It seems to me that across time morality improves when we see other things as of equal value to ourselves.
That is a long way of saying the application of the golden rule is good.
Secularly we could call this humanising the other.
Enslaving, robbing from, hurting another human being requires we first dehumanise them. But when we humanise we give woman the vote, end slavery, fight oppression. Even animal rights activists try to give animals human rights, to humanise them to save them.
But why not for babies in the womb?
First to reply they are foetuses not babies, needs to re-read the thread 100 times.
Directional morality and abortion
Moderator: Moderators
- Wootah
- Savant
- Posts: 9199
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 108 times
Directional morality and abortion
Post #1Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
- William
- Savant
- Posts: 14187
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 912 times
- Been thanked: 1644 times
- Contact:
Re: Directional morality and abortion
Post #2[Replying to Wootah in post #1]
One cannot give anything inside the womb the right to vote, or the right to end slavery, or the right to fight oppression.
Given that those who have been born - in sheer numbers - have not succeeded in securing such rights, or - having secured such rights - have not shown any significant world-changing events unfold through having such rights, demanding such - largely ineffectual - rights for the unborn for such reasons, is clearly more emotional-based than logical-based.
Enacting laws based upon emotion rather than logic is likely what got humans into such a mess in the first place.
The difference is that the examples you give are all about creatures outside of the womb. The dehumanizing/humanizing is done after the birth of the critter.But why not for babies in the womb?
One cannot give anything inside the womb the right to vote, or the right to end slavery, or the right to fight oppression.
Given that those who have been born - in sheer numbers - have not succeeded in securing such rights, or - having secured such rights - have not shown any significant world-changing events unfold through having such rights, demanding such - largely ineffectual - rights for the unborn for such reasons, is clearly more emotional-based than logical-based.
Enacting laws based upon emotion rather than logic is likely what got humans into such a mess in the first place.
- Wootah
- Savant
- Posts: 9199
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 108 times
Re: Directional morality and abortion
Post #3Would you consider that you may be too prejudiced to recognise someone's humanity like the slave owners were and justifed it with their own reasons.
A slave can't survive without their master?
A baby can't survive without their mother?
Can you see how you are dehumanising a person by saying they are in the womb or on the reservation?
A slave can't survive without their master?
A baby can't survive without their mother?
Can you see how you are dehumanising a person by saying they are in the womb or on the reservation?
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
- William
- Savant
- Posts: 14187
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 912 times
- Been thanked: 1644 times
- Contact:
Re: Directional morality and abortion
Post #4[Replying to Wootah in post #3]
As I pointed out - having the rights you mentioned doesn't seem to be world-changing. If that is all 'recognizing someone's humanity' amounts to, I don't understand the reasoning you offer re what you take issue with.
No. It may be that it has never been explained to me what 'someone's humanity' really is.Would you consider that you may be too prejudiced to recognise someone's humanity
As I pointed out - having the rights you mentioned doesn't seem to be world-changing. If that is all 'recognizing someone's humanity' amounts to, I don't understand the reasoning you offer re what you take issue with.
- Wootah
- Savant
- Posts: 9199
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 108 times
Re: Directional morality and abortion
Post #5OK - maybe it really is a cultural issue just like slave owners didn't understand the problem before. Intriguing.William wrote: ↑Wed Jun 29, 2022 11:50 pm [Replying to Wootah in post #3]
No. It may be that it has never been explained to me what 'someone's humanity' really is.Would you consider that you may be too prejudiced to recognise someone's humanity
As I pointed out - having the rights you mentioned doesn't seem to be world-changing. If that is all 'recognizing someone's humanity' amounts to, I don't understand the reasoning you offer re what you take issue with.
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
- Wootah
- Savant
- Posts: 9199
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 108 times
Re: Directional morality and abortion
Post #6From this facebook post
In the past they dehumanised even 2 year old children apparently. We sure we aren't doing the same?https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... 3796549810
Brothels were common place within antiquity and were often placed between houses of respected Roman families.
Far from being perceived as taboo, brothels were one of the most common gathering places for Roman men. It was seen as antisocial for men not to engage in activities with prostitutes.
There are two ways archaeologists know whether a building discovered is a brothel or not.
The first is by signage — with names and prices on one side and “occupata” (“occupied” in Latin) on the reverse. Or obvious inscriptions like “cellae meretriciae” (prostitute’s cot) which marked out the purpose of the location.
The other way is the discovery of the mass graves of children.
In Roman Antiquity children were not considered real people until they were at least two. Fathers were legally allowed to kill their children without legal repercussion.
This made infanticide rabid in the ancient world. The presence of fetal and newborn skeletons in mass graves give archaeologists an indication that what they’re excavating could very well be a brothel.
There was no ethical dilemma in the ancient world with these situations because children had been fully dehumanized in antiquity. They “looked human” but were “non complere personas” (not fully persons yet), as one ancient writer put it.
Infanticidal practices were considered acceptable, justifiable, and necessary due to the lack of contraception and the adult who was (unlike children of course) a “full person” and therefore within their rights to do as they pleased.
The concept of intrinsic human value — that you have dignity, worth, and purpose by nature of simply being human — is foreign to the vast majority of human history.
It has only recently been broadly accepted, and only due to the Judea-Christian ethic, that the value of the human being no matter what size, stage, situation, race, gender, etc., etc., came into fruition as a societal norm.
I’m seeing a lot of very relevant conversations that both sadden and worry me. Worry me about the state of how we view human worth, dignity, and value - concepts which only have a leg to stand on via historical biblical grounding. As a historian I spend a lot of my time reading the writings of ancient pagans and sometimes their arguments justifying their dehumanizations and sacrifices (literal sacrifices in many cases) don’t sound nearly as ancient as they ought to be.
The ancients had no qualms with child sacrifice because they had utterly dehumanized babies. Another reminder that societal assumptions do not equate with truth, morality, or justice.
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2572 times
Re: Directional morality and abortion
Post #7I don't know. When's the last time you bashed you one against the rocks?
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
- Wootah
- Savant
- Posts: 9199
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 108 times
Re: Directional morality and abortion
Post #8[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #7]
No idea what you are talking about? Let's agree that bashing babies on rocks is wrong so we can focus on the topic.
No idea what you are talking about? Let's agree that bashing babies on rocks is wrong so we can focus on the topic.
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2572 times
Re: Directional morality and abortion
Post #9You was talking on how awful folks treated kids in the long ago, and asked if we ain't still doing it.Wootah wrote: ↑Sat Jul 02, 2022 7:30 am [Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #7]
No idea what you are talking about? Let's agree that bashing babies on rocks is wrong so we can focus on the topic.
So I asked you, a Christian, if you were bashing kids against the rocks, cause that pleases the Christian God.
You seem to now say your God's got the baby rock bashing wrong, so now I'm curious to understand why you'd worship such a wrong-headed god.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
- Wootah
- Savant
- Posts: 9199
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 108 times
Re: Directional morality and abortion
Post #10[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #9]
The passage you are referring to is poetry and reflects the anger and heartache of the Jews who had just gone through the Babylonians invasion and exile. It's not a prescriptive command from God. You know this.
The passage you are referring to is poetry and reflects the anger and heartache of the Jews who had just gone through the Babylonians invasion and exile. It's not a prescriptive command from God. You know this.
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."