that all rational men and women are obligated to think about abortion and the government in turn. Federal or state.

That's right. Not all thoughts are equal. Some, such as what I've provided, are rooted in reality, the situation as it is, rationality, and human nature.

Others are based on ideologies that wander around saying, "what if, Biff?"

Right, right. As though others who think the opposite of you here aren't making exactly the same claims about their own rendition of reality.

But, just to be clear, what is the one and the only Walker reality in regard to abortion?

Let's suppose you have the power to enact and to enforce the "rules of behavior" in your community. A woman gets pregnant and has an abortion. A woman, say, you know and love. What is to be done?

Speak for yourself.

*

You ask for the personal, so I’ll tell you a personal anecdote. The reason it’s interesting is for you to figure out. After all, why should you trust my judgment, my assessment, my evaluation or explanation of the incident? That’s a rhetorical question.

Obviously, the energy traded for the writing indicates my opinion of its worth.

Long ago I was with another person and we saw a homeless person who was in bad shape. I wondered aloud what it would be like to be that way. The person with me simply said, “That would never happen to me.”

The fact is, it didn’t happen to her, and everything she did in life made certain it didn’t happen.

You say it could have happened to her? To say that is illogical. To say that is a fantasy. The fact that it did not happen, proves that it could not have happened. Why is this so?

Because she was an element of every situation she was in. Every crossroads she encountered, every thought and intent. Every element other than she*, in every situation she was in, was not enough either singly, or in combination with another element or elements, to alter her simple intent. Her simple intent was the single root from which her life grew. The root caused her to say that homeless person’s sad plight would never happen to her.

I have always known that to raise children so that they get what they want, and don’t get what they don’t want, you need to explain the cause and effect of imagined situations. You say, to get this, you do this thing, or you don’t do this other thing. You say, to prevent that, you do that thing, or you don’t do that other thing.

The how-to’s that you give to your children are personal for that individual, tailored to their proclivities. To not betray that and to speak in general terms, the father knows the son and the daughter completely. When you know the truth and tell them the truth when they are young and trust you, they will be equipped to foresee, to mitigate, and perhaps even create.

You have to influence them in that way when they are young. This is why the government wants control of pre-K.

And since you asked for something personal regarding “how-to,” I’ll tell you this. I have always addressed my children and grandchildren as “Sir,” and “Miss.” That has worked out just as I figured it would.

So that's just the long-winded way to answer your question, what would I do?

The short answer is: Transcend time.



* is "she" the correct pronoun, or should "her," be used?

Walker wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 9:20 am Think on this thing.


May 9, 1960. 62 years ago in the USA the FDA approved The Pill.

- Science enabled women to have sex for pleasure, without the worry of an unwanted pregnancy.
- As a result, there was no more need for abortions.

- But, that didn’t happen, did it.
- What happened was, about 62 million abortions in the USofA, after The Pill.
- That’s probably more abortions than in the 62 years before 1960.
- Availability of abortions created the need for more abortions.
- There was so much demand, abortion was legalized 13 years later, after the effects became obvious.

- So much for the fairy tale of how to turn should be, into be.

- Conclusion: The Pill caused need for abortions to increase, thus proving once again that invention is the mother of necessity.

- Question: Is the symmetry of 62 years and 62 million abortions* a coincidence?

* edited to replace death with abortion.

Men have never at any time in history had to worry about getting pregnant...

Many women can't even take the pill. I've known quite a few women who can't because of the horrible side effects that affect SOME women. It's really none of your fucking business.
You men are such judgemental kunts. Isn't there something in your book of fairy tales about not judging others? Why are you so obsessed with commenting on something that has nothing whatsoever to do with you?

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 11:01 am

Walker wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 9:20 am Think on this thing.


May 9, 1960. 62 years ago in the USA the FDA approved The Pill.

- Science enabled women to have sex for pleasure, without the worry of an unwanted pregnancy.
- As a result, there was no more need for abortions.

- But, that didn’t happen, did it.
- What happened was, about 62 million abortions in the USofA, after The Pill.
- That’s probably more abortions than in the 62 years before 1960.
- Availability of abortions created the need for more abortions.
- There was so much demand, abortion was legalized 13 years later, after the effects became obvious.

- So much for the fairy tale of how to turn should be, into be.

- Conclusion: The Pill caused need for abortions to increase, thus proving once again that invention is the mother of necessity.

- Question: Is the symmetry of 62 years and 62 million abortions* a coincidence?

* edited to replace death with abortion.

Men have never at any time in history had to worry about getting pregnant...

Many women can't even take the pill. I've known quite a few women who can't because of the horrible side effects that affect SOME women. It's really none of your fucking business.
You men are such judgemental kunts. Isn't there something in your book of fairy tales about not judging others? Why are you so obsessed with commenting on something that has nothing whatsoever to do with you?

The Pill is a generic term for a wide variety of scientifically-based birth control methods, and the Good Lord and you knows that folks have enough sex education pointed in their direction to avail themselves of that available science, often at low to no cost and even if it does cost an awful lot, that would be a cost must less than an arm or a leg.

Walker wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 11:12 am

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 11:01 am

Walker wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 9:20 am Think on this thing.


May 9, 1960. 62 years ago in the USA the FDA approved The Pill.

- Science enabled women to have sex for pleasure, without the worry of an unwanted pregnancy.
- As a result, there was no more need for abortions.

- But, that didn’t happen, did it.
- What happened was, about 62 million abortions in the USofA, after The Pill.
- That’s probably more abortions than in the 62 years before 1960.
- Availability of abortions created the need for more abortions.
- There was so much demand, abortion was legalized 13 years later, after the effects became obvious.

- So much for the fairy tale of how to turn should be, into be.

- Conclusion: The Pill caused need for abortions to increase, thus proving once again that invention is the mother of necessity.

- Question: Is the symmetry of 62 years and 62 million abortions* a coincidence?

* edited to replace death with abortion.

Men have never at any time in history had to worry about getting pregnant...

Many women can't even take the pill. I've known quite a few women who can't because of the horrible side effects that affect SOME women. It's really none of your fucking business.
You men are such judgemental kunts. Isn't there something in your book of fairy tales about not judging others? Why are you so obsessed with commenting on something that has nothing whatsoever to do with you?

The Pill is a generic term for a wide variety of scientifically-based birth control methods, and the Good Lord and you knows that folks have enough sex education pointed in their direction to avail themselves of that available science, often at low to no cost and even if it does cost an awful lot, that would be a cost must less than an arm or a leg.

What does that have to do with anything I wrote?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 4:59 am

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 5:15 am You obviously don't have a clue what abortion involves and don't want to know.

Quite the opposite. I know what it is in detail...graphic, horrid detail.

Is abortion worse than child rape?

Is abortion worse than child rape?

I reckon you're bein' treated like a piece of meat either way., so I'm hard-pressed to say one or the other is the lesser evil.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 5:28 pm

Is abortion worse than child rape?

I reckon you're bein' treated like a piece of meat either way., so I'm hard-pressed to say one or the other is the lesser evil.

Well then Henry. I am going to see how you do logic.

Is a foetus going to spend much time concerning itself over it's death or is a child going to spend much time concerning itself over what and who did what to it? Which one of the two is going to suffer THE most Henry?

Nah, I'm not pickin' the lesser of two horrors. I ain't splittin' that hair.

Child murder, child rape: I'll treat both as they are...wrong.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 4:59 am
Well, we'll see what the Giver of Life has to say to them when they stand before Him. They have something to answer for.

When they stand before him? Even now, everyone stands before God.

When and now they and we stand before him, whether or not they know. Why now, and not just when?

Because for everyone in this lifetime who lives out their span of time, conscience eventually makes itself known. When that happens, on the deathbed, or when being fitted for the hangman’s noose, or when conscience appears early on in life, one enters the realm of Old Karma.

Old Karma is when the past is measured by this newly awakened conscience that won’t go away, and one can’t hide in the dark or at the bottom of a bottle, because one can’t turn off the truth anymore.

This results in hell on earth.

The hell lasts for a moment for one dropping to his demise before the noose tightens, but really, who knows how long the last moment of time really lasts.

I’d wager this is why Trungpa Rinpoche advised that if one has not yet begun a spiritual life, it’s best to not begin. A late start should not be taken lightly, Old Karma is nothing to sneeze at. It's physically painful, as U.G. Krishnamurti, and others, can attest. The going through old karma, which is a natural and choiceless process, ain’t pleasant in many ways for those with pasts like bonfires.

The good news is, Old Karma eventually gets burned off, that is, lived through. The bad news is, fire is painful. The good news is, embarking on the spiritual path before choice has a voice, results in less Old Karma to burn off, that was caused by this lifetime.

For the secularist unconcerned with the spiritual path, the crucial and relevant question is: does all this burning increase Climate Change?