Leaderboard

Abortion is by definition murder. Feel free to expand your argument as it's not clear to me. When someone is unconscious like is knocked out, a fetus, or is in a coma, why is it when someone who is conscious and kills them not considered a murderer to you?

Schrödinger really had a strange way of hating it, by contributing a lot to its understanding.

Interesting stuff about mirror neurons and empathy and the need to change minds through acceptance and openness. We are robotic in our brain circuit activity and need to transcend that if we are to survive. Got scared by the "one world" vibe. Sounds like a way to justify dropping our borders, which is another way of saying that the West has no right to exist, which means that I as a Westerner clinging to particular values, principles, and cultural artefacts have no right to exist at all, much less in a nurturing culture.

The abortion argument is one of the biggest red herrings in contemporary history. If you're willing to kill a (potential) human being that you voluntarily created when you could easily give it up for adoption (or fucking raise it yourself, or wear a fucking condom) whether it is 'moral' or not is besides the point. You're so close to a psychopath that any decent society should ostrasize you or get you some help. "I love living, but I'm going to kill this defenseless thing which I won't consult about whether or not it wants to despite the fact that there's a 99.99999% chance that it will." The absolute lack of empathy is the most damnable thing about abortion. It's like a person who kills animals just because. Yeah, it's not 'technically' evil, but you're pretty much a psychopath everyone should avoid. Beyond that, abortion actually is evil.

The NAP doesn't create positive obligations, but you do. If I sign a contract and fail to fulfill it, I've stolen, therefore violating the NAP. A child (from the moment of conception) is, at the very least, a potential moral agent (i.e if it is allowed to develop normally it will become one whereas a sperm or an egg by itself could never be.) By voluntarily having sex you agree to the risks involved, including pregnancy. Since the child is essentially a moral agent (or will be if you don't murder it and raise it) and is helpless, has not chosen to be born, will, by a huge probability, value it's life and having been born in the future and has come about by your voluntary action, you not only "owe" it life but owe the child the skills to survive and thrive on it's own (up until adulthood.) If you don't have the capacity to do so yourself, you have an obligation to find someone who can. By killing it you destroy it's future moral agency, have committed the rankest form of hypocracy (since you value your life and would not have wanted your mother to abort you, since you are living) and have given yourself the liberty to place value on the life of a being you created all because you think it will ruin your life (when in fact you're ruining the life of someone who could've lived, much more completely.) It's one of the most vile things a person can do and one of the most blatant acts of violence and force against a helpless child. The only situation where abortion is "technically" justified (though I think it's still awful) is if the woman is raped or the child is really young and incapable of responsibility. This invalidates your "contract" with the child because you didn't enter into it voluntarily. This is covered by the 'violinist argument' used by feminists, which is actually a pretty good argument.

According to wikipedia you don't need reflectors to bounce lasers off the moon. If there are reflectors on the moon, they would not have to put them there with the help of people. A rocket loaded with a ton of glass shards sent to crash on the moon might even have been enough. I don't know how or if they did send something reflective to the moon, but the point is that it is not an evidence for humans setting foot on the moon. Just as the other usual arguments are not. There is however quite a lot of evidence that we did not go there, and probably still do not have the required technology to safely get to the moon and back. You are lucky that I even bothered replying since you still could not contain yourself calling me names after I had notified you.

actually it is not, YOU can prove it by investing some time in science <add impressive echo effect when saying science>... at first I thought this thread was a thread of everyone just posting silly things for fun, but, well, do some of you people actually believe that ISS does not exists (very easily observed by anybody), that moon landing did not happen (once again, you can do some fairly basic science and know it did). Same with flat-earthers, it takes only the most rudimentary understanding of math and a telescope near a lake and well, curvature proven... thorium (molten salt) reactors are still fission reactors (not fusion) but much safer and more costly to build..unless you consider the cleanup costs for a "fukushima" type mess! so, ahh... this was just a thread with everybody joking, right???? or did a lot of people graduate with Jethro Bodine and not learn past their "naughts and ones" ;-) Much of what is around us today can actually be personally "proven" without a great deal of effort... no billion dollar facility needed ;-) low cost precision time keeping that would stun a scientist from 50-60yrs ago..(no not a quartz watch!) High resolution telescopes, cameras, compute power and shareware software such as opencv that will let YOU personally prove things that would have taken entire government science teams to solve 60 years ago... or, I suppose, you could watch reality TV and wear a fitbit...I guess...

so how did the laser reflectors get up there then? Or do you believe in flat earth and moon is fake.. While there are some people that mess with quite powerful lasers on youtube (scary stuff), I doubt that even now you could get close to the power output needed to actually get a few photons back hehe You may be able to go to your local observatory and see if any nearby are setup with the necessary detectors and lasers to give it a try, there are a couple around that can do it. Do not fear science, there are good scientists and they are actually friendly! (probably really lonely lately as real scientist do not chat with the "Faith based" crowd) as a ham radio operator I can tell you that EME is a real thing and you can do it yourself! hams regularly send out signals, bounce them off the moon, and exchange info; the "math" will tell you exactly how far away the moon is. If you do not believe in meteors you can also try meteor scatter comms, you need to be really lucky for that one and wait for meteor showers. ISS is really there and you can chat with it using equipment you hold in your hand!...get with you local ham club, they will show you how for less than $100 and some time; depending on who is up there.(actually, there was an ARRL announcement last month or so that the space station finally got a replacement handheld radio so they can chat VHF again. You can make your own circularly polarized hand-help yagi antenna, $10 and a trip to a local hardware store and you are good to go. (you can try those really cheap chinese handheld ham radios but their sensitivity is terrible. I am a kenwood fan but for $25 I had to get one of those boefeng radios...junk hehe...well thats rude, for the money you spend you are actually getting a lot I suppose; but compared so a nice icom/kenwood/etc. well, no comparison ;-) if you do the math on what it would take to "see" things on the moon I am sure the mirror size would be insane (ignoring all the issues of atmosphere, temperature, and how many pixels you would want across a bus size object ); however, it would be an interesting experiment to take a array of lower cost aligned telescopes and oversample over a long period of time to get a very nice increase in subpixel resolution. You could not pull it off decades ago but now, with all the computer horsepower available, high resolution sensors, good optics, precision tracking, well, it would be very interesting to see what you could pull off with $100k or so. have fun, and remember, everything around is all just one big math problem that is free for you to explore.

Interesting question. Here's another perspective: Does the world need another philosopher or does the world need more true selves?