View Poll Results: would you support such a system ?

Voters
39. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes

    1 2.56%
  • no

    35 89.74%
  • other

    3 7.69%
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34

Thread: proposed solution for Abortion

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Last Seen
    12-23-09 @ 05:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    616

    Re: proposed solution for Abortion

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    I don't believe that law can be anything but arbitrary. In the end, regardless of whether the law is written by one man or thousands, whether the law itself is constrained by other laws, and even what goals the law sets out to accomplish, the law is nothing more than opinions decided by men with pens and enforced by men with guns. There is no law that could not have been written differently, and no law that could not work just as well within society if it had been.

    The only things that matter are what you want the law to do, and whether or not it works. If you don't know what you want the law to do, you can't tell whether or not it works-- and if you don't know why you want the law to do something, you can't tell whether or not it's worth the price.



    The only thing that is objectively necessary about the law is that it exists and that it's enforced. Society needs to have rules in order for people to know how to behave, and more importantly, to know how to expect other people to behave. Beyond that, everything else is just a matter of how people want other people to behave and there's nothing more subjective than that.
    so do you see it as a need to balance human rights with social order?

    or do you see no place for human rights at all ?

    i think that we only need to protect human rights and social order will result automatically because any disturbance of the order will necessarily violate somebody's rights.

    so for example we don't even need to write a law saying that all must drive on the right side of the street. you try driving on the left side - you run somebody over - and you find yourself on an electric chair. your brother will then think twice before driving on the left side of the street even though there isn't a single law regulating traffic.

    you make the assumption that you know what means will lead to which ends. or at least you think you can figure it out by trial and error.

    i say it doesn't need to be that complicated. instead of a guessing game let's make it a constraint satisfaction problem:

    [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constraint_satisfaction_problem]Constraint satisfaction problem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

    which is what the Fathers did with the bill of rights. they defined the ENDS rather than the means.

    the ends being agreed on universally is sufficient for a framework for social order. the means can and should be decided on individual level because decisions are usually more efficient on that level than on state level.

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Last Seen
    12-23-09 @ 05:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    616

    Re: proposed solution for Abortion

    micro-managing from the top only makes sense if the person on the top is leaps and bounds more intelligent than the person being managed.

    however when the person on the top is nothing more than average vote of the retards at the bottom - it doesn't work any more. because now you are just taking 300 million average intelligences and reduce them to one average intelligence - you reduce system efficiency by a factor of 300 million instead of increasing it.

    do you know how fish forms schools when they swim ? and birds form flocks ? there are no laws telling fish what side of the street to drive on. and there is no NEED for any.

    in september i drove my car all across America - 4,000 miles. speed limits in different states and on different roads varied roughly from 65 to 75 mph yet the cars always maintained 80 mph speed regardless of what state it was in. the only exceptions were NYC where the cars went SLOWER ( about 70 ) and LA where the cars went FASTER ( about 90 ). but that's because NY has traffic probably 16 hours a day and LA is mostly douchebags in porsches.

    interestingly the speed limit in LA is only 65 but people drive faster there than in places where the limit is 75. that's because people in LA have more $$$ to burn on gas, brakes and tires.

    moral of the story is people will ON THEIR OWN and INSTINCTIVELY settle on UNWRITTEN rules to go by, just like fish and birds do it. there is NO NEED in most cases for any state rules and any such rules will only INTERFERE with the NATURAL ORDER.

    every once in a while you suddenly see people braking for no apparent reason then a minute later you see a cop sitting in the bushes with a radar then a minute later everybody speeds back up to 80 mph - IDIOCY !

  3. #23
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: proposed solution for Abortion

    Quote Originally Posted by NEUROSPORT View Post
    so do you see it as a need to balance human rights with social order?
    or do you see no place for human rights at all ?
    Human rights are just more policies. If you ask three liberals to seriously define what human rights are, you'll get four answers and an impromptu street protest. Some "human rights" are good policies because they're cheap and they produce good results, like the freedom of the press and the right to keep and bear arms. Other "human rights" are mostly good policies because the State can provide blanket coverage in ways the market cannot-- like primary education and universal healthcare-- and they double as useful tools for social engineering.

    And some "human rights" are just bad policies, like the "right" to an education you're intellectually or socially incapable of benefiting from, the "right" to incur 85% of your lifetime healthcare costs staving off the inevitable in your last eighteen months, or the "right" to march down public roads shouting, blocking traffic, and waving picket signs with offensive slogans on them.

    Quote Originally Posted by NEUROSPORT View Post
    you make the assumption that you know what means will lead to which ends. or at least you think you can figure it out by trial and error.
    The only real assumption I make is that society will survive, mostly because assuming anything else is self-destructive. As long as society survives, it is possible for it to be improved, and as long as society's goals are consistent with its means, improvement is inevitable. The problem is that in democracies, especially liberal democracies, society's goals are not consistent with each other-- and the majority of them remain unspoken.

    Quote Originally Posted by NEUROSPORT View Post
    which is what the Fathers did with the bill of rights. they defined the ENDS rather than the means.
    The problem is, they defined a very limited system of ends in reaction to abuses against them carried out by their former government-- and did not consciously address either the practical or moral needs of society. Our nation has survived this long mainly because the State has ignored-- in some cases blatantly-- the limitations imposed upon it by the Constitution in order to fulfill its obligations to the people.

    Quote Originally Posted by NEUROSPORT View Post
    the ends being agreed on universally is sufficient for a framework for social order. the means can and should be decided on individual level because decisions are usually more efficient on that level than on state level.
    Everyone believes this, and it's a load of utter nonsense. It is not enough to say that we have a right to life, liberty, and property and then simply let individuals figure out not only how to secure their own, but how to defend their neighbors', rights. There must be an authority that defines what these "rights" means, and implements them practically in the law-- and that means that the authority is limited by their own subjective experience and biases in implementing the law.

  4. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Last Seen
    12-23-09 @ 05:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    616

    Re: proposed solution for Abortion

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    The problem is, they defined a very limited system of ends in reaction to abuses against them carried out by their former government
    yes. maybe that is the problem.

    they left way too much room for politics.

    Constitution should have been about the same size as Bible.

    and the first thing the Constitution should have said is that every person must be required to know the Constitution by heart otherwise he forfeits his citizenship.

    and they should have never allowed for amendments. or at least made sure that amendments may only be passed unanimously AND with 2/3 majority public support.

    perhaps they just didn't care what would happen 200 years down the line. perhaps they felt their ancestors didn't deserve to have everything handed to them on a silver plate.

    the Fathers based their decisions on their knowledge of HISTORY. but at no point in history was there ever the kind of pussyfication we have today where not a single person is willing to move a single finger to bring about any change let alone a revolution. based on the history such and end was simply impossible for them to foresee.
    Last edited by NEUROSPORT; 11-22-09 at 04:38 AM.

  5. #25
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: proposed solution for Abortion

    I actually agree that penalties for abortion should be progressively harsher as the fetus develops; the latest-term abortions should be treated like murder. That's not to say I exactly agree with your solution though.

  6. #26
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: proposed solution for Abortion

    Quote Originally Posted by NEUROSPORT View Post
    yes. maybe that is the problem.

    they left way too much room for politics.

    Constitution should have been about the same size as Bible. If it were, by now it would be size of the Encyclopedia Britannia.

    and the first thing the Constitution should have said is that every person must be required to know the Constitution by heart otherwise he forfeits his citizenship. No! People should know the spirit of the Constitution, thats enough.

    and they should have never allowed for amendments. no, the amendments are good, times do change and will continue to do so. or at least made sure that amendments may only be passed unanimously AND with 2/3 majority public support.

    perhaps they just didn't care what would happen 200 years down the line. perhaps they felt their ancestors didn't deserve to have everything handed to them on a silver plate.

    the Fathers based their decisions on their knowledge of HISTORY. They based it on what they knew, being intelligent men, their knowledge was limited, as is ours. but at no point in history was there ever the kind of pussyfication we have today where not a single person is willing to move a single finger to bring about any change let alone a revolution. based on the history such and end was simply impossible for them to foresee.
    What a bunch of male bovine feces.
    Mr Obama is trying to change things, if he does, even a little, it will be a miracle..
    Many others have tried and have succeeded to a degree, which is quite the achievement.

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Last Seen
    12-23-09 @ 05:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    616

    Re: proposed solution for Abortion

    Quote Originally Posted by earthworm View Post
    What a bunch of male bovine feces.
    Mr Obama is trying to change things, if he does, even a little, it will be a miracle..
    Many others have tried and have succeeded to a degree, which is quite the achievement.
    so genius how the **** are people supposed to know what the spirit of constitution is without reading it ?

    let me guess - they should ask Obama ?

    go drink some more Kool aid.

  8. #28
    Anti-Hypocrite
    molten_dragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,351

    Re: proposed solution for Abortion

    Quote Originally Posted by NEUROSPORT View Post
    so genius how the **** are people supposed to know what the spirit of constitution is without reading it ?

    let me guess - they should ask Obama ?

    go drink some more Kool aid.
    Just out of curiousity, why does the average person need to know what's in the constitution. The average person rarely does anything that would require them to know what's in it.
    If you build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.

    If you set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

  9. #29
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: proposed solution for Abortion

    Quote Originally Posted by NEUROSPORT View Post
    when you abort whatever was the age of embryo/fetus at the time is how much you spend in prison for it

    abort it at 2 weeks ? - get 2 weeks in prison.

    abort it at 2 months ? - get 2 months in prison.

    both parents serve the time.

    if the girl is under age the man serves both his and her time.

    anything past 6 months is murder.

    age of consent is reduced to age of puberty.

    would you support this scheme ?
    Am I the only one who sees Neurosport's obsession with lowering the age of consent creepy?
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  10. #30
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: proposed solution for Abortion

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    Am I the only one who sees Neurosport's obsession with lowering the age of consent creepy?
    Probably not, but it's about the only thing I agree with him on.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •