On Topic Discussion A serious talk about the value of human life...

[fabulouslyghetto]

We kill ourselves, we have been infected with the thought that man, our fellow man, our children and parents are inherently evil. I would have expected this to come from religious zealots of some type, but rather I see it coming from a group that is largely secular and perhaps humanist.

Terms such as "glob of cells" or "(no) better than a salamander") tell a story of a self loathing, a contempt and hatred for humans from humans.

What a sad existence.

Therein lies the crux of unintelligible discourse here and elsewhere. "If you disagree with me it's clearly because you're a sinister hell-beast with every intention to destroy mankind."

So because we support a woman's right to govern her own body we're self-loathing, contemptuous and hate other humans?

One could say the same for you supporting an abortion ban knowing, historically, factually, that last time it was done women were dying. So you MUST be ok with women dying, right? The easiest form of self-righteous indignation since you aren't responsible for the fetus.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

Therein lies the crux of unintelligible discourse here and elsewhere. "If you disagree with me it's clearly because you're a sinister hell-beast with every intention to destroy mankind."

So because we support a woman's right to govern her own body we're self-loathing, contemptuous and hate other humans?

One could say the same for you supporting an abortion ban knowing, historically, factually, that last time it was done women were dying. So you MUST be ok with women dying, right? The easiest form of self-righteous indignation since you aren't responsible for the fetus.

This type of debate is such a disease to conversation. “Since you say this, you mean this.” The straw man argument is used way too many times, especially when coming from the people opening up the subject in the first place.

Disagreeing is almost never allowed, it’s considered an attack, disagreeing with someone means your offended, it means we can’t like each other, etc.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

I personally don’t hate humans, I’m disgusted by a lot of what we do and I get angry over it. And why? Because I know we can do better but we tend to ignore or just not do better and stay with the status quo because it doesn’t affect the individual personally.

 

[eastofeden]

In an ironic fashion many replies have explained to me why we see the violence against human life that we do. It is self inflicted, we don't see animals from the wild roaming our schools and eating children.

We kill ourselves, we have been infected with the thought that man, our fellow man, our children and parents are inherently evil. I would have expected this to come from religious zealots of some type, but rather I see it coming from a group that is largely secular and perhaps humanist.

Terms such as "glob of cells" or "(no) better than a salamander") tell a story of a self loathing, a contempt and hatred for humans from humans.

What a sad existence.

I have to call you on this.....

It is complete nonsense.....

It sounds a bit like a anti choice church sermon....

I think some people are evil due to their very evil actions....I think everyone is CAPABLE of evil...and good....but there is no self loathing of any kind. It is called humility.....

My ego doesn't need to think I am superior to Mother Nature. I don't need to dominate or destroy her. I would much rather respect her and leave a healthy planet for the humans who come behind me. How is that self loathing? I think I have a very highly developed and well defined conscience.

I think it is kinda "sad" that this discussion is tied to anti choice as though this is all one big problem...and the issues you set forth are very different.

 

[peeonme]

Therein lies the crux of unintelligible discourse here and elsewhere. "If you disagree with me it's clearly because you're a sinister hell-beast with every intention to destroy mankind."

So because we support a woman's right to govern her own body we're self-loathing, contemptuous and hate other humans?

One could say the same for you supporting an abortion ban knowing, historically, factually, that last time it was done women were dying. So you MUST be ok with women dying, right? The easiest form of self-righteous indignation since you aren't responsible for the fetus.

This thread was not to be a discourse over "abortion rights", (although I think that the lack of concern for the fetus speaks loudly)
and I mentioned it as I remember when abortion became legal. Doctors had been treating women with pregnancy problems before this.
Pregnancy is not a disorder or a fatal disease, it is seen as a "fetal" disease. Do people not understand the complications of sexual intercourse?

Most pregnancies can be avoided, condoms are no longer sold from under the counter at the back of the drug store. We have racks of condoms, all sizes and flavors. We have pills and other devices that my mind in its morning fog can't think of at the moment.

The idea of "oops, we didn't have a condom or I forgot to take my pill" doesn't go very far. The thought of "I don't want this one" speaks volumes.
It reflects the idea of not being responsible, of a lack of regard and a "me first" attitude.

Does the shooter just see a glob of flesh when he aborts it?

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

Most pregnancies can be avoided, condoms are no longer sold from under the counter at the back of the drug store. We have racks of condoms, all sizes and flavors. We have pills and other devices that my mind in its morning fog can't think of at the moment.

Irrelevant, hindsight is 20/20, but irrelevant upon conception. Also known as the couldashouldawoulda effect.

The idea of "oops, we didn't have a condom or I forgot to take my pill" doesn't go very far. The thought of "I don't want this one" speaks volumes.
It reflects the idea of not being responsible, of a lack of regard and a "me first" attitude.

A person saying "I'm not responsible/ready/whatever enough to take care of a life" is the highest form of responsibility ever, our world would be infinitely different if every parent were as self-aware. What's irresponsible is people having kids they're ill-equipped to raise, as is insisting that such people go ahead and have the kid on the hopes that everything will work itself out, the stakes couldn't possibly be higher and you're content with "Maybe it'll all be ok. I won't even be around to know how it turns out."

Apologies if this is descending your topic into pro/anti choice.

 

[oakpope]

I like this kum ba ya song myself but the reality is most people on value those closest to them and those who look/talk/walk/act/think like them, everybody else be damned.

When you know better, it's your job to educate people to do better, to be better.

 

[oakpope]

We have always had gu[...] fetal termination. Cops have not always shot first and then checked for a weapon. We as a people have lost our regard for human life.

Fetal termination is as old as humanity.
Abortion is not an easy subject for someone like me who considered himself a Catholic.
I'm glad the number of weeks when it is legal in France is relatively low.

Why am I on the side of letting women choose to have or not to have the choice ? Because, for me, the right of the mother to control her body is greater than the right of the fetus to have a possibility to live. At less than 12 weeks, the fetus has no way to live without his mother's womb and body. But it is enough for the mother to be sure about what she want, and the condition of having/raising a child. I think it's better to let the person concerned the most be the judge of what is right. With the limitation on time.

But it's not an easy matter and every one can have differences, and we should tolerate and respect other's points of view.

 

[oakpope]

so I’d be happy if many billions ceased to exist.

Are you joking ?

 

[oakpope]

There is a difference between an animal in the Wild getting its dinner and how humans generally exploit animals,

It's not different in reasons, it's just that humans are more efficient. Animals kill to eat, animals kill youngling to have kids of their own, animals torture others for fun, animals farm others to exploit them (ants for example).

But we're more intelligent, this combined with opposing thumbs and writing skills have lead to human supremacy over the world.

And believing humans have souls and not animals, I think, too, that human life has more value inherently than animals.

 

[zoltanspawn]

Are you joking ?

The world would be a much better place with only a few million of us. I imagine one miniaturized city (a la Soleri) on each continent. Of course, that's a utopian pipe dream.

Are you assuming some violence on my part in wishing the cessation of billions? The VHEMT ethic is fine by me: live long and die out.

It's really not such a strange idea.

 

[luckynumbah7]

It's not different in reasons, it's just that humans are more efficient. Animals kill to eat, animals kill youngling to have kids of their own, animals torture others for fun, animals farm others to exploit them (ants for example).

But we're more intelligent, this combined with opposing thumbs and writing skills have lead to human supremacy over the world.

And believing humans have souls and not animals, I think, too, that human life has more value inherently than animals.

I'm pretty sure everything has a 'soul', such as it is. I'm also dubious on the 'we're more intelligent' bit. More efficient, yes. But I'm still on the fence with 'more intelligent', haven't seen the evidence of that, myself, opposable thumbs be damned. I can think of quite a few species who would undoubtably probably be similar in their actions if they, too, had opposable thumbs. Hell, I've seen 'em make identical deductions without opposable thumbs; the basic reasoning processes are pretty similar.

I mean, scale-wise, as a species we haven't exactly ...exceeded expectations.

 

[Dominus]

There is a difference between an animal in the Wild getting its dinner and how humans generally exploit animals, it isn’t just simply a natural food cycle. We wreck eco-systems, destroy environments (even unintentionally), the way the meat industry goes about murder, raping and torturing animals is just awful to say the least.

All this shit we do to animals we use as food would be considered animal abuse to animals we generally have as pets, we arbitrarily draw a line.

We are not equal to a Lion eating a Water Buffalo, it’s not seeming itself more important, it’s eating. We as human deem ourselves more important, which is why me mass produce them, rape them and pump them full of chemicals. Though of course none of this means humans should suffer and die in retaliation, but we should value all life rather than just our own.

I don’t know where we as humans we get to decide our lives are more important than other species and justify doing what we do.

I value human life, but by an individual basis on how said individual values all life, not just humans.

How else do you propose we feed 7 billion people, with a lot of them pumping out children like they're rabbits?

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

Do you really think animals have understanding of what exploitation actually means? I mean what goes on in the Wild is what goes on there and I’ll never argue that it’s not a dangerous ugly place.

At the same time, we know better and we learn more about animals every day, Cow and Pigs are as smart if not smarter than dogs. Though with one we would be held accountable for animal cruelty if we did what we do to Cows and Pigs.

We torture and kill animals, some times for fun and we actually consciously understand what we are doing. Animals don’t stab Bulls with spears to piss it off and let it chase people for the sake of entertainment. Animals don’t drown and electrocute Turkeys for a holiday that is celebrated over genocide. We take Pit Bulls and make them fight each other for the sake of entertainment and kill the ones who become useless. Calves are taken away from their Mothers and Males are killed for meat because they are useless when it comes to Dairy Farming.

We have the capacity to understand what that means and knowing animals actually go through pain and fear, we still do it.

I’m not a spiritual guy at all, but if I was I wouldn’t be of the belief that they don’t have souls. How is something that also can feel pain, love, fear have no soul? Am I supposed to believe that humans who are supposed to understand better and do these things have a soul while animals who are acting the way a God had intended, don’t? And we’re supposed to be better because we just decided we are?

I could go on but I’m already feeling preachy although I really shouldn’t because to me there is something wrong with a society that condones these things because they are “efficient.”

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

How else do you propose we feed 7 billion people, with a lot of them pumping out children like they're rabbits?

I propose people make better eating decisions and stop letting factory farms get away with what they do.

I would never expect everyone to make the life style choice that I have and wouldn’t want them to. But I wish people made better decisions and paid attention to where and how their food came to be, by that point making a better conscious decision about what one puts in their bodies.

 

[eastofeden]

I'm pretty sure everything has a 'soul', such as it is. I'm also dubious on the 'we're more intelligent' bit. More efficient, yes. But I'm still on the fence with 'more intelligent', haven't seen the evidence of that, myself, opposable thumbs be damned. I can think of quite a few species who would undoubtably probably be similar in their actions if they, too, had opposable thumbs. Hell, I've seen 'em make identical deductions without opposable thumbs; the basic reasoning processes are pretty similar.

I mean, scale-wise, as a species we haven't exactly ...exceeded expectations.

I definitely think everything has a soul...animals...mountains..trees....the ocean...the earth itself....

In fact...I know they do. I have looked into many animals eyes... and I trust what I feel.

 

[Dominus]

I propose people make better eating decisions and stop letting factory farms get away with what they do.

I would never expect everyone to make the life style choice that I have and wouldn’t want them to. But I wish people made better decisions and paid attention to where and how their food came to be, by that point making a better conscious decision about what one puts in their bodies.

This sounds like social engineering, which has always been a bad idea.

The fact is changing people's attitude on anything is very hard to impossible. They proved long ago that smoking causes lung cancer and chewing causes mouth cancer. This does not seem to stop people from smoking and chewing. We know this because we just moved back north from the south where everyone was chewing and smoking.

Look, we can't even convince some people to be nice to pets. What on earth makes you think people will ever change their eating habits?

If anything I have said offends you, I apologize. It was purely unintentional.

 

[peeonme]

I am amazed at how fast this can go from the value of a human being to animal rights. Do some care more about the feral cats than they do for the man who shares an alley with them?
How about the hungry child? (If only we had spared it this life)

 

[luckynumbah7]

This sounds like social engineering, which has always been a bad idea.

The fact is changing people's attitude on anything is very hard to impossible. They proved long ago that smoking causes lung cancer and chewing causes mouth cancer. This does not seem to stop people from smoking and chewing. We know this because we just moved back north from the south where everyone was chewing and smoking.

Look, we can't even convince some people to be nice to pets. What on earth makes you think people will ever change their eating habits?

If anything I have said offends you, I apologize. It was purely unintentional.

It would help if the knowledge had a sight reminder. Very visual animals, people. Sheer knowledge isn't enough.

 

[luckynumbah7]

Do you really think animals have understanding of what exploitation actually means? I mean what goes on in the Wild is what goes on there and I’ll never argue that it’s not a dangerous ugly place.

I have to ask, what makes you think people do? Barring a basic conception of the thing most people are unable to give first-hand examples beyond themselves. That does not indicate actual understanding, to me. Most people can pick out a gross exaggeration; as can the the other 'higher mammals'. Elephants lieing about how much work they're contributing for the group effort, as a slightly more benign example, so they deliberately fudge how something looks. But regarding overall knowledge and application, it seems to be thin on the ground everywhere.