Its weird how much overpopulation has been coming up on this site
I forget how young some of yall are on here
cmon now
population growth != overpopulation
we're significantly more capable of sustaining life than we were in the past
The apocalyptic s*** we're seeing stems from poor resource management and lack of infrastructure more so than a critical strain on natural resources
That’s just for NOW
i wholeheartedly agree, but the issue nowadays is that we look back on the ancients as if they were like these extremely barbaric and stupid people.
obviously they didn't know as much as we did, but a wealth of mystical insights from sages and gurus alike that is found in Buddhism + Hinduism is trivialized and cast aside, because for some odd reason, the Enlightenment era is taken as this divine shining light into darkness thing for all of humanity, so it singlehandedly cured "the God delusion" and spirituality, when lots of that s*** had nothing to do with things that are in the "material, objective world"
like you aren't going to find God or spirituality within axioms, a scientific method, and proofs, it's something that you have to experience for yourself, which is why a lot of religions have an emphasis on rituals and certain traditions to help you find that understanding
They were undeniably barbaric but they definitely weren't stupid. There's a alot of knowledge lost to times for sure.
The other part that annoys me is this weird fetishization of abortion that's started to crop up where it's treated as this feminist sacrament.
obviously not super mainstream, but it's there.
people seem to not be willing to admit that abortion can be weaponized against women and have negative outcomes
also, i'd be remiss to not post this ITT
i mean yeah we can talk about it but the vast majority of ppl itt talking aren’t the demographic that have abortions
A bunch of old white men in robes shouldn't be deciding what women do with their bodies
Pro-lifers are never really about it
A handful of cells ain't a human and certainly doesn't have equal rights with someone with free will and the capacity to have more children
My wife had an early miscarriage a year before our daughter was born and as horrendous as that was, it's not remotely comparable to the suffering experienced by women who have stillborn children because they're really not the same thing
If becoming a father didn't change my mind about this s*** nothing will
i mean yeah we can talk about it but the vast majority of ppl itt talking aren’t the demographic that have abortions
Lmao
A bunch of old white men in robes shouldn't be deciding what women do with their bodies
Pro-lifers are never really about it
A handful of cells ain't a human and certainly doesn't have equal rights with someone with free will and the capacity to have more children
My wife had an early miscarriage a year before our daughter was born and as horrendous as that was, it's not remotely comparable to the suffering experienced by women who have stillborn children because they're really not the same thing
If becoming a father didn't change my mind about this s*** nothing will
this is exactly what i'm talking about
A bunch of old white men in robes shouldn't be deciding what women do with their bodies
addressing the optics surrounding the legislation doesn't actually address the morality of the action
A handful of cells ain't a human and certainly doesn't have equal rights with someone with free will and the capacity to have more children
Reductive fetus arguments always end up weird because abortion is really the only context we engage in this kind of characterization.
A woman being pregnant is never really thought of "congratulations on getting a clump of cells", there's much more cultural significance attached
The other half is that in invoking reduction/nonequality of rights, we more or less admit that the action of abortion WOULD be a morally wrong if it was performed on a person...
but then the people who take this position won't define when a fetus becomes a person
this is exactly what i'm talking about
A bunch of old white men in robes shouldn't be deciding what women do with their bodies
addressing the optics surrounding the legislation doesn't actually address the morality of the action
A handful of cells ain't a human and certainly doesn't have equal rights with someone with free will and the capacity to have more children
Reductive fetus arguments always end up weird because abortion is really the only context we engage in this kind of characterization.
A woman being pregnant is never really thought of "congratulations on getting a clump of cells", there's much more cultural significance attached
The other half is that in invoking reduction/nonequality of rights, we more or less admit that the action of abortion WOULD be a morally wrong if it was performed on a person...
but then the people who take this position won't define when a fetus becomes a person
It's disingenuous to say that we don't have a functional definition of personhood when fetal viability can be scientifically determined
It's disingenuous to say that we don't have a functional definition of personhood when fetal viability can be scientifically determined
i was speaking more that a person, conversationally, wouldn't take a position on this, which would make their stance weird because they would be allowing ambiguity. So potentially, in their ethical wordlview, oodles and caboodles of fetus people COULD be getting murdered but just eh, it's a clump of cells, let's not talk about personhood.
defining personhood on a civic/ethical level is entirely different can of worms.
viability is also a weird benchmark because a baby can't survive outside of the womb by itself, yet infanticide is generally considered barbaric
Women’s body. Women’s choice. It’s disgusting when old white men who don’t have to deal with that kinda s*** can just make laws when they don’t give a s*** about the baby after it’s born.
A women has a right to about an unwanted baby when they aren’t financially and mentally fit to raise a child.
But that doesn’t mean the women shouldn’t talk with the person that got them pregnant. She should have an open and honest conversation about whether to keep it or not and make that decision together.
i was speaking more that a person, conversationally, wouldn't take a position on this, which would make their stance weird because they would be allowing ambiguity. So potentially, in their ethical wordlview, oodles and caboodles of fetus people COULD be getting murdered but just eh, it's a clump of cells, let's not talk about personhood.
defining personhood on a civic/ethical level is entirely different can of worms.
viability is also a weird benchmark because a baby can't survive outside of the womb by itself, yet infanticide is generally considered barbaric
In your view, at what point in a pregnancy should a woman cede her reproductive rights to that of her fetus?
In your view, at what point in a pregnancy should a woman cede her reproductive rights to that of her fetus?
It's a pretty big moral grey area for me. I don't think it's possible to make a blanket judgement on abortion, because there are so many complicating factors and we'd get some pretty absurd results if we ignored the context of each situation.
Treating it as a transactional rights system is also weird because rights involve the protection of voluntary action, but a fetus doesn't decide to be born or not.
I think it's worth noting that abortion legislation and abortion as an action are distinct moral situations.
ppl talking about life is started at conception but if that bundle of cells has the wrong chromosomes it can literally stop itself and self abort