The Philosophy Discussion Forum

sthitapragya wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
NIck A. is confused. He is incapable of making a distinction between killing and eating. Don't pander to this obvious and childish moving of the goal posts.
It's the fallacy of shifting the ground.

Actually, I was thinking that he should get over his unhealthy obsession of forcing fetuses down other people's throats otherwise his higher consciousness will probably leave and look for safer places to hide. The poor higher consciousness must be wondering what the f*** he got himself into. Literally.

shitapragya wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:

NIck A. is confused. He is incapable of making a distinction between killing and eating. Don't pander to this obvious and childish moving of the goal posts.
It's the fallacy of shifting the ground.

Actually, I was thinking that he should get over his unhealthy obsession of forcing fetuses down other people's throats otherwise his higher consciousness will probably leave and look for safer places to hide. The poor higher consciousness must be wondering what the f*** he got himself into. Literally.

It is obvious that neither Sthit or Hobbes has any regards for a zef. They believe it to be an unwanted parasite growing in a woman's body that should be destroyed. Its one saving grace is that China has discovered that this parasite is both nutritious and delicious if prepared right. The multi cultural approach including the support of equality suggests that we should share the wealth. All these aborted zefs are going to waste. You would think that those like sthit and hobbes would jump at the chance for encouraging the consumption of something that was considered a useless nuisance, a parasite that had grown in a woman's body. I can see a right wing loon protesting for archaic reasons but hobbes and sthit are modern progressive thinkers who should encourage multiculturalism and the sharing of cultural delights. It is shocking to read them demonstrate such dogmatism. Shocking!!

Nick_A wrote: It is obvious that neither Sthit or Hobbes has any regards for a zef. They believe it to be an unwanted parasite growing in a woman's body that should be destroyed.!

No we do not.

Hobbes wrote: Nick_A wrote:
It is obvious that neither Sthit or Hobbes has any regards for a zef. They believe it to be an unwanted parasite growing in a woman's body that should be destroyed.!


No we do not.

Of course you do. The zef cannot have any value for you. You believe that a woman decides what value it has. If she points her thumbs up it lives. If she points them down it dies. The zef can only be considered an unwanted parasite by you that a woman can allow to live if it pleases her. According to you it has no intrinsic value other than as a good meal.The woman determines its value.

Nick_A wrote:

Hobbes wrote: Nick_A wrote:
It is obvious that neither Sthit or Hobbes has any regards for a zef. They believe it to be an unwanted parasite growing in a woman's body that should be destroyed.!


No we do not.

Of course you do. The zef cannot have any value for you. You believe that a woman decides what value it has. If she points her thumbs up it lives. If she points them down it dies. The zef can only be considered an unwanted parasite by you that a woman can allow to live if it pleases her. According to you it has no intrinsic value other than as a good meal.The woman determines its value.

It's just another way of getting at women and you know it. Why don't you religious kunts worry about IVF then? You hypocritical little worm. And babies don't look after themselves. When you take on every unwanted baby and look after it till adulthood then get back to us. You are coming across as a pervert.

Nick_A wrote:
It is obvious that neither Sthit or Hobbes has any regards for a zef. They believe it to be an unwanted parasite growing in a woman's body that should be destroyed.

No. We just believe that the choice should be left to the woman. Let her decide whether it is wanted or not. The rest is just your higher consciousness working overtime.

Nick_A wrote: Its one saving grace is that China has discovered that this parasite is both nutritious and delicious if prepared right. The multi cultural approach including the support of equality suggests that we should share the wealth. All these aborted zefs are going to waste. You would think that those like sthit and hobbes would jump at the chance for encouraging the consumption of something that was considered a useless nuisance, a parasite that had grown in a woman's body. I can see a right wing loon protesting for archaic reasons but hobbes and sthit are modern progressive thinkers who should encourage multiculturalism and the sharing of cultural delights. It is shocking to read them demonstrate such dogmatism. Shocking!!

Seriously, dude. You need help. This obsession of shoving fetuses down people's throats is a unique fetish you have developed. Does it turn you on or something? It seems like soon you will be giving out recipes for it too. Is this what touching higher consciousness does to people? Seems like just a consciousness on a really unhealthy and weird high.

sthitapragya wrote:

Nick_A wrote:
It is obvious that neither Sthit or Hobbes has any regards for a zef. They believe it to be an unwanted parasite growing in a woman's body that should be destroyed.

No. We just believe that the choice should be left to the woman. The rest is just your higher consciousness working overtime.

Nick_A wrote: Its one saving grace is that China has discovered that this parasite is both nutritious and delicious if prepared right. The multi cultural approach including the support of equality suggests that we should share the wealth. All these aborted zefs are going to waste. You would think that those like sthit and hobbes would jump at the chance for encouraging the consumption of something that was considered a useless nuisance, a parasite that had grown in a woman's body. I can see a right wing loon protesting for archaic reasons but hobbes and sthit are modern progressive thinkers who should encourage multiculturalism and the sharing of cultural delights. It is shocking to read them demonstrate such dogmatism. Shocking!!

Seriously, dude. You need help. This obsession of shoving fetuses down people's throats is a unique fetish you have developed. Is this what touching higher consciousness does to people? Seems like just a consciousness on a really unhealthy and weird high.

What do you mean 'higher consciousness'? What bullshit. It's misogyny at its most base level. Why do you pretend to be so 'deep'? It might wash with some, but not with me.

Nick_A wrote:
Of course you do. The zef cannot have any value for you. You believe that a woman decides what value it has. If she points her thumbs up it lives. If she points them down it dies. The zef can only be considered an unwanted parasite by you that a woman can allow to live if it pleases her. According to you it has no intrinsic value other than as a good meal.The woman determines its value.

What kind of a sick mind translates "let the woman decide" to "eat fetuses"? How does such a sick thought even occur to someone? How did you even come up with such a disgusting thought process? You really need help, man. This need to interfere in a woman's business basically is rooted in an inability to introspect. Since you don't spend your time looking for your own flaws and improving upon them, you waste it interfering in the lives of others and judging them. But even then, the fact that you can even think of something like eating a fetus suggests that you have a truly uniquely sick mind.

sthitapragya wrote:

Nick_A wrote:
Of course you do. The zef cannot have any value for you. You believe that a woman decides what value it has. If she points her thumbs up it lives. If she points them down it dies. The zef can only be considered an unwanted parasite by you that a woman can allow to live if it pleases her. According to you it has no intrinsic value other than as a good meal.The woman determines its value.

What kind of a sick mind translates "let the woman decide" to "eat fetuses"? How does such a sick thought even occur to someone? How did you even come up with such a disgusting thought process? You really need help, man. This need to interfere in a woman's business basically is rooted in an inability to introspect. Since you don't spend your time looking for your own flaws and improving upon them, you waste it interfering in the lives of others and judging them. But even then, the fact that you can even think of something like eating a fetus suggests that you have a truly uniquely sick mind.

He's probably regurgitating Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal, though poorly. But it's in context, and he shouldn't be faulted for it (though Nick has many faults).

http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html

PS. You're welcome, Nick. Try explaining yourself better, next time.

Nick_A wrote:

Hobbes wrote: Nick_A wrote:
It is obvious that neither Sthit or Hobbes has any regards for a zef. They believe it to be an unwanted parasite growing in a woman's body that should be destroyed.!


No we do not.

Of course you do. The zef cannot have any value for you. You believe that a woman decides what value it has. If she points her thumbs up it lives. If she points them down it dies. The zef can only be considered an unwanted parasite by you that a woman can allow to live if it pleases her. According to you it has no intrinsic value other than as a good meal.The woman determines its value.

You claim to know the mind of god but you are piss poor at knowing the minds of other people.

sthitapragya wrote:

Nick_A wrote:
Of course you do. The zef cannot have any value for you. You believe that a woman decides what value it has. If she points her thumbs up it lives. If she points them down it dies. The zef can only be considered an unwanted parasite by you that a woman can allow to live if it pleases her. According to you it has no intrinsic value other than as a good meal.The woman determines its value.

What kind of a sick mind translates "let the woman decide" to "eat fetuses"? .

The sort of sick mind that thinks he knows the mind of god?

D P wrote:

PS. You're welcome, Nick. Try explaining yourself better, next time.

You are right D P. Jonathan Swift's ideas did inspire me but there is a deeper question I was hoping someone would bring up but as usual, those questions are denied in favor of small stuff and ad homs.

Why does this idea of eating a fetus seem so repulsive? It is because in some way we value it as more than just food. Yet many hide this feeling and intellectually justify it as a meaningless zef that should be killed for purposes of convenience.

When once a certain class of people has been placed by the temporal and spiritual authorities outside the ranks of those whose life has value, then nothing comes more naturally to men than murder. ~ Simone Weil

Of course she was referring to how we justify war. But the idea is the same. The pro abortion movement justifies abortion of convenience by denying the fetus has "value." It is just a parasite, meaningless zef. Yet it is natural to feel this value which is why eating it becomes an abhorrent idea. Why are we this way and so accepting of hypocrisy? It is a philosophical question that emotional blind denial will not allow so everything becomes superficial.

Nick_A wrote: You are right D P. Jonathan Swift's ideas did inspire me but there is a deeper question I was hoping someone would bring up but as usual, those questions are denied in favor of small stuff and ad homs.

Why does this idea of eating a fetus seem so repulsive? It is because in some way we value it as more than just food. Yet many hide this feeling and intellectually justify it as a meaningless zef that should be killed for purposes of convenience.

That is just your misogyny showing which calls it killing for convenience.

If it were killing, your government would have made it illegal.

And the idea of eating a fetus is not repulsive because it is something that we value more than food. It is something that came out of a human body. That is why we don't eat it. Just as you don't eat removed organs.

It is out of respect for the living, which you won't understand because to you the life of a living woman has no importance at all.

And since you are the one still obsessed with eating fetuses, go ahead and do it. Just spare us.

Nick_A wrote:When once a certain class of people has been placed by the temporal and spiritual authorities outside the ranks of those whose life has value, then nothing comes more naturally to men than murder. ~ Simone Weil

[/quote]

You really should stop quoting a dead woman to us because she is not here and we have to argue about the crap she spouts with you. You really are a contradiction. On the one hand you worship a dead woman but on the other you have no respect for the ones living. It is amazing.

sthit wrote: That is just your misogyny showing which calls it killing for convenience.

Abortions for convenience is a common term

http://clinicquotes.com/99-31-of-aborti ... h-reasons/

………………..These reasons include a mother not wanting the child interfere with her career, not wanting to be single mother, not wanting to put her baby up for adoption, or simply not wanting another child. Here are the statistics:
from 1980 to 2000 – 99.31% of abortions annually were for non-therapeutic reasons
5460 were for health of mother — that is .36%
3640 were for fetal defects — that is .24%
1,506,770 are for social cases- that is 99.31%

So even if the stats are slightly off, still the great majority of abortions are done for convenience.

If it were killing, your government would have made it illegal.

Why? The government sanctions killings in wars, executions, self defense, and abortions. What does legality have to do with it? It is all politics, not ethics.

And the idea of eating a fetus is not repulsive because it is something that we value more than food. It is something that came out of a human body. That is why we don't eat it. Just as you don't eat removed organs.

Why do you find it repulsive to eat an arm just because it came from a human body? It surely isn’t repulsive. It feels wrong. It is demeaning to the perceived value of the human body

It is out of respect for the living, which you won't understand because to you the life of a living woman has no importance at all.

You have chosen which living beings you respect. Yet some mothers would sacrifice their lives to save the baby they are carrying. Do you respect her or just call her an arse and psychologically disturbed for being willing to risk her life for a meaningless zef?

Nick_A wrote:When once a certain class of people has been placed by the temporal and spiritual authorities outside the ranks of those whose life has value, then nothing comes more naturally to men than murder. ~ Simone Weil

Y

ou really should stop quoting a dead woman to us because she is not here and we have to argue about the crap she spouts with you. You really are a contradiction. On the one hand you worship a dead woman but on the other you have no respect for the ones living. It is amazing.

Typical misogyny. If I said you should stop quoting dead men like Kant and Nietzsche you would think it absurd. But your misogyny condemning a dead woman is justified. Your misogyny prevents you from impartially contemplating an idea.

Nick_A wrote:
Abortions for convenience is a common term

Yes, it is. Among misogynists.

Nick_A wrote:………………..These reasons include a mother not wanting the child interfere with her career, not wanting to be single mother, not wanting to put her baby up for adoption, or simply not wanting another child. Here are the statistics:
from 1980 to 2000 – 99.31% of abortions annually were for non-therapeutic reasons
5460 were for health of mother — that is .36%
3640 were for fetal defects — that is .24%
1,506,770 are for social cases- that is 99.31%

So even if the stats are slightly off, still the great majority of abortions are done for convenience.

Misogyny again. You just read "social cases" as "convenience" without bothering to find out what social cases meant.

Nick_A wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:If it were killing, your government would have made it illegal.

Why? The government sanctions killings in wars, executions, self defense, and abortions. What does legality have to do with it? It is all politics, not ethics.

The governement sanctions killing is wars to defend its country, in self defense to protect the right of an individual to live. These are good reasons unless you think otherwise. So it follows that allowing abortion is a good reason too.

So you think people should not be allowed to defend themselves? You think the right to kill in self defense is politically motivated? I am appalled at your ignorance.

Nick_A wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:And the idea of eating a fetus is not repulsive because it is something that we value more than food. It is something that came out of a human body. That is why we don't eat it. Just as you don't eat removed organs.

Why do you find it repulsive to eat an arm just because it came from a human body? It surely isn’t repulsive. It feels wrong. It is demeaning to the perceived value of the human body

I find it repulsive because I cannot eat humans. You don't find it repulsive. So go ahead and eat. Why are you obsessed with making others eat human parts? You are one sick sicko.

Nick_A wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:It is out of respect for the living, which you won't understand because to you the life of a living woman has no importance at all.

You have chosen which living beings you respect. Yet some mothers would sacrifice their lives to save the baby they are carrying. Do you respect her or just call her an arse and psychologically disturbed for being willing to risk her life for a meaningless zef?

I respect her decision as much as I respect the decision of a woman who wants an abortion.

Nick_A wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:You really should stop quoting a dead woman to us because she is not here and we have to argue about the crap she spouts with you. You really are a contradiction. On the one hand you worship a dead woman but on the other you have no respect for the ones living. It is amazing.

Typical misogyny. If I said you should stop quoting dead men like Kant and Nietzsche you would think it absurd. But your misogyny condemning a dead woman is justified. Your misogyny prevents you from impartially contemplating an idea.

You can go back and check all my posts. Each and everyone. I never quote anyone. Dead men or women or live men or women who are not in the forum. And my dislike for Simone Weil is not misogyny. It is rooted in the undisputable fact that the woman was a weird dumbass. And that still does not explain your weird contradiction of worshipping a dead woman and still having no respect for the living ones.