The Moral Deficit

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
And since then, you have NEVER accidentally felt the heat of a flame? So, once you knew fire burned, you've never burned yourself since?
The chances are 15-25%. BabyMed
Because sex is a natural urge and drive in human beings. It's a way of being close and intimate with someone you love. It's a bonding process and it feels good. You don't know this stuff?
Society doesn't get to decide. YOU don't get to decide on someone else's morals. Society needs to keep its nose out of people's private business AND families. My family is none of your business.

1. Nope. Never been that STUPID to put my finger under a burning flame.

2. High or low, why take the chance then?

3. Killing is also a natural urge. So we, as civilised beings, are allowed to consumate our natural urges without a thought to the consequences we alone are responsible for?

4. If the reproductive cycle involves and is only within your own family, I doubt if anyone wishes to be involved, unless pedo or incest is involved, for that child too, is a member of a civilised society, with obligations and responsibilities to others. We are no longer living in our islands where we individually are kings, but share a huge land to shoulder shared responsibilities - education, infrastructure, security, etc.

As long as you play your part responsibly as a member, no one will say a word but will thank you for your contributions. But if you behave irresponsibly, than it becomes every other members responsibility to ensure you live up to the agreed committments of society.

People will always talk about making sexual mistakes in regards to getting pregnant, but nobody ever talks about STDs.

Sure, you decide to have unprotected sex and get pregnant, an abortion is an option that's available and, hopefully, said person/people will learn from this and not make the same mistake again.

Meanwhile, another person decides to have unprotected sex and ends up getting herpes, genital warts, AIDS, etc. There just isn't a quick fix for these things and their lives will be forever altered because of one night of unbridled fun. Not only this, but pregnancy isn't contagious. How many other people will be exposed to these STDs if the person is too embarrassed to tell their new sex partner. Maybe this person won't even care enough about their next sexual partner or is too selfish to even consider telling them that they may get the disease. Some people who have STDs don't even care who they infect and are too interested in satisfying their own sexual needs and think condoms take away the feeling. This is probably because they have no feelings except for in this part of their body.

People need to consider these things, but the media keeps pumping out the idea that irresponsible sex with multiple partners is the way to go. Getting pregnant is one bad result of this wreckless mindset, but injuring your health permanently is a whole 'nother ball game. Even if you want to be responsible and wait to have a baby when you're with the right person or more financially stable, some of these diseases will make you sterile or make it more difficult to carry a baby.

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
1. Nope. Never been that STUPID to put my finger under a burning flame.

Actually, placing your finger UNDER a flame isn't that dangerous. But I have a hard time believing that you have never accidentally burned yourself... You must not do much cooking.

2. High or low, why take the chance then?

Because they are free to and they want to. People jump out of airplanes and off mountains. They ride fast motorcycles and put themselves in dangerous positions all the time. Because they want to. Nothing more needs to be addressed. As long as they are within the law, what they choose to do in their personal lives in not my business.

If YOU don't want to take the chance, then don't. But others are free to. Life has consequences, and people are free to choose how to deal with the consequences of their lives.

3. Killing is also a natural urge. So we, as civilised beings, are allowed to consumate our natural urges without a thought to the consequences we alone are responsible for?

No. Killing hurts other people, infringes on their legal rights and it's against the law.

But if you behave irresponsibly, than it becomes every other members responsibility to ensure you live up to the agreed committments of society.

What are these agreed "commitments of society"? I've never heard of that.

And "behaving irresponsibly" is in the eye of the beholder. I will deal with the consequences of MY life and you deal with the consequences of YOURS. How 'bout that?

It is not your responsibility to ensure that I live up to ANYTHING. The government makes and enforces the laws.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Actually, placing your finger UNDER a flame isn't that dangerous. But I have a hard time believing that you have never accidentally burned yourself... You must not do much cooking.

Because they are free to and they want to. People jump out of airplanes and off mountains. They ride fast motorcycles and put themselves in dangerous positions all the time. Because they want to. Nothing more needs to be addressed. As long as they are within the law, what they choose to do in their personal lives in not my business.

If YOU don't want to take the chance, then don't. But others are free to. Life has consequences, and people are free to choose how to deal with the consequences of their lives.

No. Killing hurts other people, infringes on their legal rights and it's against the law.

What are these agreed "commitments of society"? I've never heard of that.

And "behaving irresponsibly" is in the eye of the beholder. I will deal with the consequences of MY life and you deal with the consequences of YOURS. How 'bout that?

It is not your responsibility to ensure that I live up to ANYTHING. The government makes and enforces the laws.

You are merely arguing for the sake of arguing, illogically now grabbing at straws. It is not my wish anyway to change your view if your persist in them.

1. Believe or not over a simple example i used, is within your own perception, right and free will, which I will not debate on, unlike your irrational personal rant over it.

2. People have the full right and free will to do as they wish, so long as they are prepared for the consequences themselves, and NOT rely on others to pick up the tab for them, more so on dangerous self indulgent activities. Similarly so for UNWANTED pregnacies, which can be easily avoided and would not had caused any pain to themselves and society that divides all.

3. So you are now starting to twisting your stand of 'natural urge' when it suits you? Have you no integrity at all?

4. Committments are rules of laws that you and I abide to uphold within a free civilised society. Who is the gov but representatives elected by you or by the majority?

If you don't like the laws, you are free to show your displeasure either by your vote or by leaving the country and living in a deserted island to become the king that you seemingly wish to be, under no authority but your own, to decide your own fate or any that is foolish to follow you and subject himself to your tyranny, for you respect no laws except those that you make up.

Do you still wish to debate further? IF so, please show why you refuse to tackle the root of the problem rationally but instead harp upon issues of the metaphorical horse that had already bolted out of the stable.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


I'm not arguing to argue. I'm addressing points made in this thread with my opinion. Nor am I ranting. I'm posting my thoughts and opinions.

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101

2. People have the full right and free will to do as they wish, so long as they are prepared for the consequences themselves, and NOT rely on others to pick up the tab for them, more so on dangerous self indulgent activities. Similarly so for UNWANTED pregnacies, which can be easily avoided and would not had caused any pain to themselves and society that divides all.

Actually people have the full right and free will to do as they wish, even if they aren't prepared for the consequences. They can also rely on other people if they wish. You have your idea of how people should behave and you're welcome to have that opinion. But our rights are NOT contingent on whether or not we're prepared for the consequences.

3. So you are now starting to twisting your stand of 'natural urge' when it suits you?

What did I twist? What are you talking about? A natural urge is ONE reason to have sex. I twisted nothing.

4. Committments are rules of laws that you and I abide to uphold within a free civilised society.

Obeying the law? I'm all for it! I don't always do it, but I support the order of law.

IF so, please show why you refuse to tackle the root of the problem rationally but instead harp upon issues of the metaphorical horse that had already bolted out of the stable.

I don't understand. What is the root of the problem that I have not tackled?

There is no correlation between what is natural and what is moral. There is plenty of immorality found in nature, and nature is absolutely no guarantee of morality. Not to mention that the entire distinction between what is natural and what is not is a fuzzy one.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I'm not arguing to argue. I'm addressing points made in this thread with my opinion. Nor am I ranting. I'm posting my thoughts and opinions.

Actually people have the full right and free will to do as they wish, even if they aren't prepared for the consequences. They can also rely on other people if they wish. You have your idea of how people should behave and you're welcome to have that opinion. But our rights are NOT contingent on whether or not we're prepared for the consequences.

What did I twist? What are you talking about? A natural urge is ONE reason to have sex. I twisted nothing.

Obeying the law? I'm all for it! I don't always do it, but I support the order of law.

I don't understand. What is the root of the problem that I have not tackled?

'Addressing' my points, with one liners? Bravo.

1. In your own world and kingdom, I am sure you will do as you wish. Fortunately for the rest of society, we dont live in 'your world and kingdom', nor believed as responsible society members with equal rights, to 'do as we wantonly wish' without a care for the effect of what if we had irresponsibly done to others.

2. There you are. You condone 'natural urges'. Fortunately the rest of us are civilised beings, with full comprehension on what will happened if our 'natural urges' goes unchecked. Wish I can say the same for you.

3. Obeying the law? Do you have a forked tongue? On one hand you seek to do as you wish, and then you claimed to support order of laws. Can you at least show some self respect on integrity, or is that also illusive within you?

4. Need I repeat again? Which language do you prefer, so that I can make it clear to you? Why the refusal to tackle the root of the problem over abortions, which is the result of biological PREGNANCIES that can and should be avoided in the first place?

reply to post by Maslo

Originally posted by MasloThere is no correlation between what is natural and what is moral.

I agree. I hope you don't think I'm trying to say there is. The poster asked my WHY people have sex when they know it can result in pregnancy. I answered:

1. Because it's a natural urge (that's WHY people do it, I'm not justifying all natural urges)
2. t's a way of being close and intimate with someone you love.
3. It's a bonding process.
4. It feels good.

These are some of the reasons(aside from reproduction) that people have sex.

If Mr. Seeker thinks that means I think we should all live completely in service to our natural urges and start killing people we don't like, that's really his own fantasy and comes from not reading or understanding what I said.

Originally posted by newsoul
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

Aaaannnndddd this is my point exactly. You believe that you should be allowed whatever freedoms that make you happy. And I never mentioned God or religion in my OP. I also do not understand where all of the aggression is coming from. I asked a question in regards to where do YOU see moral deficits in our society.

Why shouldn't he have the right to the pursuit of happiness? As long as a person hasn't physically harmed you or your property, it seems there is no problem. Unless of course you have trouble minding your own business.

Remember, God will deal with everyone on an individual basis. Are you playing God? isn't that heavily frowned upon?

reply to post by Jessica6


Jessica6


There is a famine going on right now in Somalia - tell a pregnant starving mother with 3 or 4 other kids that she only has to starve her foetus for a (few months) and then deal for a lifetime with the deficiencies that such starvation is likely to produce in her child. Explain to her how its WRONG to deny life to her foetus while she can't get food for the ones that are already alive. explain why there is no grey - how the world and every action of every person can only be viewed in black and white!

You are absolutely right - there are 10s of thousands of babies available for adoption - so why is that???? Haven't you and your friends adopted all the living ones yet - obviously not so why not - and are you looking for more?

Tired of Control Freaks

reply to post by newsoul


Newsoul

Yes - you certainly did upset me! Because you have are trying to disguise a discussion about abortion as an issue of morality. An issue where you say that there is grey - there is only black and white and somethings (like murdering an unborn baby) are always wrong.

I don't know anything about you and you seem to feel I don't have the right to judge you for that reason or to make demands on your resources and your time?

So - do you know each and every pregnant woman who decides to get an abortion? Yet you judge her actions as being black and make demands on her resources and her time?

I wonder how you judge the dead woman in the picture - who you haven't even acknowledged. She was abused. Her existing children were abused. She made the decision not to have more children and paid the price with her life. Now her children have lost their mother. Not because she obtained an abortion but because ALL she could obtain was an abortion without proper medical assistance. The only price that her lover and the father of the unborn child paid was a year in jail.

The logical extension of your logic is that it is not only wrong to seek an abortion but also wrong to seek to prevent a foetus from developing by the use of birth control. If people like you have their way - we will go back to the days when most families had too many kids and not enough resources.

I can live very very well without your brand of "morality" and I reject it utterly and completely.

Tired of Control freaks

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
'Addressing' my points, with one liners? Bravo.

Those are paragraphs, not 'one-liners'. Is this what you're looking for?

1. In your own world and kingdom, I am sure you will do as you wish. Fortunately for the rest of society, we dont live in 'your world and kingdom', nor believed as responsible society members with equal rights, to 'do as we wantonly wish' without a care for the effect of what if we had irresponsibly done to others.

I'm not asking anyone to live in my world. I don't want anyone to live in my world or behave according to my morals. Where did you get this? I don't understand the point you're making. I have made NO statement that we should all do as we wantonly wish without a care for others... You made that assumption about me. It's not my position.

2. There you are. You condone 'natural urges'.

This was answered in my previous response. I didn't condone anything. I answered your question. Natural urges can have negative or positive consequences. I have the natural urge to hug my husband. It's wonderful. I have the natural urge to run in the field. It's a great thing! Natural urges do not all fit into the same category. neither condone nor advocate all natural urges.

3. Obeying the law? Do you have a forked tongue? On one hand you seek to do as you wish, and then you claimed to support order of laws. Can you at least show some self respect on integrity, or is that also illusive within you?

Again. I have given my position on this. I believe in the rule of law in society. And I do not believe morals should be a matter of law.

(Attacking my character over and over is NOT a good way to keep me engaged in debate. I will not tolerate it further. If you want to have a discussion, you're going to have to leave the ad hominem attacks out of it.)

4. Why the refusal to tackle the root of the problem over abortions, which is the result of biological PREGNANCIES that can and should be avoided in the first place?

Are you saying that I am refusing to tackle the root of the problem? Or the government or what? The way you state your issues isn't very clear...

I can only speak for myself. I believe education and birth control are the answers to tackling the abortion issue in this country. There will always be abortions. Whether they are legal or not, women will get pregnant without meaning to. It's not something you or I can control. So, I suggest accepting the things you cannot change. Abortion is a fact of life.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


Do you always obey your natural urge to eat? Are you slightly overweight? If so, maybe we should all makes laws to force you to eat properly.
Let me guess, you probably think crying on the phone to a friend is a natural act that is healthy when in reality it is an unhealthy waste of time. Should we make sure you never have a "woe is me I need pity moment" and make a law preventing sobbing like a schoolgirl?
As annoying as the heart to hearts and crying can be to others, the answer is obviously no.

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks

There is a famine going on right now in Somalia - tell a pregnant starving mother with 3 or 4 other kids that she only has to starve her foetus for a (few months) and then deal for a lifetime with the deficiencies that such starvation is likely to produce in her child. Explain to her how its WRONG to deny life to her foetus while she can't get food for the ones that are already alive. explain why there is no grey - how the world and every action of every person can only be viewed in black and white!

You are absolutely right - there are 10s of thousands of babies available for adoption - so why is that???? Haven't you and your friends adopted all the living ones yet - obviously not so why not - and are you looking for more?

Tired of Control Freaks

In the 1st place, you HAD known about famine going on right now in Somalia. So why aren't you doing anything to alleviate the suffering there???? Why talk about abortion when feeding the mother is MUCH MORE critical? Have you lost your sense of priority, if not your moral compass?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

I'm not asking anyone to live in my world. I don't want anyone to live in my world or behave according to my morals. Where did you get this? I don't understand the point you're making. I have made NO statement that we should all do as we wantonly wish without a care for others...

You made that assumption about me. It's not my position.

This was answered in my previous response. I didn't condone anything. I answered your question. Natural urges can have negative or positive consequences. I have the natural urge to hug my husband. It's wonderful. I have the natural urge to run in the field. It's a great thing! Natural urges do not all fit into the same category. neither condone nor advocate all natural urges.

Again. I have given my position on this. I believe in the rule of law in society. And I do not believe morals should be a matter of law.

(Attacking my character over and over is NOT a good way to keep me engaged in debate. I will not tolerate it further. If you want to have a discussion, you're going to have to leave the ad hominem attacks out of it.)

Are you saying that I am refusing to tackle the root of the problem? Or the government or what? The way you state your issues isn't very clear...

I can only speak for myself. I believe education and birth control are the answers to tackling the abortion issue in this country. There will always be abortions. Whether they are legal or not, women will get pregnant without meaning to. It's not something you or I can control. So, I suggest accepting the things you cannot change.

Abortion if a fact of life.

Talk is cheap, as proven by your continued twisting of words to suit in your favor and double shifting stands. Either you make a stand on birth control or make you stand on abortions. Abortions need not be a fact of life, as you erraneously believed.

Abortions are the result of the biological reproductive act, that can be controlled to happen or to be avoided, with free will. With no reproductive acts being committed, there is NO WAY abortions can happen.

Abortions had became a diversive issue in societies, creating moral dilemmas regardless if for or against, and detracts many from more pressing issues of state, just as you and I had distracted this thread with our numerous posts on just this issue alone, when OP had in mind much more further issues on moral deficits.

It is unnecessary, just as the diversive issue of abortions is unnecessary. As I said before, if the reproductive act did not happen, which is under full control by humans, abortions will not happen. Thus, eradicating abortions lay in eradicating or CONTROLLING the reproductive act, beginning from the family nucleas radiating to society through education. This is the solution we must seek for the cause, and not grappling with its effect.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


I am not the one who is making moral judgements here. YOU ARE! So why don't you solve all the problems of the world?

Ah - that is right - you can't! So what gives you the right to insist that others live by your definition of morality. And by the way this post was to Jessica6 who kindly pointed out that a pregnancy is only a few months long (implying that it is only a minor inconvenience).

Tired of Control Freaks

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
Either you make a stand on birth control or make you stand on abortions.

I make a stand on both. I support birth control for those who wish to use it.
I support keeping abortion safe and legal for those who wish to use it.

I choose to use neither.

With no reproductive acts being committed, there is NO WAY abortions can happen.

Well, thanks for stating the obvious. I do not advocate controlling other people's "reproductive acts". Only my own.

But you're right. If we didn't have sex, there would be no abortions. Of course, there would be no US to HAVE sex... So that scenario is about spent...

As I said before, if the reproductive act did not happen, which is under full control by humans, abortions will not happen.

Are you advocating that people stop having sex except to reproduce as a means to eradicate abortion?

If so, how would you like to see this enforced?

I agree with you that education is the answer. But we are never going to reach 100% eradication of abortion because people have free will. Unless of course, you're wanting to take THAT away...

Originally posted by Salamandy

Do you always obey your natural urge to eat? Are you slightly overweight? If so, maybe we should all makes laws to force you to eat properly.
Let me guess, you probably think crying on the phone to a friend is a natural act that is healthy when in reality it is an unhealthy waste of time. Should we make sure you never have a "woe is me I need pity moment" and make a law preventing sobbing like a schoolgirl?
As annoying as the heart to hearts and crying can be to others, the answer is obviously no.

Be rational and let not views that goes against your views cloud your judgement by giving illogical responses, for it will only show your irrationality.

You and I do have natural urges, for we are only human. I have to ensure a healthy balance on my food intake, or I will only grow obese and become a health risk to myself. If you are heavily overweight, I suggest you do the same.

You guessed wrong. Too much presumption on your part. I do not weep over the phone, but if you had such experiences, I would say it is a healthy thing to do, to share that woe and let it out. Time waste is never the issue, for it is your life and is precious, rather than to keep it bottled inside. Afterall, it is only tears over the phone, and not a knife or body apendage into another.

On this point of 'natural urges' that you take offense over, just simply consider the balances and the consequences of it. I am sure you are educated enough to find it, unless you lack the sanity or rationality for it and prefer excesses.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


Seeker of Truth 101

You are not only a seeker of truth - you are the bringer of truth.

Finally, out the truth spills. You don't care about "murdered foetus". What you care about is controlling the sexuality of others. Ensuring that sex is an act solely of reproduction and not an act of humanity.

Woman had had a millenia of such bizarre control including rituals and requirements that were cruel, inhumane and unjust.

Why in heaven's name would we accept such a immoral act as allowing someone else to control personal sexuality and would you be interested in such control?

Tired of Control freaks

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I make a stand on both. I support birth control for those who wish to use it.
I support keeping abortion safe and legal for those who wish to use it.

I choose to use neither.
Well, thanks for stating the obvious.

I do not advocate controlling other people's "reproductive acts". Only my own.

But you're right. If we didn't have sex, there would be no abortions. Of course, there would be no US to HAVE sex... So that scenario is about spent...

Are you advocating that people stop having sex except to reproduce as a means to eradicate abortion?

If so, how would you like to see this enforced?

I agree with you that education is the answer. But we are never going to reach 100% eradication of abortion because people have free will. Unless of course, you're wanting to take THAT away...

No. It will have to reach 100%. Each of us are responsible for our actions within society. Education is the only way, and it begins from the home. The abortion issue will be diversive for a few more years, but it is our responsibility as society members to keep the figures down.

Pregnancies can be avoided if they have no wish to complete the reproductive cycle, even if a married couple were to indulge in such acts.

Human beings are capable of reason, and will respond to reason more than enforcement. There is no law against male/female sexual intercourse, nor should there ever be. It only needs one's moral compass and conscience as guidance, and this can only be brought about through education, beginning within families, relatives and friends.