oh, brave new world...(OT)

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 261 - 280 of total 300 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

bluering

Trad climber

Santa Clara, CA

Apr 29, 2014 - 11:47pm PT

Fracking, or Ukraine. Or new Benghazi revelations....

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Apr 30, 2014 - 12:34am PT

Bruce, I really appreciate your careful, systematic way of describing the process and intentions of discussion.

Bluering, I'm not "demanding" anything. I offered an approach that could make your position plausible to a reasonable mind. It really is the only approach that could make your position plausible. If you don't agree with that statement, then please do let me know what "assessment approaches" are nothing like what I was asking for.

To me, a response that says (paraphrased) "I just have an opinion. I offered it. I can't explain it. Nobody can explain it...." Well, that defies "assessment approaches." So, it does not render your perspective plausible to reasonable minds that don't already agree with you.

I "demand" only that somebody trying to convince me of something offer explanations. If you don't or can't, no problem. I remain, then, unmoved by the perspective. So, I'm just saying that you arouse in me exactly zero sympathy for your perspective or for whatever process you employed to arrive at it or internally assess it (if you do).

bluering

Trad climber

Santa Clara, CA

Apr 30, 2014 - 01:04am PT

Bluering, I'm not "demanding" anything. I offered an approach that could make your position plausible to a reasonable mind. It really is the only approach that could make your position plausible

Have you offered your take on this yet, genius? You keep claiming everyone else is too stupid for you to deal with.

Why don't you enlighten us with your glorious insights?

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Apr 30, 2014 - 01:42am PT

LOL... in the face of that sort of request, nah... I think not.

Besides, I think that I've already made it pretty clear that I think an early-stage fetus is nothing morally relevant. And I've actually argued for that perspective. The burden of proof is on the person that thinks the early-stage fetus is something over and above a skin cell on the moral-relevancy scale.

So, what do you think I need to explain?

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber

Livermore, CA

Apr 30, 2014 - 11:55am PT

hope? how quaint...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement#Intermittent_reinforcements

Intermittent reinforcements[edit]
Pigeons experimented on in a scientific study were more responsive to intermittent reinforcements, than positive reinforcements.[16] In other words, pigeons were more prone to act when they only sometimes could get what they wanted. This effect was such that behavioral responses were maximized when the reward rate was at 50% (in other words, when the uncertainty was maximized), and would gradually decline toward values on either side of 50%.[17] R.B Sparkman, a journalist specialized on what motivates human behavior, claims this is also true for humans, and may in part explain human tendencies such as gambling addiction.[18]

happiegrrrl

Trad climber

www.climbaddictdesigns.com

Apr 30, 2014 - 02:11pm PT

Maybe keeping them to the first trimester, but c'mon.

think fast: What percentage of abortions in the US are performed after the 1st trimester?

Even Fox News posts that over 90% of US abortions are 1st trimester, and

...and only about 100 are performed in the third trimester (more than 24 weeks' gestation), approximately .01 percent of all abortions performed.

source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/2003/06/17/fast-facts-us-abortion-statistics/

How many of those hundred do we suppose are other than some terribly unfortunate tragedy? Yet fundamentalists will have us believe that slatternly women are routinely aborting last trimester.

For some factual information on abortion statistics: http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/women_who.html

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Apr 30, 2014 - 04:07pm PT

Good points, Happy!

The debate here is really an "all or nothing" divide, as the religious right is really after a theocracy; abortion is just (they think) what ought to be an "obvious" thing we can all agree upon: WHO could seriously want to murder babies???

As you note, they completely obfuscate, because (as we've seen in the discussion on this very thread) it is NOT obvious that a single, fertilized cell is a "baby," and it's really hard to make the "baby" case during the whole first trimester. Hence the "life begins at conception" BS, and I say BS because the real issue has NEVER been about when "life" begins.

Thus, Bluering's "compromise" really gives the entire game away and would never be acceptable to the religious right.

And Rebumblecons have a SERIOUS problem with ever getting the presidency again, because the primary process has become more and more religious-right, with abortion being THE primary vetting issue. This means that a Rebumblecon candidate HAS to pander to the far right in order to get the nomination; but then THAT candidate is not generally electable. So he/she then spends all the time between the primary and the general election trying to "become" more "moderate," which leaves voters wondering, "Who IS this guy?"

As long as the religious right SO infests the Rebumblecon party, particularly the primary process, this is an increasingly daunting problem Rebumblecons face (over and above their many other problems).

One thing that would go FAR toward reducing this problem would be for "Christians" to get OFF of this abortion hobby-horse and quit vetting candidates largely by this measure alone.

bluering

Trad climber

Santa Clara, CA

Apr 30, 2014 - 08:23pm PT

think fast: What percentage of abortions in the US are performed after the 1st trimester?

Even Fox News posts that over 90% of US abortions are 1st trimester, and

So you, me, and FOX are in agreement!

bluering

Trad climber

Santa Clara, CA

Apr 30, 2014 - 08:28pm PT

When does a clump of cells that will be a human being become relevant? Try to be specific.

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Apr 30, 2014 - 10:57pm PT

When does a clump of cells that will be a human being become relevant? Try to be specific.

I already answered that question: At viability. That is when you have an independent entity that can be considered apart from the (mother's) body upon which it is otherwise entirely dependent for its existence.

Cut your finger off, and it dies and is nothing apart from the body it was part of.

Cut out a non-viable fetus, and it dies and is nothing apart from the body it was part of.

If you could cut off a finger and have it start growing and developing completely apart from the body it was once part of, you would certainly THEN have to start considering WHAT that thing IS and whether it should be considered to have individual rights.

In the case of a non-viable fetus, we don't have to worry about individual rights, because that thing is not an individual.

bluering

Trad climber

Santa Clara, CA

May 1, 2014 - 03:24am PT

When does that happen, even roughly? You appear to be dodging the original question.

anita514

Gym climber

Great White North

May 1, 2014 - 09:34am PT

I would suggest the mother makes that call, Blue

Her opinion trumps all others

Others' opinions can influence her's, but she's the boss and the law agrees

survival

Big Wall climber

Terrapin Station

May 1, 2014 - 09:59am PT

When does that happen, even roughly?

Blue, roughly 6+ months of gestation. How many fetuses are intentionally aborted after six plus months, even roughly?

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

May 1, 2014 - 11:19am PT

Are you even roughly serious, Bluering?

Your whole approach to this is pretty transparent, so I'd like to just point out that there being just a bit of ambiguity on exactly when viability occurs is a FAR cry from your "account," which amounts to nothing more than: "The single cell has a soul, and I can't say anything about what that means, because nobody can."

However, there is not very much ambiguity, so in the interests of helping you see your way clear on this subject, I'll quote from an article on the National Institutes of Health site: "In the United States viability presently occurs at approximately 24 weeks of gestational age" (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11753511);.

You can note that viability varies country by country, as medical technology and neonatal care varies country by country. However, you can't push the line of viability back and back all the way to the single cell (yet), and in fact the further you push it back even with the best technology, the odds increase dramatically that you end up with a baby that is severely disabled (mentally and physically) throughout its life. So, if you try to push "viability" back very far, you end up with a being that really is never a truly independent and normally-developing individual.

So, in the USA, about 24 weeks (with risks!).

However, I believe that viability might be employed to provide a principled line regarding "independence," which is certainly a necessary condition for a fetus to be considered rights-bearing; but that line does not, to my mind, provide a "trumping" consideration regarding women's rights! Hence, I am very sympathetic to the statements upthread to the point that it's a woman's right to choose, regardless of the line that viability might draw.

Have you read anything from Judith Jarvis Thomson yet, Bluering? Or do you prefer to remain unread and untutored on this subject? I know you'll never actually read the Realm of Rights, so I'll just point you to a Wikipedia article that can give you a "Cliff's Notes" version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion

If you want to discuss at a level that is not transparently disingenuous, there is a rich field to mine in Thomson's work (and the attempted replies to it). Your caviling about viability is just nonsense. Get serious.

bookworm

Social climber

Falls Church, VA

Topic Author's Reply - May 5, 2014 - 07:35pm PT

abortion: it's not just a right, it's "cool"

"it will always be a special memory for me. I still have my sonogram, and if my apartment were to catch fire, it would be the first thing I’d grab.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/05/woman-films-her-own-abortion-to-show-world-how-cool-it-is/#ixzz30t4I8ZPZ

miranda: oh, brave new world that has such [wo]men in it

prospero: 'tis new to thee

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

May 7, 2014 - 01:23pm PT

So, bookie has exactly zero response here, however now sharing his/her "wisdom" on other threads.

Rise to the challenges here, bookie, or just admit that you are NO thinker.

And as a non-thinker, spare us your other "contributions" on other threads.