4 ms·
If significant % of the population doesn't think it's problematic it should be allowed as long as it doesn't influence lives of the other part. You can easily o
by bluecalm 7y ago
If significant % of the population doesn't think it's problematic it should be allowed as long as it doesn't influence lives of the other part. You can easily opt out of any stem cells based research or treatment, we can make it not state funded. Opposing that is the kind of self-righteous aggressive morality I despise.
It's the same with abortion: about half the population thinks it's ok to let a woman decide. It doesn't influence you, your family or your community if you opt out. If you still think your feelings should dictate how others then you're the problem and the reason there are so many conflicts and so much violence caused by "I want to dictate how others live and I don't accept if they disagree".
- rebuilder 7y agoWouldn't we still have slavery if we did things the way you suggest?
- dbrian 7y agoThat would very clearly negatively affect the opposing party.
- Lord_Baltimore 7y agoKilling the opposing party through abortion would be a negative effect.
- firethief 7y ago"Negative" here sounds like it should mean something objective, but that can't be the case because curbing population growth makes the world better for everyone in it.
- Lord_Baltimore 7y agoShould we thank genocidal regimes for "curbing population growth"?
- bluecalm 7y agoYou're assuming it's like killing. By that you're making a moral judgement. Significant part of the population disagrees with you. That means your judgement is not universal and shouldn't be forced on others. There are moral principles vast majority of the population agrees with but abortion=killing is not one of them. Don't force others to live according to your religion or moral conviction.
- Lord_Baltimore 7y agoYou are also making a judgment that is not universal and shouldn't be forced on others (unborn children). There are moral principles the vast majority of the population agrees with but abortion<>killing is not one of them. Don't force others (unborn children) to die according to your religion or moral conviction.
- jtbayly 7y agoYou first have to define the opposing party. Are you speaking of the slaves or of the other humans who oppose slavery? Because remember, part of the justification is that slaves and unborn babies are not fully human, and thus cannot be the opposing party.
- rebuilder 7y agoIf you have slavery, obviously you're not going to care much whether the slaves oppose it.
- UnFleshedOne 7y agoSlavery kinda influences lives of slaves. Maybe.
- rebuilder 7y agoBut slaves don't get to vote, so it's a moot point.
- jtbayly 7y agoJust one example of how abortion affects everybody: Sex selective abortions leave millions without somebody to marry and live with.
- oneshot908 7y agoThat's what robot lovers are for silly goose!
- bluecalm 7y agoNot a problem in a Western culture. If it's a problem in yours then there are many other ways to fix things to make raising girls better for the parents than forcing them to have children so you are provided with a bride. I mean, seriously that's a sense of entitlement right there: "Not only you will have children even if you don't want to but you will have them so they are spouses for others".
- homonculus1 7y agoTo phrase this more succinctly, you're saying that society should never intercede on behalf of the victims of moral injustice as long as the perpetrators are sufficiently numerous. I'm sure you would disagree, of course, because you probably only see this principle applying to certain moral issues--namely, the ones you've already carved out as exceptions because you don't perceive them as injustices.