All evaluations, all value judgements, require an objective. A motive.
Different motives create the ideological conflicts concerning abortions.
In nature there is nothing intrinsically good or bad.
Better to grow flowers from the ashes than add to them, and add death to rape.
They donāt require them. They are them.
Pivot self=other (valuer=valuer).
self=other is intrinsically good, and all violation of it is privation.
Your anti-nature forces you into paradoxical self-annihilation.
Self can never equal other. This is antithetical to experienced existence.
an individual is not even equal to his past self.
Difference is multiplicity, necessitating consciousness.
The uniformity you crave is aligned with modernityā¦and it is an expression of insecurity and resentment.
Cooperative survival and reproductive methods necessitate such expansions of identity.
Women, in particular, desire itā¦because of their reproductive role.
My line of reasoning has nothing to do that, at no point did I assume not-having an abortion was a net-benefit to the parent. Infants and toddlers, like pets, can be an annoying burden and parasite. Wanting to dodge all that responsibility and embrace hedonism is understandable.
My stance is that allowing free abortions is simply a decay of the morals of society and a stepping stone to complete moral anarchy. Selinus himself admits that he doesnāt believe in good or evil and its all depending on context to an objective, the collective health of the community.
Second the way abortionists kill babies seems brutal and inhumane, if they killed them in a more humane star-trek kind of way then I might not be as against it as I am today.
As Iāve noted, all value-judgments refer to an objective. Modern objectives are to erase all biological, or genetic, diversities, and create an idealized uniformity.
One such biological disparity is sexual.
Males/Females differ and Moderns cannot bear it.
I assure you that my goal is not to create some āmono raceā devoid of diversity just as the Nazis wanted in Europe or the woke DEIs want of the world.
I also assure you this has absolutely nothing to do with my stance on abortion whatsoever, and I seriously doubt that this explains the intentions of average Americanās stance on abortion either.
As for gender yes one could argue my Futarani plan does indeed reduce the sexual dimorphism, except for the genitals which will be much larger than before. I feel that modern maleās genitals are far too small and shrunken and not aesthetic at all.
I donāt live in an upper class, āMr. Rogersā Pleasantville ideallic white neighborhood that feels safe. After a while the diversity grinds on you and wears you down. Everyone you see is a different race and every encounter you become paranoid they will pull out a 9mm on you, for no reason whatsoever. You might say I have become āretiredā of the manās world.
For all of millennia mankind has fought each other and other men, and I seek to put an end to it. And that is a large part of my Futarani plan. Futarani will allow true diversity when all men are as surrogate females, walking down the streets full of diversity and not feeling paranoid of every man you see. Multi-racial towns with no feeling of conflicts or stranger dangers.
Many people would rather go back to the old ways, of constant wars and walking through towns full of barbarian men. Distrust and paranoia of strangers, etc. You should play a game called Metaphor, Re:Fantazio, it depicts a town full of diversity and all the conflicts it brings. Their goal however is to create a āmono-raceā utopia, which is not my goal. As with the Futarani plan, no āmono-raceā is required, as surrogate females of every race can live in harmony with each other
Whence comes this valuer=valuer, self=other you love so much if not from your dogmatic perspective? Whence comes this belief in uniformity, in equality between a fully grown woman and an unborn fetus? Nature doesnāt work that way. Someone must have created this way of thinking one day.
Yet, I would even agree with you, any infant has the potential to become a true individual, just like it can have the potential to being born without a brain, or die soon after birth. Again, what you fail to accept: every situation is unique, every pregnancy is different from all others, so it can happen to end in an abortion (or a miscarriage). Iām not defending unrestricted abortion here, Iām saying it can be an option for a woman who is fully owner of herself.
Radiant rule: Take the course of action which results in the least amount of net suffering of the universe while also maximizing the net happiness of the universe.
Diamond rule: Treat others in the way that most benefits them.
Platinum rule: Treat others as they want to be treated.
Golden rule: Do onto others as you would want them to treat you
Silver rule: Be productive.
Bronze rule: Help yourself.
Rust rule: Do as thou wilt.
Itās not, nothing is ever conducting to real āmoral anarchyā, by its own nature anarchy canāt stand or last long, another established way of thinking soon āevolvesā from any state of anarchy. A new form of State, a new morality, etc.
But such a morality is always arbitrary and unconditional. I fail to see how a woman having an abortion affects the whole of humanity, the whole of society. Itās an entirely subjective affair. It would be different if we created a whole religious or cult system based on abortion, but no, itās something that occurs rarely and even the woman who has to endure it is oftentimes traumatized later.
Again, forget the ideal, concentrate on the flesh and blood in front of you right now.
Fair enough when you yourself wants to adopt any of these so-called ārulesā. You yourself will deal with the consequences. Another thing, entirely, is to want to impose them on others. Thatās dogmatism.
From my own experience āDo as thou wiltā rarely happens, because there are always obstacles to oneās will. When total arbitrariness is the rule, the individual soon succumbs. So my āruleā is rational, enlightened egoism. Not an egoism which wants or seeks to destroys āothersā, but quite on the contrary, sees these āothersā as necessary to fulfill my needs.
Fixed it. All of these are self=other, including āDo nothing to others that they would not want done to them.ā
You have to stay in dialogue about what everyone involved wants, or doesnāt want, and everyone has to (want to) be ordering all wants around self=other.
thatās do as you will, dude
āInside, evenā (said the baby in the womb, right before the grand exit)
Yes. They are both capable of valuing (affirming value), and hunger to be likewise affirmed/valued. When this hunger is not met, they experience the same anxiety, and do not thrive, even if they survive.
Even more absurd if we withhold our affirmation, if we stomp out any possibility of affirmation before it is even born. If we think satisfaction is impossible (if we bet against hunger being a sign it can be satisfied), though, is it surprising we would want to avoid all anxietyā¦ be life-denying?
And it spreads, unless you stop ignoring the hunger and seek true satisfaction/life. Obviously, we are not meant for mere survival (or insatiable gluttony).
She parrots her shamans verbiage.
Birds of a feather
This is amazing.
Gullible needy spirits, projecting into existence their own self-evaluations.
Insecurities and anxieties bubbling up from their subconscious, grasping at imagery, mystical terminology, seeking refuge in obscurantism. The occult.
Choosing the words that best express the pains of their secret wounds.
This has always been where priests and charlatans flourish.
Ask the gypsies, adopting the same lifestyleā¦the same survival tactic. Parasitically exploiting a hostās weakness.
Maybe, but I reinterpret it my own way, as a reasonable stance, not as a call to sheer arbitrariness. By my own nature, Iām not inclined to hate or hurt others, not purposefully. Also, I donāt demand people to act this or that way. I let them be.
It is a weakness to be unable to participate in value. True power sets free (empowers, affirms).
Abortion doesnāt let a baby be. It demands it dies.
Ha!!!
Brilliant!!
The cult adds another convert.
Will to power, through feebleness.
The paradox of need. To expose powerlessness by grasping at power.
Power. Value. Life. Meaning.
All are synonymous.
You hate āem? Yetā¦ here you are.
Good. Welcome 
Your choice of terminology exposes your deep desires.
You, adopting your masterās method, unnecessarily complicates the simple, implying what you cannot rationalize.
Energyā¦not value.
Value is how conscious beings measure energy, relative to their goals.
But I am wasting my time on the needy.
A faith healer and a hypnotist has no power over his targets. He exploits what is already present in them - need, desireā¦anxiety.
He channels their victimās energies.
Carry on, zombie. Follow your hunger.