- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:20 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
Ethics is intertwined with morality.
I disagree. They are similar, but certainly not "intertwined" when properly defined.
quote:
History, how do you know what it looks like sans morality?
What? We can look at results with zero moral input.
quote:
Explain how psychology would have led to the outlaw of murder?
I didn't say psychology would have led to the outlaw of murder.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:21 pm to Blob Fish
By your logic, there is no secular argument against "retiring" layabouts?
I guess it all depends on your respect for life.
I guess it all depends on your respect for life.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:22 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Sure, just not a very good one.
I mean, I don't have religious arguments against killing small animals, but I'm still opposed to it.
Snuffing out human life for convenience doesn't seem like it's much less egregious than that.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:22 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
I disagree. They are similar, but certainly not "intertwined" when properly defined.
Check your dictionary
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:23 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:Hmm.
I disagree. They are similar, but certainly not "intertwined" when properly defined.
Example?
quote:Hmm. Example?
What? We can look at results with zero moral input.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:24 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
I didn't say psychology would have led to the outlaw of murder.
It was one of your answers to the question of why nurder would have ever been illegal if not for morality.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:24 pm to Dale51
quote:
What word would you use?
Naive seems like a good fit.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:25 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
one of
Indeed.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:27 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Naive seems like a good fit.
So, in your opinion, pro abortion people are naive?
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:28 pm to Blob Fish
It's murder? 
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:28 pm to Dale51
quote:Land mine, 3 o'clock
So, in your opinion, pro abortion people are naive?
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:28 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
Check your dictionary
I'm aware of the dictionary definition of each. Your reliance on that makes me question your understanding of them.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:29 pm to Dale51
quote:
So, in your opinion, pro abortion people are naive?
Absolutists, yes, as I thought was already understood from our conversation.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:31 pm to Blob Fish
quote:
if you take morality out of the equation, is it not cheaper for taxpayers to pay for a one time abortion than to pay for food, education, welfare, Medicaid, prison, drug rehab, etc. for all of these unwanted babies born to unfit parents?
If you are making the argument from a strictly fiscal prospective, then it would also be OK to murder infants that were born to "unfit parents". Viability is the best non-moral argument. The only difference between a viable fetus and a human is location.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:32 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
quote: Check your dictionary I'm aware of the dictionary definition of each. Your reliance on that makes me question your understanding of them.
And your inability to understand that dictionaries have long been properly viewed as a collection of the what society sees as "properly defining" something makes me question that you knew the dictionary definition when you posted. Maybe you are just clumsy with your words, you did switch from properly defined to understanding so atleast you are getting better.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:32 pm to westerntigerfan
quote:
If you are making the argument from a strictly fiscal prospective, then it would also be OK to murder infants that were born to "unfit parents".
Wrong.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:33 pm to Blob Fish
Yes. It ends a life. It's murder.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:34 pm to Blob Fish
This is a very selfish, shortsighted, and evil mindset.
Take this argument:
And apply it to the mentally and physically handicaps. The repeat offenders( of whatever level) in prison, the homeless, etc. why don't we just kill them all without warning? Wouldn't that save us some money?
You should have your answer.
Just because doing something May "save money" doesn't make it the right thing to do. Especially when they think is potentially killing a perfectly viable infant just because isn't a "burden"
Take this argument:
quote:
In the welfare nanny state that we live in and will be living in for the foreseeable future, if you take morality out of the equation, is it not cheaper for taxpayers to pay for a one time abortion than to pay for food, education, welfare, Medicaid, prison, drug rehab, etc. for all of these unwanted babies born to unfit parents?
And apply it to the mentally and physically handicaps. The repeat offenders( of whatever level) in prison, the homeless, etc. why don't we just kill them all without warning? Wouldn't that save us some money?
You should have your answer.
Just because doing something May "save money" doesn't make it the right thing to do. Especially when they think is potentially killing a perfectly viable infant just because isn't a "burden"
Posted on 5/3/17 at 8:34 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
If you are making the argument from a strictly fiscal prospective, then it would also be OK to murder infants that were born to "unfit parents".
Wrong.
Well, it would save money........
Page 3 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News