The [Current Year] General Political/Salma Hayek discussion thread, part 4!!!

[nonobaddog]

View attachment 74406


Reverse Godwin's

The analogy falls apart because of the gestation timeline.

A person of Jewish faith is right there already. The decision as to human or not is immediate, uncomplicated and easy.

With a baby there is a timeline between "damn, she's hot" and "slap, whaaaaa". At some point the zygote becomes a human and that time point is not carved in stone. It is defined and redefined by the courts. Whether that is appropriate or not is another matter. This means one is on fuzzy ground when taking action against abortions because of the moving goalposts.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Personal quip aside...
Well here's your chance to explain the faulty logic. As it stands now, for all the freedom loving, from my cold dead hands, liberty loving Americans, I find it difficult to reconcile if they think abortion is an ongoing exercise in mass murder, how they can standby doing nothing. It seems because it is allowed by "law," then their hands are constrained from taking action. Historically, that has been the coward's excuse from doing the right thing.

I think by and large that group of Americans believes in doing things within the constitutional framework. You can't say that they (at least those that consider themselves to be pro-life) haven't tried to stop it at the ballot box by electing like-minded representatives and have to varying degrees succeeded on a state level to have stricter laws put in place regulating abortion in some states. There have of course been the fringe groups that resort to bombing clinics, murdering abortion doctors, but that is not the preferred way and to my way of thinking is where the true cowardice lies.

The pro-choice folks by and large have also fought at the ballot box for their views and (again, at the state level) have, with varying degrees of success gotten looser restrictions in some states. That is as it should be, don't you agree? I don't see that as cowardly.

 

[Kutnupe14]

And how shall I take action beyond the ballot box? Would you have me murder the murderers?

What of you? 156 people were murdered in Indianapolis last year, 3/4 of them black. Given those last couple of posts, how can you crouch behind a keyboard in Carmel and do nothing, you even have police experience. Why aren't you out there going all Equalizer on the perps?

The part bolded is the one I find most interesting. If I believed as many do, that abortion is murder (and I don't), then I'd argue that putting down a murderer, whose trade is continuing to murder, isn't murder at all, at least morally, but an obligation.
As far as the equalizer proposition, you're smart enough to know why the the two are dissimilar. Further, there are already people tasked to handle those individuals doing wrong.

 

[BugI02]

The argument is that it is easier to murder people if you dehumanize them first; the gestation timeline is immaterial, murder is premeditated killing - whether you contemplate it for years, or months or 40 weeks


ETA: If anything, the problem is the meme trivializes mass murder on an industrial scale as practiced by the Nazis. Planned Parenthood is an industrial murder concern, but their 'customers' are not forced by the state down the path to infanticide

 

[Kutnupe14]

I think by and large that group of Americans believes in doing things within the constitutional framework. You can't say that they (at least those that consider themselves to be pro-life) haven't tried to stop it at the ballot box by electing like-minded representatives and have to varying degrees succeeded on a state level to have stricter laws put in place regulating abortion in some states. There have of course been the fringe groups that resort to bombing clinics, murdering abortion doctors, but that is not the preferred way and to my way of thinking is where the true cowardice lies.

The pro-choice folks by and large have also fought at the ballot box for their views and (again, at the state level) have, with varying degrees of success gotten looser restrictions in some states. That is as it should be, don't you agree? I don't see that as cowardly.

So do you disagree with the death camp analogy, and if so why?

 

[BugI02]

The part bolded is the one I find most interesting. If I believed as many do, that abortion is murder (and I don't), then I'd argue that putting down a murderer, whose trade is continuing to murder, isn't murder at all, at least morally, but an obligation.
As far as the equalizer proposition, you're smart enough to know why the the two are dissimilar. Further, there are already people tasked to handle those individuals doing wrong.

You have a uniquely flawed understanding of morality, seemingly divorced from religious underpinnings

 

[nonobaddog]

The argument is that it is easier to murder people if you dehumanize them first; the gestation timeline is immaterial, murder is premeditated killing - whether you contemplate it for years, or months or 40 weeks

No. Murder is taking a human life. Premeditated killing is premeditated, unpremeditated killing is not premeditated.
The timeline does come into play because it defines a human life. If it is not a human it is not homicide so the point when it becomes human determines whether or not it is homicide..

 

[Kutnupe14]

You have a uniquely flawed understanding of morality, seemingly divorced from religious underpinnings

Morality is solely a religious concept? Interesting.

 

[nonobaddog]

I believe an individual's morality is a collection of his acceptance of social mores. However religion has a huge role in defining and promoting social mores.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

So do you disagree with the death camp analogy, and if so why?

I agree with the analogy as Bug explained it - that it is the dehumanizing factor that made/makes either one more palatable to those in favor of doing the killing.

 

[jamil]

Personal quip aside...
Well here's your chance to explain the faulty logic. As it stands now, for all the freedom loving, from my cold dead hands, liberty loving Americans, I find it difficult to reconcile if they think abortion is an ongoing exercise in mass murder, how they can standby doing nothing. It seems because it is allowed by "law," then their hands are constrained from taking action. Historically, that has been the coward's excuse from doing the right thing.

Logically then, what is the consistent action one should take? Yes. I want you to come out and say it in so many words.

 

[nonobaddog]

I have read that the majority of Germans were completely unaware of what was going on in the death camps so, of course they were not faced with any decision.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Logically then, what is the consistent action one should take? Yes. I want you to come out and say it in so many words.

Would you take an active role to save another from what you believe is their imminent murder, or would you just be upset about it on the internet?

 

[Kutnupe14]

I have read that the majority of Germans were completely unaware of what was going on in the death camps so, of course they were not faced with any decision.

You may have read that, but that simply isn't true. Most German were completely aware of what was going on. The may not have seen it directly, but they knew well enough.

 

[jamil]

The analogy falls apart because of the gestation timeline.

A person of Jewish faith is right there already. The decision as to human or not is immediate, uncomplicated and easy.

With a baby there is a timeline between "damn, she's hot" and "slap, whaaaaa". At some point the zygote becomes a human and that time point is not carved in stone. It is defined and redefined by the courts. Whether that is appropriate or not is another matter. This means one is on fuzzy ground when taking action against abortions because of the moving goalposts.

I think this is very close to right. The place where I think it may fall short is that you’re saying it’s the gestation timeline. I think conceptually you’re saying that it’s unclear to science when we can say the new life is a “person”. So, therefore the analogy falls short because it’s untrue that the abortion side of the analogy is trying to dehumanize for the purpose of making murdering humans more acceptable, because it’s unclear to them that it’s a “person” to make it murder.

The reason why it’s close but not quite is that it seems obvious that the ardent pro abortion advocates do try to dehumanize it at least a little. And I’m talking about the bat**** crazy people who advocate allowing abortion right up to dilation. Objectively, it’s clear that the baby is viable outside the womb at some point, making abortion at that point at least more controversial. But you don’t see the bat**** crazies acknowledging that they’re advocating a choice to end a human life. They use much more sterile language to avoid humanizing the process.

So the analogy mostly falls apart with the moderate pro-choicers. But it’s probably pretty accurate when applied to the pro-abortion exreamists.

 

[jamil]

You may have read that, but that simply isn't true. Most German were completely aware of what was going on. The may not have seen it directly, but they knew well enough.

Inthink there is plenty of evidence in literature that this is true. Some people risked their own lives to help jews avoid capture. Thise people were few and far between. Most people were either okay with it or didn’t want to risk their own families.

 

[nonobaddog]

Inthink there is plenty of evidence in literature that this is true. Some people risked their own lives to help jews avoid capture. Thise people were few and far between. Most people were either okay with it or didn’t want to risk their own families.

Yeah, could be what I read was just somebody trying to justify the inaction of the populace.
It is very obvious that everybody knew about the vicious antisemitism going on in the public streets and that the Jewish were being rounded up and herded into trains and taken away. What I read said that the German people were not aware of the gas chambers and mass graves going on in the secured camps.
My Dad went to Dachau later in 1945 after the liberation but he didn't like to talk about it.

This is from Wikipedia (which does not mean it is true)
"American troops also forced local citizens to the camp to see for themselves the conditions there and to help bury the dead.[SUP][81][/SUP] Many local residents were shocked about the experience and claimed no knowledge of the activities at the camp."

 

[Kutnupe14]

Yeah, could be what I read was just somebody trying to justify the inaction of the populace.
It is very obvious that everybody knew about the vicious antisemitism going on in the public streets and that the Jewish were being rounded up and herded into trains and taken away. What I read said that the German people were not aware of the gas chambers and mass graves going on in the secured camps.
My Dad went to Dachau later in 1945 after the liberation but he didn't like to talk about it.

This is from Wikipedia (which does not mean it is true)
"American troops also forced local citizens to the camp to see for themselves the conditions there and to help bury the dead.[SUP][81][/SUP] Many local residents were shocked about the experience and claimed no knowledge of the activities at the camp."

Yes, it was very common for the German people to deny knowing when speaking with the allies, but they knew, full well. The HUGE infrastructure created to carry out the holocaust makes it very difficult to believe that most Germans did not know. In fact, the thought is laughable.

 

[jamil]

I do think a lot of Germans were shocked when they found out the extent of what was happening at places like Auschwitz. But I’ve also read stories that the people living around Auschwitz knew exactly what was going on. They either went along with it or just didn’t have the stones to stand against it. And that’s mostly a human nature. People who assume they’d be different and would stand up to real ass Nazis doing real ass Nazi stuff under those same conditions are probably full of ****. People like Schindler are extremely rare.

 

[nonobaddog]

Very possibly but the camps were run by the SS which were hated and feared by many, if not most, Germans. I think it is possible many were unaware of the real details inside. Many Germans were pretty busy trying to stay alive themselves from the Nazis.

How many Americans were fully aware at the time of the details of what was actually going on in Vietnam?