Fuck going to the polls to vote, you can do it online now. Now you can have more of an impact and get more tangible results! Hurray for voting:
This couple started a blog in which they allow people to vote on if they have an abortion or not. What do you think about this?
I personally think it’s probably the single sickest thing I’ve heard of in a long time.
I don’t see anything “sick” about it per se. (I mean, I expect this from most people nowadays.)
But I did have to weigh the moral decision. I ended up choosing for them to have an abortion, even though I am morally opposed to abortion in general.
For a person to publicize such a ‘decision’ is more reprehensible to me than as if they chose to have an abortion on their own.
In short, I do not want these (morally repugnant) people to reproduce. And that actually trumps my hard line stance against abortion in general.
I guess my point is that I would rather people have abortions (and not reproduce) in the first place than to fail in reasoning for themselves what they should do or not with their own lives. Because, for this latter type, I know that there is no chance in hell that these people will ever become ‘responsible’ adults in any sense of the meaning.
Hahaha.
Completely agreed. I don’t think it’s sick because they’re considering abortion, I think it’s sick that it’s a game to them.
Freudian slip?!?!? 
=D>
I read that too, lol.
If they do choose to give birth to the child, I am wondering how the child would receive this if it ever comes to know of it.
If I were that kid, I’d make my own website in which I let people vote on if I kill my parents or not. Fuck those guys, making life a joke. I’m not against abortion per-se, but I’m against the idea that it should be taken lightly.
Debaitor,
Well, as I do not quite see things in terms of ‘moral’ and ‘immoral’ though I do not ‘see’ the necessity for abortions, ever, but you seem to - you see those people as ‘morally repugnant’, but at the same time, you are quite willing to suggest they abort the child - simply because you cannot see them as being reasonable, responsible adults insofar as their lives are concerned. In your estimation, how moral is that?
Aside from that, you have no way of knowing what kind of parents they would be…and yet you are ready to deprive a human being of the right to live. That is extremely reasonable of you. Abortion trumps growing up with lousy parents or no parents at all to you? Life is all about parents?
Don’t take this as disagreement with your whole post:
you can get a pretty good picture of what kind of people these two are, and by extension how they will parent, from the blog. they will be bad parents. if they think life and death is a joke, imagine what kind of joke parenting is to them.
I was more addressing Debaitor’s willingness to destroy the child’s life because he didn’t agree with their way of thinking, being. Apparently you feel the same way too. In actuality, you cannot know for certain what kind of parents they will be. Sure, they may make miserable ones from their appearance, but we do not have the entire picture.
For myself, I would prefer that people take the time to really think things out, have the important conversations beforehand, and then to be cautious and wear condoms, practice birth control; in other words, to be responsible before a life is created.
Oh boy, what was the point of specifying that I don’t disagree with your whole post if you’re just going to ignore it? Is this how you read everything? You just ignore stuff?
I don’t know specifically how they’ll be bad, sure. I imagine they’re more the mental abuse kind of parents than the physical abuse kind, though they may also be both. Probably they’re into passive-aggression and the like.
Humpty,
I didn’t ignore what you wrote – I read it. Perhaps I didn’t read enough or I read too much into it. What you wrote was:
So you do actually acknowledge that abortion, or the taking of a human life is acceptable. According to you, we just need to give it some thought.
To which you responded (my bolded):
…’completely agreed’ is why I said you feel as Debaitor does. “Doesn’t 'completely agreed” include all of his thought, which says that publicizing it is more reprehensible than having the abortion on their own? But I’m willing to admit that I may be wrong in that you might not have implied that a child ought to be aborted simply because their parents are irresponsible and unreasonable. Only you can answer that.
Something we can’t know for sure. We tend to project our own experiences onto others, don’t we?
It just seems to me that in the ‘eyes’ of some, their publicizing of the pregnancy and the voting for or against it is more horrendous than the actual act of destroying that life. The thought did also occurred to me that this may actually not be true to life but some kind of a scenario. In this day and age though, anything is possible!
I will say one thing though - that ‘if’ it is real, the only two people involved ought to be the husband and wife, but that that conversation ought to have taken place before the child was conceived – all the pros and cons ought to have been discussed, everything looked at, not later on when the ‘cold feet’ and all of the misgivings, begin to set in. Our basic mentality is always to throw caution to the wind and something away if it’s too inconvenient or it comes too easy …and not to see true value where it lies.
I quoted what I completely agree with. That’s what quotes are for: to specify what you’re talking about.
I think you’re just being contrary. It’s pretty obvious that if I quote one line and say “completely agreed,” that I completely agree with that one line and not everything they’ve said ever in their life. That’s ridiculous.
I am not trying to be contrary at all…just trying to point out that you did seem to be agreeing with him on THIS:
…to which you said completely agreed. I am not saying that you agree with everything he says or that everyone else says. Just that statement. But the rest is implied…
But of course, we can go around in circles over this so…
we really shouldn’t be going in circles, it shouldn’t be so confusing to you. the rest isn’t implied. i agree with what i quoted.
I’m not confused at all, Humpty. We are just not seeing and agreeing from that one little point and to make it so important is making the issue of abortion less important. I think we can both agree that (1) the issue of abortion is not to be taken lightly, and from my vantage point (2) the issue of abortion ought not to ever be an issue. But unfortunately it is.
People need to have a sense of ‘responsibility’ before moral judgments become possible. I judge them because I deem myself morally responsible. I take responsibility for myself, in general, throughout life. This couple shows a complete lack of responsibility through their decision to make their abortion 1. public, and 2. have people vote on whether they should or should not.
That reeks of moral repugnance; they obviously are not ‘responsible’ adults. The first evidence of this is their conflicted situation, having a girl pregnant without expecting it. The second evidence of this is their inability to “decide” or “make a choice” in the matter.
Who, really, is making the “choice” of whether this life should become birthed or not? Answer: not the couple responsible for it, at all.
Yes, I do. They are irresponsible children, from all indications. But children having children is not uncommon in our society.
Adults are very, very rare people/individuals these days. Very few people are “adults” and take active, accountable, moral responsibility for themselves.
I am reminded of this far past middle aged guy I know. He still acts and thinks like a very young child. It is just another symptom of our degenerate culture.
I am a “Moral Realist”.
If I knew that a guy was a criminal, then I know his progeny are criminals too. For example, think of all the people/babies in this world born through rape. That is horrible and horrendous, isn’t it?? Consider Nazi Germany, when Nazi officers raped the most sexually attractive, beautiful, pre-selected Jewish women, and kept them alive as sex slaves. Now, think of their children. These babies may not know or realize it, but, they are the products of rape. As such, I see them as potential rapists to be. Actions beget similar actions.
So yes, of course I am “for abortion” in many circumstances. I don’t want these people to reproduce to begin with.
If you want any “true end” to criminality, then you have to stop it at “the source”, where it breeds. It’s rather simple.
As this couple displays absolutely no responsibility for their decision, I honestly think it is a better “choice” for them to have an abortion.
Yes.
I would rather a child not exist then to be the child of a bastard or parentless. These are the types of children who most typically become criminals, deviants, murderers, etc.
My position is overly simple, no need to overthink it at all:
Children should become born to their biological parents, one mother, one father.
Children should have one (and only one) biological father and one mother.
Don’t forget that Christianity was started by a fatherless/bastard (Jesus Christ). Religion in essence is for “lost children”, children without parents.
I would also prefer a child to have a highly abusive mother/father than one “good” single parent. I think it is healthier that a child be abused with two biological parents than become raised by one non-biological parent.
Nature trumps nurture, for me. You cannot “educate out” somebody’s genetic compulsion and likelihood to commit rapes and murder, for example.
Criminals are criminals due to genetics. You cannot take the “beast” out of man. You can only breed it out.
I know, I know, the things I say are unbelievable. But, take it for what it is worth. I don’t really want to get into moral beliefs.
So I will end it at that and say no more on this subject.
By the way, in no way am I advocating child abuse or anything of that nature; it is “wrong, disgusting, cruel, brutal, evilevilevilevil!!!”
for your sake, i’ll more fully explain precisely what i agree with:
subject A) a woman gets pregnant, she can’t afford the child and she still lives with her parents, and they’re drunks and evil and abusive, and not only will they beat her for getting pregnant, they’ll surely abuse the child as it grows up as well. this woman has an abortion.
subject B) two ass holes put it to a vote on the internet if they should have an abortion or not.
What I agreed with was that Subject A is far more respectable than Subject B. The serious decision to have an abortion for at least somewhat legitimate reasons is superior to making abortion into a joke.
This does not imply that I think either of those children should be aborted, or would be better of never living than having these shitty people for parents. As a matter of fact I think precisely the opposite, I think both of those children are better of with a life than no life at all, and it’s annoying that you would continue to insist you know what I think when I in fact don’t think that and didn’t imply thinking that.
Humpty
There are places where this girl can go and be safe until she has her child. Then, she can give it up for adoption if she has no other place to go. Part of the problem is that people do not know their alternatives, do not realize there is help out there.
And with that explanation, you just confirmed what I thought you otherwise implied…and that i might have been wrong in thinking. So from your perspective, having an abortion is far more ‘respectable’ 
than what these two did. ](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/uploads/default/original/2X/7/7c349bf1053f368a5729d053e1e91215f22ce66c.gif "Brick wall"){kind=small}
Again, I am probably wrong in what I think you are saying but to me preserving a human life is more important than being viewed as respectable or Not. I am just not able to wrap my mind around your way of thinking. What you seem to be saying here is that ultimately the act of abortion itself (even with its so-called reasons or excuses) means very little or nothing compared to the making of a joke about abortion which would be seem to be everything. Am I not understanding you here? If this IS your way of thinking, it is what it is but you seem to be placing more value on respectability than on life. Am I wrong here? Respect for human life ought to be the real value here not respectability trumping life.
This is precisely my point. They have as much right to a life no matter what their future entails once they have been conceived.
Well, though I don’t want to I have no problem with annoying you but it just somehow appears to be that you are sitting on the fence with this. First you say that Subject A is far more respectable and superior because of certain reasons (abort the child) and then you say that you don’t really feel that way…about abortion. So what is it that you’re really trying to say, barring the fact of your thinking that i don’t understand you. Your statements seem to be sort of contradictory to me but maybe that’s just my way of looking at it.
Well, there’s two sides to consider.
When I say A is more respectable than B, I’m looking at the parents’ values. A actually has concern for life, which is why she takes the decision seriously and thinks about it, even though she ultimately decided it would be better to not have it. B doesn’t have concern at all, they take the decision lightly, as if it’s not a serious matter. It is, and A recognizes that, which is what I’m saying I respect.
However, when I say that it would be better for both of the children to be born, I’m obviously not considering the parents or their values. Life is 99.99999% of the time worth living (obviously just a made up statistic).
What I’m saying isn’t contradictory. It’s just looking at the issue from different vantage points.