 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - - Posts by Arwon |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 |
| User | Post | ||
Arwon Bazu                  Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| I think this is where I exp |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| Yeah but if hardcore Hindus or something are right, you're utterly fucked regardless. | |||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| The Law of Fives states simply that: ALL THINGS HAPPEN IN FIVES, OR ARE DIVISIBLE BY OR ARE MULTIPLES OF FIVE, OR ARE SOMEHOW DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY APPROPRIATE TO 5.
The Law of Fives is never wrong. "I find the Law of Fives to be more and more manifest the harder I look." - Lord Omar |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| I can't decide whether this is beautiful proof of the divine intelligence of God's plan, or evidence that the world is a capricious, godless pit of meaningless tragedy. Does this confirm my atheism or challenge it?
Probably the former. But still, hilariously ironic. |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| What we need is more Babylon 5. | |||
|
Arwon Bazu  Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
Originally posted by SilvershieldOriginally posted by ArwonWhy do you assume that each of those unfertilized eggs would end up as an abortion? There's a difference between a woman who is willing to use contraception, and one who will go all the way and actually abort the baby she's conceived once that contraception fails. That expulsed zygote very well could've been tolerated to full-term if it had implanted and begun to grow as normal; there's no evidence to suggest that the mother would perceive the abortion as an act equivalent to just "finishing the job the pill started." Don't dodge this. Don't invent individual hypoetheticals, look at the aggregates. Maybe a few wil decide against abortion, but that's not the point. Taking a post-sex contraceptive implies not wanting babies. It then follows that many will then have abortions if they don't have access to an option such as this. This drug will almost certainly lower the abortion rate. If that's the case, isn't it worth sacrificing a few fucking zygotes? .... And as for claiming to know better than gynacologists... that's just nutty and shows both ignorance and arrogance. Agnorance, if you prefer. (edited by Arwon on 04-28-06 02:33 AM) |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu  Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| And the witch in Hansel and Gretel.
Vigilante justice, even. |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| Is that why they've made like 5 movies as well, and the ill-fated Crusade series? | |||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| The Three Little Pigs promotes vegetarianism. | |||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| OK, I still think you're wrong because not nearly that many women are going to decide against abortion when they know they don't want kids enough to run out and get an emergency after-the-fact contraceptive... but anyway try a little thought exercise for me: Assume that this pill DOES prevent a greater number of abortions than it does prevent implantations. be it by a factor of two or five or seventy eight.
Actually, let's assume it prevents abortions at a one-to-one ration with every implantation stopped. Is this pill then, on balance, a good thing? Would you trade, one for one, the one less abortion for the prevention of the implantation of a fertilised egg? Or do you actually exactly equate a mere fertilised egg with a fetus of some months' development? (edited by Arwon on 04-28-06 11:38 AM) |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Vyper Sure it will. The more expensive oil gets, the more cost-effective alternative sources become. That includes both renewables and unexplored and unexploited other sources of fossil fuels (this is already happening, things like Tar Sands are beocming more economical to drill that they ever were when oil hovered at 20 dollars a barrel). The trick for the oil companies is staying on top of the future of energy while not accidentally sidelining themselves completely with some new source, before they can adjust and take advantage. Oh, and ad hominem "hypocrisy" attacks are always staggeringly ineffective. Grow the fuck up. |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| No!!! Ambiguous dieties 44547289 through 44547830 are the only paths to truth and salvation!!! Heretic! (edited by Arwon on 04-28-06 11:55 PM) |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| It'd be nice. I wanna see the telepath war! I want JMS to write another 5 season arc!
Of course, with the deaths of Jonathan Biggs and Andreas Katsulas the series would be poorer for it, if they ever do more things. |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| I'm now focussing on whether your objections to the destruction of a fertilised egg are of the same degree as your objections to the destruction of a mid-term fetus. I find that drawing equivalency between the two is misguided and offensive, as the potentiality of life is vastly vastly different... so I am trying to get you to figure out if you actually view the two as exactly equivalent.
If this drug didn't exist, more women would concieve, because they couldnt control their ovulation in this manner. At least some of them would have abortions at a later date. Now, assume hypothetically, that the mathematics work out that: for every fertilised egg that gets destroyed in one woman, you're preventing one future abortion for another woman, through somebody managing to prevent ovulation from occurring at the wrong time. The maths may or may not work out, but since we don't know whether it prevents implantation at all and we know that at least some women don't want pregnancy and would have an abortion, it's a reasonable assumption that you're preventing abortions through the use of this drug. If you have a drug that prevents abortions through preventing fertilisation in many women, but which occastionally destroys a fertilised egg in the process as a side-effect, is that a fair trade-off for less abortions over-all? Are you actually capable of thinking in the aggreggate here, at the overall social mathematics of abortion? In such a situation as I posit, you're ending up with the net destruction of less "lives" (I'm running with your definition of live beginning at fertilisation, even though I find it absurd) so doesn't that make the occasional unproven possible prevention of implantation worth it? ... Finally, on an unrelated note, I think you're vastly overestimating the number of people who oppose abortions full-stop. There's just not that many people who consider the fertilised egg or zygote like a full baby and oppose their destruction on principle. There's not that many peopl who want to restrict these sorts of things, at the expense of choice and womens' rights. This is especially the case if you look beyond America. You absolutists don't have a majority in the US and beyond there, I doubt you'd even have a substantial minority. (edited by Arwon on 04-29-06 02:58 AM) |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| That was actually directed at young Vyper, who decided it'd be a good idea to directly attack the other posters.
Your comment... meh, well, it's just a dumb humourjoke. And you don't fuck with Al Gore. He has ridden the mighty moon worm. |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| WE NEED FUCKING CARBON TRADING SCHEMES | |||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| One of the big problems with carbon trading schemes in this country, there's too much of that. On the other hand, we do need more damn forests in this country so I guess it does need to be encouraged.
The problem of credits being given for carbon sinks undermining efforts to reduce emissions could be solved with a much harsher baseline numver of credits, but there isn't really the political will for that. Because politicans are idiots and environmental economics is really non-intuitive. (edited by Arwon on 04-30-06 12:10 AM) |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| There ya go man, now we're getting somewhere. Don't shy away from that intuitive leap... it's the entire basis for most people's abortion position. You've just demonstrated that you understand that the potentiality of life doesn't have the same value at all points of pregnancy. This is an entirely intiutive and common sense that what's ok at conception is not okay at 8 months. Life--or rather, the potentiality of human life--isn't equal at all stages of pregnancy.
There's two conflicting rights, you see, the right of the mother to control her own life and body, and the right of the potential life of the fetus. These two rights are in conflict, so they must be balanced, but they don't balance the same at all points. This is for entirely those intuitive and common sense reasons, that a clump of cells that may or may not survive is not equal to a late-term fetus. It makes sense that it's okay to do something to a fetus at 2 months that isn't okay at 8 months, because while it's not a baby, the later in the term you get, the more baby-like it gets, and its life potentiality increases. This is why the sensible position is "abortions allowed without question for the first semester and then some" but not afterwards, depending on circumstances. |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| I'm arguing that the emotional/intuitive response is entirely valid, and using it to illustrate that the value isn't equal. Emotions, gut instincts, feelings, these things count. As it gets more baby-like, for most of us, it gets more valuable, and that's how it should be.
Skydude: Yes, prostitution is legal in most states here and that's how it should be. Much better for the sex-workers than persecuting and marginalising them. (edited by Arwon on 04-30-06 07:28 AM) |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 5909 days Last view: 5909 days |
| ||
| Sky: Really?
First I don't see how prostitution relates to abortion in any meaningful way. I guess the womens rights thread, but it's pretty tenuous. Haha, are you saying I am a feminist? Or a libertarian? Don't make the mistake of attributing or expecting too much theoretical consistancy from me... I'm a contextualist and I have little time for over-arching philosophical or theoretical frameworks. They're constricting and they deny the value of subjective judgements about individual cases and issues. Second, I don't meet many people who actually think prostitution should be illegal, because I always thought it was just so blatantly obvious that such laws are ineffective, and really harmful to the women involved as it keeps them marginalised and vulnerable and harder to reach with protection and support services. Don't get me wrong, we still have problems here, but a lot of that is to do with the dodgy way the regulations regarding brothels and street-walking tend to work. Anyways, your question surprised me. I guess I keep forgetting that it's illegal in America-land. Silvershield: Oh shit, you've gone all meta, which means now the penalty is you have to PROVE THE PRIMACY OF LOGIC IN DISCOURSE!!! This is of course to say nothing of the huge assumptions your so-called "logic" rests on. What you're actually doing is passing off your own emotional gut instincts as cold logic. That's what virtually EVERYONE in debates like this does. (edited by Arwon on 04-30-06 09:23 PM) |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - - Posts by Arwon |
