It's like snuffing out the spark before the flame gets going.

Meh

its the old does a tree make a sound if it falls and noones aroudn to hear it majjigger

No, it doesn't mean you're okay with the suffering

you're right,

lets just tweet out support for NK 😉 that'll show how we're not okay with suffering

Most I think take issue with having to pay for anothers mistake

I'm sure they'll see our tweets

Is North Korea less okay than the Khmer Rouge?

like the priciple of existing only exists because we can percieve ourselves to exist

Problem is, that "mistake" will grow up

Also, i agree that its very preferable for somebody to not get pregnant when they're not ready, then have a abortion

And will cost more than the abortion

Yea

liek the idea of hearing a sound

It's a necessary evil

i dont know what the Khmer Rougue is

is a purely phenomenological thing

Wot

@Dr.Wol genocide

Thousands of people killed

Yes taxpayers shouldn't need to fund abortions. If someone fucks up that's their responsibility.

that only comes from our ability to process thta we are hearing something

Bad thing

hence if nobodies around to hear it

a sound was never made

They're a commie group that basically forced Cambodians to go back to agrarianism while killing wrong thinkers

People were worked to death

ouch

It's a killer Queen

and then no, its the same level of not okay

durin pol pot right?

It's the same though

Either starve to death

Or work to death

Actually not just wrong thinkers

Just thinkers

People who were percieved as "intellectual"

Right but the death is the important factor is it not?

Pretty much anybody that disagreed.

Anyone with an education

Opposing commies isn't wrong think

Even people wearing glasses

It's just thought

Anyone with the ability to think

Was killed

Communism requires ignoring human nature

And that needs special kinds of stupid

Communism requires loyalty! 😛

that is all, if you die, you just weren't loyal enough

The distinction made is death by starvation, death by execution, death by overwork

We're not comparing it to the suffering someone lives through

We're just comparing it to other methods of being cruelly killed

people can die twice you know

its just that the 2nd time, they have to bury your body

lol yeah

See I hear people say that about plenty of things, but then there are people who survive it. It doesn't make the initial action good, but it does draw something of a distinction

the braindeath that causes communist beleifs

and then body death that naturally follows

teh second one can take really long to happen though

Nobody comes back from being dead for 10 years, but people do come back from a hell of a lot of things that take up notably more time

yes

but thats the thing, which is worse?

instant death

Or suffering to the point where it doesn't even matter anymore

The implication is that the latter is going to occur in some of the richest and most prosperous countries in the world

i mean what would you rather happen?

an embryo getting killed before it can even develop a self

Or a person getting raped repeatedly between ages 5-11

And then to just be cast under the emotionless protection of the state

I think the better solution is to address the latter

where they are little more than a number

and until you have adressed it?

Rather than fatalistically accept it as inevitable

We live right now in a world where we haven't fixed it

when will it? and how many do you wanna force to live through it until it IS fixed?

Well we're currently not at a point where the test tube hypothetical is viable either

test tube hypothetical doesn't prevent the fate AFTER they are birthed

No, but the solution to the problem should be addressing the system

i agree

but until we do?

Like would you say people with severe birth defects should be aborted?

yeah because regardless of if the person is aborted there are other cases liek the death of parents where someone would suffer under that system

yes

Why do you get to decide this?

anything thats debilitating to their life

Until it’s fixed don’t make taxpayers foot the bill.

because:
A. this child will be in need of help their whole life, and i dont want to pay for someone elses lack of judgment
and
B. This child will not have a happy life

so make a choice

Either do it on your own time/money
Or don't bother me about it

Hold on, how are we defining debilitating?

debilitating as in, debilitating

And should Stephen Hawking have been aborted then? In your ideal state?

I dont think he's saying laws should force abortions

Stephen Hawking didn't start debilitated at birth

I think he's saying that he'd prefer if people with (x) wouldnt be born/be aborted

That's my impression anyways

Right but in an instance where you could detect such a debilitation before birth

pop 'em

or pay for it at your own expense

@Scarlet I'm asking specifically about the value judgement, not legal issues

>it's okay to kill one of the greatest scientists of our time because I don't like the welfare state

other scientists came before him, and many will follow

humans are after all a cheap resource

As a society, we're probably better off with as few crippled or debilitated people as possible. But i wouldnt be able to tell somebody, nor would i think it'd be right to tell somebody that they should abort their child for this reason.

besides why just stick to great scientists?

Why not the commoner? what makes a great scientist a better human being?