johnydon22:


Why?

Because at 9 months ;

frosbel2:


Because at 9 months ;

And after 9 months

frosbel2:


Because at 9 months ;

Cuteee

hahn:


As long as the constitution of the nation supports it I don't see how being moral or not matters.

Lol. This is not the premise; the question is; are they right or wrong not whether it matters.

Jesus!

It is against the law to engage in homosexual activities in Nigeria. Whether I feel humans are morally obligated to love whoever they want really doesn't matter and won't stop homosexuals getting arrested.

Again, not the point.

Was slavery wrong? Well at the time it wasn't and it was a profitable business. Is it wrong now? Yes

Good.

So, if we happen to legalize slavery again, it becomes right?

Was the holocaust even legal ie was it in the German constitution?

Oh yes it was under Nazi Germany

We all know that was just Hitler high on assholicious.

Is this your way of saying it isn't right? By calling Hitler an asshole? Ok, we are making progress.

North Korea executing people for what it probably termed treason was probably right.

Good.

Some people will argue that cheating is right because men are naturally polygamous.

What

We cannot judge everything by the same principles of whether it is moral or not.

Oh we can.

What about in situations where it is necessary?

I'm 100% certain that in the philosophy of morality, the principle of necessary exceptions is still applied.

For instance we will all argue that murder is wrong right?

Yes.

Some years ago I read a story of how a family was caught up in book haram territory. Now there was the mother, father and about five kids and while they were hiding the baby, less than a year, started crying and the father had to close it's mouth to stop it from making noise and in the process ended up suffocating the baby to death.

from your story, it seemed more like an accident. 100% excusable.

If he hadn't done that they would have all been killed. It might not be moral but it was necessary.

Just saying

So, all in all, are you arguing for necessary evil or that legality is same thing as morally right because i don't even know

frosbel2:


Because at 9 months ;

At 9 months what happens?

hahn:


Do you think it is right or wrong?

Is what right or wrong?

johnydon22:


At 9 months what happens?

A picture speaks a thousand words - figure it out !

Daeylar:


Cuteee

They usually call them a bundle of joy, that's until they become teenagers

frosbel2:


They usually call them a bundle of joy, that's until they become teenagers

Lol, why do you sound like you have a teenager, do you?

johnydon22:
Is what right or wrong?

Your op na shuu. Is it morally right or wrong?

hahn:


Your op na shuu. Is it morally right or wrong?

Oh. It is morally wrong. Which has always been my position on abortion.

johnydon22:


Lol. This is not the premise; the question is; are they right or wrong not whether it matters.

Jesus!

Again, not the point.

Good.

You can just say if something is right or wrong without looking at all the angles. We are not kids here. Different situations require different actions

So, if we happen to legalize slavery again, it becomes right?

I won't mind going into the business myself

Oh yes it was under Nazi Germany

Is this your way of saying it isn't right? By calling Hitler an asshole? Ok, we are making progress

To Hitler it was in necessary though. Let's not forget that

Good.

What

Oh we can.

I'm 100% certain that in the philosophy of morality, the principle of necessary exceptions is still applied.

Yes.

from your story, it seemed more like an accident. 100% excusable.

So, all in all, are you arguing for necessary evil or that legality is same thing as morally right because i don't even know

I am saying not everything is black and white

frosbel2:


A picture speaks a thousand words - figure it out !

This is enough dose of ambiguity to last me for the year. If you are going at least be clear with it

johnydon22:


Oh. It is morally wrong. Which has always been my position on abortion.

Why?

hahn:


You can just say if something is right or wrong without looking at all the angles. We are not kids here. Different situations require different actions

The premise is on Right or Wrong. Explore any determining angle on right or wrong but keep them within the premise or it is non sequitur

I won't mind going into the business myself

So, it will be morally right the


[quote
To Hitler it was in necessary though. Let's not forget that
[/quote] So? The subjective necessity of his action makes it right? Is that what you are saying? Lmao.

I am saying not everything is black and white

oh sure. So, make it clear now.

Are you arguing for necessary evil or that legality means right?

Seems you have chewing the two

hahn:


Why?

Simple; it ticks the box upon which moral abhorrence of murder is based.

johnydon22:
Simple; it ticks the box upon which moral abhorrence of murder is based.

Lol.

A thought just crossed my mind. After this people will start arguing the right to murder someome

hahn:


Lol.

A thought just crossed my mind. After this people will start arguing the right to murder someome

Aren't they doing that already with abortion?

johnydon22:


Aren't they doing that already with abortion?

I guess it is easier when it comes to kids because the kid is barely aware of it's environment plus not everyone is ready to have kids.

Like in the instance of women who are raped and get pregnant or women whose lovers refuse to take the responsibilities of having the child or even women who are advised against given birth to a child with deformities you cannot force these women to give birth to kids who might end up living in poverty or pain.

These are also real life situations that have to be put into consideration. I'd say the concensus is that as until the child is actually out of the womb it can be aborted if the mother has a reason to.

hahn:


I guess it is easier when it comes to kids because the kid is barely aware of it's environment plus not everyone is ready to have kids.

To me it is not, we are still violating the very principle on which murder is abhorred which is "Human life"

Human law primarily is meant to even the ground for the survival of the strong and the weak alike, an unborn is as weak as a human can get, it is an irony that human law means to abandon the weakest amongst us.

Like in the instance of women who are raped and get pregnant

I have always said, the consequence of rape must rest with the rapist.

However, a child is innocent in this unfortunate event

or women whose lovers refuse to take the responsibilities of having the child

Sexual relations comes with consequences. I would never have another human blatantly innocent pay for the consequence of my choice.

or even women who are advised against given birth to a child with deformities

What do you say we round up every deformed individual in Nigeria and kill them?

you cannot force these women to give birth to kids who might end up living in poverty or pain.

1. I do not presume to force anyone.

2. Choosing not to have a child is a choice that can be made before getting pregnant in the first place

3. What do you say, we round up every poor child in the world today and kill them all to save them from poverty and pain?

You all sound like inserting things like 'poverty' 'suffering' makes it any more humane to murder another.

These are also real life situations that have to be put into consideration. I'd say the concensus is that as until the child is actually out of the womb it can be aborted if the mother has a reason to.

Well, you can say and believe that. It is still tantamount to murder and it is an abhorrable behaviour.

johnydon22:
To me it is not, we are still violating the very principle on which murder is abhorred which is "Human life"

Human law primarily is meant to even the ground for the survival of the strong and the weak alike, an unborn is as weak as a human can get, it is an irony that human law means to abandon the weakest amongst us.

I have always said, the consequence of rape must rest with the rapist.

However, a child is innocent in this unfortunate event

Sexual relations comes with consequences. I would never have another human blatantly innocent pay for the consequence of my choice.

What do you say we round up every deformed individual in Nigeria and kill them?



1. I do not presume to force anyone.

2. Choosing not to have a child is a choice that can be made before getting pregnant in the first place

3. What do you say, we round up every poor child in the world today and kill them all to save them from poverty and pain?

You all sound like inserting things like 'poverty' 'suffering' makes it any more humane to murder another.



Well, you can say and believe that. It is still tantamount to murder and it is an abhorrable behaviour.

Lol. Your ramblings are infantile at best.

It's all good

hahn:


Lol. Your ramblings are infantile at best.

It's all good

Is this another way of saying "I do not have a better argument"?

Don't worry, i understand. I know I'm that good, even you do.

You can't go anywhere with this one

johnydon22:
Is this another way of saying "I do not have a better argument"?

Don't worry, i understand. I know I'm that good, even you do.

You can't go anywhere with this one

You are only being arrogant and self delusional in this case

Blakjewelry:

I feel its murder once organs are already formed.

I don't understand. @ what point does it become life, from the blood clot or when it has bones?

hahn:


You are only being arrogant and self delusional in this case

Hahahaha the argument is up there

There are conditions under which such a procedure will be allowed which is danger to the mother's health. So essentially you are choosing between the mother and child. I think its a welcome development, people should have a choice in how they want to live or die.

johnydon22:
Governor of New york just signed into law a new bill removing the protection on viable unborn babies legalizing abortion up to 9 months.

What are your thoughts on this?

Do you support abortion of a baby even at a viable stage?

Is this morally permissible by your own moral judgement?

hahn:
Share the link to the full story @johnnydon22

Who waits till 9 months and then decides they don't want the baby?

LordReed:
There are conditions under which such a procedure will be allowed which is danger to the mother's health. So essentially you are choosing between the mother and child.
I think its a welcome development, people should have a choice in how they want to live or die.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuUjdfHIAIs

For more details, read more at:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/new-york-abortions-birth/

LordReed:
There are conditions under which such a procedure will be allowed which is danger to the mother's health. So essentially you are choosing between the mother and child. I think its a welcome development, people should have a choice in how they want to live or die.

Actually No. A child at viable stage can simply be removed from the womb and placed in incubation.

There is no way killing a viable child is an ever an option.

Unless it is not viable which of course is legal even in Nigeria.

johnydon22:
Actually No. A child at viable stage can simply be removed from the womb and placed in incubation.

There is no way killing a viable child is an ever an option.

Unless it is not viable which of course is legal even in Nigeria.

The conditions under which this will be done is outlined in the law. It is not oh I no longer want this baby kill it. The health of the mother or the fetus are at stake for it to be considered after 24 weeks.

Daeylar:


Lol, why do you sound like you have a teenager, do you?

Yes I do actually , lol.

johnydon22:
Actually No. A child at viable stage can simply be removed from the womb and placed in incubation.

There is no way killing a viable child is an ever an option.

Unless it is not viable which of course is legal even in Nigeria.

I think we can reach a compromise on this,since u do not support abortion how about we see it this way
If a woman conceives and does not want to keep the baby,she should have it removed surgically,and then the baby can be put in an incubator until it becomes mature enough,the woman would not have the right to claim the baby,maybe an agency or couple who want to adopt a child could fund the expenses and automatically become the kids parents.
I don't really know how you arrived at abortion being immoral and your whole Sacredness of life position,but for me a woman should have the right to say if she wants to keep a pregnancy or not,after all it is her body,but since we are dealing with a "human being" she could simply remove the foetus and whoever is interested can take it up from there,I don't see that as murder

In the instance of rape which u commented on,u said the child is innocent and shouldnt bear the "consequences" but then I ask,is it the mother that should suffer,whoss feeling matters more to you,a 6 week old foetus or a 25 yr old woman

In any case,I want to have your thoughts on what I said,would you still consider it as murder if the woman which in this case doesn't want to have the pregnancy has it removed especially at the early stages,and then those interested in the life of the baby takes it up from there to make sure it grows ?,is that the same as murder ?

Hermes019:

I think we can reach a compromise on this,since u do not support abortion how about we see it this way
If a woman conceives and does not want to keep the baby,she should have it removed surgically,and then the baby can be put in an incubator until it becomes mature enough,the woman would not have the right to claim the baby,maybe an agency or couple who want to adopt a child could fund the expenses and automatically become the kids parents.

I agree with this

I don't really know how you arrived at abortion being immoral and your whole Sacredness of life position,

How i arrived? Lol. That's not me. That is a fundamental belief behind human morality for it to make sense. Without it, human morality do not make sense or have any basis.

That's why secular morality is quite a dilema, they don't always seem to understand why they say something is right or wrong.

And if there is no basis for a moral position, it is inherently meaningless.

I have a couple of questions for you;

Why do you think rape is bad?
Why is murder wrong?

but for me a woman should have the right to say if she wants to keep a pregnancy or not,after all it is her body,but since we are dealing with a "human being" she could simply remove the foetus and whoever is interested can take it up from there,I don't see that as murder

premeditated termination of a human life is murder. A woman has every control of her body and her choice, there is an option not to get pregnant in the first place.

It is my position that nobody, absolutely nobody should have the right to kill another human.

Do you know that if you kill a pregnant woman that you are not charged with 1 count murder but 2?

You can't have this both ways, either murder is wrong or it isn't.

In the instance of rape which u commented on,u said the child is innocent and shouldnt bear the "consequences" but then I ask,is it the mother that should suffer,whoss feeling matters more to you,a 6 week old foetus or a 25 yr old woman

I do not weigh any one feelings more than another's life.

It's incomparable.

This Guy's feelings and this one's life.

In any case,I want to have your thoughts on what I said,would you still consider it as murder if the woman which in this case doesn't want to have the pregnancy has it removed especially at the early stages,and then those interested in the life of the baby takes it up from there to make sure it grows ?,is that the same as murder ?

Nope. It is not murder. Murder only occurs when a human life is terminated, not when moved from one place to another.

If you think i am against someone removing the baby in her womb then that's sadly a mistake.

I'm against killing it (directly or by proxy)