Abortion & Euthanasia: Why I’m All For Both

Posted on by

Simply put, liberals/progressives are the ones who, IMO, are going to utilize these services the most. So, yeah, the fewer babies they get to raise, and the earlier we can stop them from voting, the better. On the conservative side we have the Duggars and highly religious people breeding like crazy and clinging to life for every breath they can take – which puts and keeps more conservatives in the voting pool longer.

So, as a pragmatic political matter, I say let ’em abort their young and kill themselves off to their heart’s content.

114 thoughts on “Abortion & Euthanasia: Why I’m All For Both”

  1. Richardthughes,

    And yet, society becomes more liberal as it and time progresses.

    I think that claim needs some support. Take Iran and Afghanistan as two examples. I’m not certain Putin’s Russia helps your case either.

  2. Murray,
    Have you ever heard of population overshoot? You can fantasize all you want about technocornucopianist solutions but the physics and math are the nooses around humanity’s neck that will never come off. Birth enough people on this planet and you will bring about the worst suffering possible when we hit the double hulls of overshoot and high density energy depletion. That’s some good Christian charity you got there.

  3. Elizabeth: For pete’s sake someone post an interesting OP. Unfortunately I’m up to the ears in RL right now.

    Same here, I’m afraid. I have two books on the concept of representation in cognitive science I need to get through this weekend, then re-read Tomasello’s latest.

  5. Elizabeth: For pete’s sake someone post an interesting OP. Unfortunately I’m up to the ears in RL right now.

    Well, I was thinking of reading Freedom Evolves and starting an OP on that, but I thought that might be getting too personal. Besides if you’re busy you might not be able to participate anyways.

    I have another I just started on cognitive science of religion that’s on the radar for an OP.

  6. Both of those would be great, Mung. Thanks.

    I’ll try to keep looking in. I’m stuck to my computer anyway right now, I just don’t have time for extended thought!

  7. Wjm:
    In fact, I think we should raise “personhood” status to the age of 18, meaning you can be aborted by your parents all the way up to age 18.

    We could call it ” youthanasia “

  9. newton:
    Wjm:
    In fact, I think we should raise “personhood” status to the age of 18, meaning you can be aborted by your parents all the way up to age 18.

    We could call it ” youthanasia ”

    **Rimshot**

  10. Aardvark:
    Murray,
    Have you ever heard of population overshoot? You can fantasize all you want about technocornucopianist solutions but the physics and math are the nooses around humanity’s neck that will never come off. Birth enough people on this planet and you will bring about the worst suffering possible when we hit the double hulls of overshoot and high density energy depletion. That’s some good Christian charity you got there.

    No, I’ve never heard of population overshoot or technocommunist … technocopulatio ….technocornhuske…. whatever. And, by the way, I’m not a Christian. Or a Muslim. Or Jewish. Or Rastfartia .;.. rasfarengi ….rastaflyingpasta … whatever.

  11. Richardthughes:
    And yet, society becomes more liberal as it and time progresses. What is William missing?

    Islam is the fastest growing worldview in the world. I don’t think it’s a very liberal worldview. That’s the essential problem with liberal worldviews; they just don’t have the powerful cohesiveness and motivational power of a good old-fashioned religion.

  13. William J. Murray: Islam is the fastest growing worldview in the world.I don’t think it’s a very liberal worldview.That’s the essential problem with liberal worldviews; they just don’t have the powerful cohesiveness and motivational power of a good old-fashioned religion.

    Yes, it seems to be a counter fact to Pinker’s thesis. I’m not sure, though. On the whole. as societies get richer they get more liberal. And I think we will continue to get richer.

  14. Kantian Naturalist: Same here, I’m afraid. I have two books on the concept of representation in cognitive science I need to get through this weekend, then re-read Tomasello’s latest.

    But given your reading speed, wouldn’t that still leave Sunday open?

    Seriously, I’d be interested in the book titles, if you have not posted them yet.

  15. Elizabeth: Yes, it seems to be a counter fact to Pinker’s thesis.I’m not sure, though.On the whole. as societies get richer they get more liberal.And I think we will continue to get richer.

    Yes, as societies get richer, they tend to get more liberal … and they tend to reproduce less. And, if they have open-door immigration policies, they tend to have their native populations displaced by immigrants and their higher reproductive tendencies, since they are often not a “rich” part of the society.

    This is exactly the case in many European countries, where their rampant liberal idealism and low native reproduction rate has resulted in many of those countries being slowly overtaken with rising populations of muslims. Which has resulted – at least in Britain – with an expansion of the acceptance of Sharia law in some areas of Austria, Germany, France and the UK. Spain has Muslim police and courts in some areas that prevent women from driving or holding jobs outside the home. In liberal Holland, Sharia law is taking root in several areas. Does the government have the will to put an end to it? Does any European country? The UK officially recognizes Sharia courts of law.

    One of the problems of liberalism (not to be confused with libertarianism) is that it doesn’t seem to be able to muster the will to defend itself against being overthrown. If morality, rights, and freedoms are just norms that the people decide and instantiate through law, then what is the answer to the spread of Islam?

    It’s bizarre to me that so many atheists/secularists seem so worried about some kind of Christian theocracy, when Islamic theocracy has already taken root in many European countries and is starting to test its legal footings even in the USA. As you dismantle Christianity, you are dismantling the only ideology with the cohesive and motivational power to stand against Islam. You want immigrants to freely come into the USA — do you think these immigrants are mostly atheists and secularists?

    It’s like some kind of death wish – you cling to idealistic notions and grand social and environmental ideas, complaining about Christianity and being ever vigilant against it while seemingly embracing the cancer that is systematically destroying your way of life and threatening modern civilization.

  16. William J. Murray: It’s like some kind of death wish – you cling to idealistic notions and grand social and environmental ideas, complaining about Christianity and being ever vigilant against it while seemingly embracing the cancer that is systematically destroying your way of life and threatening modern civilization.

    Islam == cancer? Then best give that faith healer of yours a call, as that’s the cure for cancer right?

  17. William J. Murray: This is exactly the case in many European countries, where their rampant liberal idealism and low native reproduction rate has resulted in many of those countries being slowly overtaken with rising populations of muslims. Which has resulted – at least in Britain – with an expansion of the acceptance of Sharia law in some areas of Austria, Germany, France and the UK. Spain has Muslim police and courts in some areas that prevent women from driving or holding jobs outside the home. In liberal Holland, Sharia law is taking root in several areas. Does the government have the will to put an end to it? Does any European country? The UK officially recognizes Sharia courts of law.

    This sounds like a claim of fact to me. As you have no direct personal experience of these issues (I doubt you have ever left the USA from the parochial views you espouse) on what basis are you making these claims of fact?

    As you do not know the truth or otherwise of things in the world except where you have directly experienced them, could you tell me how you know that the UK officially recognizes Sharia courts of law?

  18. William J. Murray,

    Which has resulted – at least in Britain – with an expansion of the acceptance of Sharia law in some areas of Austria, Germany, France and the UK.

    First I’ve heard of it. You’d think someone might have mentioned it.

  20. Allan Miller: First I’ve heard of it. You’d think someone might have mentioned it.

    It’s been all over the Daily Mail site for a while. It’s to do with guidance issued to solicitors with regard to family law mainly IIRC. But given William’s “If I’ve not experienced it directly it’s not real” viewpoint, I’m interested to know how he knows it’s true. Did he take what someone else wrote at face value?

    e.g. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2587215/Sharia-Law-enshrined-British-legal-lawyers-guidelines-drawing-documents-according-Islamic-rules.html

  22. BruceS: Seriously, I’d be interested in the book titles, if you have not posted them yet.

    Wheeler’s Reconstructing the Cognitive World and Nanay’s Between Perception and Action. I don’t want to hijack this thread; we can talk about them in another topic.

  24. Kantian Naturalist: Wheeler’s Reconstructing the Cognitive World and Nanay’s Between Perception and Action. I don’t want to hijack this thread; we can talk about them in another topic.

    Thanks.

    I was just looking for names. A discussion at some time would be an unexpected but welcome bonus.

    (For similar reasons to yours, I avoided commenting on your concerns with brain/mind identity posted in another thread, but had I done so, I would have focused on identity theory being applied to phenomenal consciousness…)

  25. As you do not know the truth or otherwise of things in the world except where you have directly experienced them, could you tell me how you know that the UK officially recognizes Sharia courts of law?

    I don’t know it. As a common grounds for discussion, this is one of those things I refer to that I don’t think will be contested because the news is everywhere.

    From the Daily Mail in UK: Sharia law to be enshrined in British legal system as lawyers get guidelines on drawing up documents according to Islamic rules

    From the Huffington Post: Islamic Sharia Law Effectively Enshrined In UK Legal System With New Will Guidance

    From The Telegraph in the UK: Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs

    I don’t watch Fox news, btw.

  26. William J. Murray: I don’t know it. As a common grounds for discussion, this is one of those things I refer to that I don’t think will be contested because the news is everywhere.

    Well, I contest it. In the UK anyway.

  30. Yes, that was good news. But it was never a case of UK law recognising sharia courts. As I understand it, it was guidelines for drawing up wills within UK law but in accordance with sharia principles.

    A lot different. I don’t like the principles, but then I don’t like the principles on which a lot of people write their wills.

  31. Elizabeth,

    What assertion does it not support? The very fact that the solicitors put the Sharia-compliant guidelines up in the first place and then only took them down because of public pressure demonstrates the point I’ve been making – that sharia is infiltrating western society. Even though the solicitors changed their minds on this recently, muslims are still conducting their own “court” system in the UK:

    Sharia courts have operated unofficially for years among Britain’s Muslim communities but until now their rulings could not be enforced, relying instead on parties agreeing voluntarily.

    The Muslim Arbitration Tribunal panels, set up by lawyer Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, are now operating in London, Bradford, Manchester, Birmingham and Nuneaton, with more planned for Glasgow and Edinburgh.

    Mr Siddiqi said: ‘We realised that under the Arbitration Act we can make rulings which can be enforced by county and High Courts.

    ‘The Act allows disputes to be resolved using alternatives like tribunals. This method is called alternative dispute resolution, which for Muslims is what the sharia courts are.’

  33. Elizabeth: This one:

    Well, actually, my links did support that contention. Whether you call it a court of law or an “alternative tribunal”, the UK officially recognizes sharia courts tribunals – as my prior post and link points out.

  35. From your own link:

    The Ministry of Justice said: ‘Sharia law is not part of the law of England and Wales, and the Government has no intention of making any change that would conflict with British laws and values.

    ‘In all arbitrations, decisions will be enforceable by the English courts if the requirements of the 1996 Arbitration Act are satisfied. If any decisions by these Tribunals were illegal or contrary to public policy under English law, they would not be enforceable.’

    Read more

  36. William J. Murray,

    Where does this court/tribunal thing come from? A will is a legal instrument which allows the testator to distribute their estate how they wish. If they wish to incorporate Sharia principles, that is their right. The Law Society guidance – which is a long way from enactment of Sharia in formal British Law – was intended to guide solicitors in helping people draw up these instruments. IANAL.

  37. Yes, that’s my understanding.

    And, equally, people can use any arbitration system they want. As even that Daily Mail article points out – if an arbitration tribunal makes decisions that are contrary to UK law, then they are not legally valid.

    Not that any of this isn’t worrying – but the idea that the Saracen Hordes are at the gates of European liberal culture is basically bullshit.

  39. William J. Murray: Yes, as societies get richer, they tend to get more liberal … and they tend to reproduce less.And, if they have open-door immigration policies, they tend to have their native populations displaced by immigrants and their higher reproductive tendencies, since they are often not a “rich” part of the society.

    This is exactly the case in many European countries, where their rampant liberal idealism and low native reproduction rate has resulted in many of those countries being slowly overtaken with rising populations of muslims. Which has resulted – at least in Britain – with an expansion of the acceptance of Sharia law in some areas of Austria, Germany, France and the UK. Spain has Muslim police and courts in some areas that prevent women from driving or holding jobs outside the home.In liberal Holland, Sharia law is taking root in several areas.Does the government have the will to put an end to it?Does any European country?The UK officially recognizes Sharia courts of law.

    One of the problems of liberalism (not to be confused with libertarianism) is that it doesn’t seem to be able to muster the will to defend itself against being overthrown.If morality, rights, and freedoms are just norms that the people decide and instantiate through law, then what is the answer to the spread of Islam?

    It’s bizarre to me that so many atheists/secularists seem so worried about some kind of Christian theocracy, when Islamic theocracy has already taken root in many European countries and is starting to test its legal footings even in the USA.As you dismantle Christianity, you are dismantling the only ideology with the cohesive and motivational power to stand against Islam.You want immigrants to freely come into the USA — do you think these immigrants are mostly atheists and secularists?

    It’s like some kind of death wish – you cling to idealistic notions and grand social and environmental ideas, complaining about Christianity and being ever vigilant against it while seemingly embracing the cancer that is systematically destroying your way of life and threatening modern civilization.

    William, is the idea here that to be safe, we have to “out-conservative” Muslim evangelists? That liberals, who are “open society” types make it too easy for “bad guys” to flourish, so what’s needed are hard-ass (Trump-type?) bastards to keep them off?

    If so, be careful what you dream.

  40. walto: I have no clue what happened there. You should ask keiths: I was probably up to something diabolical.

    That’s exactly what I thought! 🙂

  42. Neil Rickert: I took you to be expounding on the content of the empty set.

    If that’s deep or important or difficult to understand, that must have been it! 🙂

  43. walto said:

    William, is the idea here that to be safe, we have to “out-conservative” Muslim evangelists?

    No, you don’t have to “out-conservative” them; your society does, however, have to be able to withstand the socio-political assault such a powerful ideology brings to the table. A socio-poltical system of “diversity” and “tolerance” only works as long as no one is dedicated enough, organized enough or smart enough, to use those liberal laws and sensibilities against you.

    This is why the concept of unalienable rights and freedoms is necessary – otherwise, freedoms, rights and laws are just whatever the majority says they are, and words mean whatever the current group in power says they mean.

  44. William J. Murray:
    walto said:

    No, you don’t have to “out-conservative” them; your society does, however, have to be able to withstand the socio-political assault such a powerful ideology brings to the table.A socio-poltical system of “diversity” and “tolerance” only works as long as no one is dedicated enough, organized enough or smart enough, to use those liberal laws and sensibilities against you.

    This is why the concept of unalienable rights and freedoms is necessary – otherwise, freedoms, rights and laws are just whatever the majority says they are, and words mean whatever the current group in power says they mean.

    Just wanted to quickly note that I don’t agree with any of that.

  46. Elizabeth:
    Yes, that’s my understanding.

    And, equally, people can use any arbitration system they want.As even that Daily Mail article points out – if an arbitration tribunal makes decisions that are contrary to UK law, then they are not legally valid.

    Not that any of this isn’t worrying – but the idea that the Saracen Hordes are at the gates of European liberal culture is basically bullshit.

    What is it with you and walto turning what I say into some kind of extremist nonsense? European liberal culture is being infiltrated – deliberately or not – by a culture that is diametrically opposed to it and actively seeks to change or circumvent it.

    What is the fastest-growing European population? Christians, atheists or muslims? Does the liberal celebration of “diversity” promote assimilation of this culture into agreement with its liberal views, or does it promote cultural balkanization – where muslims continue to operate under sharia law and traditions in their communities whether or not it is officially sanctioned?

    Do you think women living in these communities feel safe taking off their burkas if they wish to? Do you think they feel “protected” by liberal laws if they decide to wear a bikini to go to the beach? Or to get a job and drive to work?

    At least France and Belgium, sensing their existential threat, have taken up the beginning of the task by banning the Burka – which some in the UK consider a “radically right-wing” suggestion.

    There’s a limit to how much diversity any society can tolerate without signing on to its own eventual destruction.

  47. walto:

    I have no clue what happened there. You should ask keiths: I was probably up to something diabolical.

    In this case, your “I don’t know what happened” comment came after the comment disappeared.

    Last time it was “Oops, something happened to my comment” and then your comment disappeared. If I hadn’t refreshed my browser at just the right moment, you might have gotten away with it. Here’s the photographic evidence.

  48. I’m just sorry you don’t have the photographic evidence here, keiths, I think a screenshot would have shown that I was trying to post an excerpt from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, but then thought better of it, posted a cute cat pic followed by some porn. But when I (falsely as it turns out! 🙁 ) thought you might be Johnny on the spot again, I quickly deleted everything.

    I mean Jaysus. Nothing works out the way I’d like it. When I think you’re not there, you are, carefully preserving everything, and when I think you are…..where the hell ARE YOU? 🙁

Leave a Reply