Pro-Choice - It's Just This Simple[W:432:673:895]

GEIxBattleRifle said:

Hello once again Removable Mind as it been a bit since I posted on this site. Don't allow pro lifers to focus on species membership and keep the abortion debate simplistic because you are suppose to if you want to brake there little person=human chain they like to do by doing this,

Think about the movie E.T. If an extraterrestrial comes down to earth and asks to use the phone, we shouldn’t say, You’re not human, so instead of letting you use the phone, we’re just going to eat you. If we are talking to an alien who has self-awareness, makes choices, has complex emotional experiences, plans future projects, has enduring memories, etc.; we recognize we’re talking to another person. Those traits, or some cluster of them, are the decisive features in personhood and yet they’re not conceptually identical with “humanity.”

Science fiction stories like E.T., Star Wars, or Wall-e may evoke our personhood intuitions simply for the purpose of entertainment, but some books and films use science fiction to explore more serious moral conundrums. The movie District 9 for example, extrapolates South Africa’s apartheid policies and explores questions around dignity and compassion for an alien species stranded on earth. House of the Scorpion explores the identity and rights of a child who is the product of cloning. The now classic movie, Blade Runner, which is laden with religious allusions, explores themes of yearning for life and love in robots who are keenly aware of their own pre-programmed mortality.

Let's look at some Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) research. Multiple scientific disciplines are involved, from biologists studying the structure of the human brain, to engineers copying things learned ("biomimicry"). We have "neural nets", "multiprocessor systems", "expert systems", "natural language processing", "self-editing software", "genetic algorithms", "Turing Test contests", advances in miniaturization, and even systems that are *evolving* more and more intelligence.

ht..../en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_neural_network

ht......ww.iospress.nl/book/recent-advances-in-artificial-intelligence-research-and-development/

ht......ww.i-programmer.info/news/105-artificial-intelligence/3234-rosette-wins-loebner-prize-2011.html

ht......ww.extremetech.com/extreme/105067-mit-creates-brain-chip

ht..../en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moores_law

ht..../rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2012/04/04/rspb.2012.0206.full

ht..../demesos.blogspot.com/2010/08/evolving-self-oragnizing-soccer-team.html

ht......ww.newscientist.com/article/mg20727723.700-artificial-life-forms-evolve-basic-intelligence.html

Researchers are very confident that it will be one day possible (and likely, because of continuing miniaturization progress, within 20 years) to build an electronic brain that has *greater* processing power than a human, in *every* respect. It will be a true A.I. that, just like the average adult human, will have Free Will and be able to understand ethics and experience emotions, and be able to "mentally put itself in the shoes of another". Its ancestry will guarantee that it will be rational; we could call it a "machine organism", not a biological organism. So for example, Optimus Prime, Commander Data, and Jenny from my life as a teenage robot can qualify each as a person and no that word is not a synonym for being a member of the human species like I TOLD PRO LIFER TIME AND TIME AGAIN AND AGAIN AND IT EVEN SAYS SO ON WIKIPEDIA Person - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia adult humans are usually considered persons, but depending on the context, theory or definition, the category of "person" may be taken to include such non-human entities as animals, artificial intelligences, or extraterrestrial life, as well as legal entities such as corporations, sovereign states and other polities, or estates in probate.[4] The category may exclude some human entities in prenatal development, and those with extreme mental impairment. . Although the term 'person' features in every day conversations such as the person who lives next door or 'the person who survived for 10 years in a persistent vegetative state’ in much of philosophy and bioethics it is a theoretical concept.

I sure hope that one day Removable Mind we can finally get in that non human centric definition of that word that rightfully deserves to be put into law.

Click to expand...

Removable Mind said:

Me, too. Welcome back GBR! :2wave:

Click to expand...

roguenuke said:

Babies is definitely a relative term. It is just as wrong for people to claim pregnant women can't be carrying "babies" as it is for others to claim abortion is "murder". Neither argument over semantics has any real bearing on whether abortions should be legal or not and why. Even if someone is calling other people's unborn children "baby" it is not wrong. It doesn't make any difference when it comes to whether they should be able to legally choose to have an abortion or whether that decision is right or wrong morally.

Click to expand...

GEIxBattleRifle said:

Thanks for the warm welcoming once again. My debating skills went down a bit due to being completely gone from the abortion debate for about a full month now and will dip my self back on to FutureIncoming website to do more reading again. I been working on ET and AI books now for awhile and have 3 notebooks going into each category.

Click to expand...

choiceone said:

my view has always been that the pregnant woman has the right to decide what is inside her own body. Nonetheless, some of the points i made about standard native english speaker usage are correct.

If people in general honestly believe that what is inside of a woman is a baby, then they ought to believe that a man owes a pregnant woman child support from the point of fertilization of her ovum and thus be enraged that our laws do not require that. They ought to believe that a miscarriage at six weeks is the death of a baby and requires a death certificate, the same sort of funeral as that of a 1 year old baby, and the death should be investigate the way a baby's death is investigated. Hence, every one of these issues as related to law should be just as important to those people as abortion, and there should be widespread movements of outraged people seeking to make the law reflect that belief.

My point is that people do not act as if they really do believe the embryo or fetus is a baby and they don't make laws that reflect that belief, either.

And the only bearing it has on the issue of abortion is that, if you claim to be anti-abortion because the zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus is a baby, the same as a two month old baby, say, then we have the right to expect you to reflect that belief in other ways, and people just don't do that.

Click to expand...

Removable Mind said:

1. Well, tune up your battle skills and come on back.

2. ET and AI books...I dig'em. It's been a while since I've read any.

Click to expand...

choiceone said:

I am against CP, because it is possible for a jury to bring in a mistaken verdict.

It is irresponsible on the part of any system of justice to impose any punishment if it cannot guarantee that either the punished person is guilty or the justice system can remit the punishment if the judgment is later found to be mistaken.

And FYI, I am not manipulating semantics. I am using words the way I was taught them and the way that the vast majority of native English speakers use them in standard English.

If everyone in the US honestly thought that an embryo was a baby, then

1) women who are two months pregnant would always be treated as mothers of existing babies on Mother's Day,
2) women who have miscarriages at six weeks would have received death certificates for the embryos from the hospital or government and would have held funerals for them in every sect of Christianity, in Judaism, and in other religions,
3) every miscarriage would have been investigated as a possible homicide and there would be a formal report to the government indicating whether it was a homicide or a death from natural causes,
4) women would receive child support from the men by whose sperm their eggs had been fertilized, and the child support would be calculated back to the approximate date of conception.

I could go on like this, but I think you may get my point from the above.

Click to expand...

Scrabaholic said:

And here we have it - bitterness toward women who enjoy sex.

Click to expand...

Removable Mind said:

But, Scraba...you don't understand. Women are morally responsible for the proliferation of humankind. And of course to be at the beckoning call of men's sexual needs. OH, and to clear the matter up ahead of time. Men aren't subject to such a moral responsibility to proliferate humankind by ejaculating sperm into a woman's vagina. They just get horny.

Click to expand...

Removable Mind said:

It shouldn't be a grey area for you. There's several DP members who proudly support that a fetus should be born if at all possible...even if it's at the cost of the woman's long-term health and/or her life. They believe that it's god's will and creation. They believe that the soul implanted in the unborn has a mission....and that since we all must die, why not from childbirth as well.

So shed yourself of any feelings of hypocrisy. Problem solved! See how simple it is?

Click to expand...

GEIxBattleRifle said:

Hello once again Removable Mind as it been a bit since I posted on this site. Don't allow pro lifers to focus on species membership and keep the abortion debate simplistic because you are suppose to if you want to brake there little person=human chain they like to do by doing this,

Think about the movie E.T. If an extraterrestrial comes down to earth and asks to use the phone, we shouldn’t say, You’re not human, so instead of letting you use the phone, we’re just going to eat you. If we are talking to an alien who has self-awareness, makes choices, has complex emotional experiences, plans future projects, has enduring memories, etc.; we recognize we’re talking to another person. Those traits, or some cluster of them, are the decisive features in personhood and yet they’re not conceptually identical with “humanity.”

Science fiction stories like E.T., Star Wars, or Wall-e may evoke our personhood intuitions simply for the purpose of entertainment, but some books and films use science fiction to explore more serious moral conundrums. The movie District 9 for example, extrapolates South Africa’s apartheid policies and explores questions around dignity and compassion for an alien species stranded on earth. House of the Scorpion explores the identity and rights of a child who is the product of cloning. The now classic movie, Blade Runner, which is laden with religious allusions, explores themes of yearning for life and love in robots who are keenly aware of their own pre-programmed mortality.

Let's look at some Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) research. Multiple scientific disciplines are involved, from biologists studying the structure of the human brain, to engineers copying things learned ("biomimicry"). We have "neural nets", "multiprocessor systems", "expert systems", "natural language processing", "self-editing software", "genetic algorithms", "Turing Test contests", advances in miniaturization, and even systems that are *evolving* more and more intelligence.

ht..../en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_neural_network

ht......ww.iospress.nl/book/recent-advances-in-artificial-intelligence-research-and-development/

ht......ww.i-programmer.info/news/105-artificial-intelligence/3234-rosette-wins-loebner-prize-2011.html

ht......ww.extremetech.com/extreme/105067-mit-creates-brain-chip

ht..../en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moores_law

ht..../rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2012/04/04/rspb.2012.0206.full

ht..../demesos.blogspot.com/2010/08/evolving-self-oragnizing-soccer-team.html

ht......ww.newscientist.com/article/mg20727723.700-artificial-life-forms-evolve-basic-intelligence.html

Researchers are very confident that it will be one day possible (and likely, because of continuing miniaturization progress, within 20 years) to build an electronic brain that has *greater* processing power than a human, in *every* respect. It will be a true A.I. that, just like the average adult human, will have Free Will and be able to understand ethics and experience emotions, and be able to "mentally put itself in the shoes of another". Its ancestry will guarantee that it will be rational; we could call it a "machine organism", not a biological organism. So for example, Optimus Prime, Commander Data, and Jenny from my life as a teenage robot can qualify each as a person and no that word is not a synonym for being a member of the human species like I TOLD PRO LIFER TIME AND TIME AGAIN AND AGAIN AND IT EVEN SAYS SO ON WIKIPEDIA Person - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia adult humans are usually considered persons, but depending on the context, theory or definition, the category of "person" may be taken to include such non-human entities as animals, artificial intelligences, or extraterrestrial life, as well as legal entities such as corporations, sovereign states and other polities, or estates in probate.[4] The category may exclude some human entities in prenatal development, and those with extreme mental impairment. . Although the term 'person' features in every day conversations such as the person who lives next door or 'the person who survived for 10 years in a persistent vegetative state’ in much of philosophy and bioethics it is a theoretical concept.

I sure hope that one day Removable Mind we can finally get in that non human centric definition of that word that rightfully deserves to be put into law. There is another site where I been debating that word among with other pro lifers who are willing to be serious about this debate. Sorry if I sounded hostile by saying that but this strong fixated focus pro lifers have been doing lately on species membership is not a winning strategy.

Click to expand...

SENSIBLE PATRIO said:

Yes BRAKE our person = human lol
your AI will be an abomination and have no soul unlike the babies you kill!

Click to expand...

SENSIBLE PATRIO said:

So you are for killing the innocent, and allowing the guilty to live got it that's all you had to say you have a twisted sense of logic.

1. They are in may cases, now I recognized my wife!
2. That would be a really good way to help women cope, and have closure, bring that up to someone!
3. well when it comes to abortion it would be an open and shut case!
4. Cool I am ok with that, can't stand men who don't take care of their children!

Click to expand...

SENSIBLE PATRIO said:

When men get equal rights in the decision of killing the child or not we can talk!

Click to expand...

SENSIBLE PATRIO said:

.........

Click to expand...

SENSIBLE PATRIO said:

Punished? now you sound like Odumma, I just don't want you to murder babies! You have a choice when you lay down and spread your legs!

Click to expand...

Scrabaholic said:

And here we have it - bitterness toward women who enjoy sex.

Click to expand...

SENSIBLE PATRIO said:

No just MEN and WOMEN who do not take seriously the accountability for their actions, you are the ones who make it all about the rights of WOMEN, if it's all about WOMEN and their rights let's keep it about WOMEN.

Click to expand...

Ocean007 said:

It IS all about the rights of women; specifically, the right of EACH woman to decide for HERSELF what to do about a pregnancy. If she decides to stay pregnant and give birth, that is HER DECISION. If she decides NOT to stay pregnant, again, that is HER DECISION. Unless YOU are the woman who is pregnant, you don't get to decide.

Not YOUR pregnancy? NOT your decision. Period.

Click to expand...

Ocean007 said:

Riiiiiiiiiight, the old anti-choice "spread your legs" line that attempts to shame women just for having sex while unmarried. It's as lame and stupid now as it was when it was used the first time.

And yes, when a woman is FORCED to continue a pregnancy against her will, when she never wanted to be pregnant in the first place, it most certainly is a PUNISHMENT. Luckily for me and all women, YOU don't get to make our sexual and reproductive choices for us.

Click to expand...

nota bene said:

Women shouldn't be shamed. And last time I checked, it still usually takes two to tango. But reckless behavior shouldn't be encouraged. If you want to hook up, do it. All the time and with as many partners as you please. Just be responsible. Don't get pregnant. It is super easy not to.

Click to expand...

choiceone said:

My view has always been that the pregnant woman has the right to decide what is inside her own body. Nonetheless, some of the points I made about standard native English speaker usage are correct.

If people in general honestly believe that what is inside of a woman is a baby, then they ought to believe that a man owes a pregnant woman child support from the point of fertilization of her ovum and thus be enraged that our laws do not require that. They ought to believe that a miscarriage at six weeks is the death of a baby and requires a death certificate, the same sort of funeral as that of a 1 year old baby, and the death should be investigated the way a baby's death is investigated. Hence, every one of these issues as related to law should be just as important to those people as abortion, and there should be widespread movements of outraged people seeking to make the law reflect that belief.

My point is that people do not act as if they really do believe the embryo or fetus is a baby and they don't make laws that reflect that belief, either.

And the only bearing it has on the issue of abortion is that, if you claim to be anti-abortion because the zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus is a baby, the same as a two month old baby, say, then we have the right to expect you to reflect that belief in other ways, and people just don't do that.

Click to expand...

SENSIBLE PATRIO said:

I am sorry we disagree, But if you participate in the action in which pregnancy may occur, you should be accountable for the results, not destroy innocent life.eace

Click to expand...

prometeus said:

And the basis of this is what?

Click to expand...