Originally Posted by ynvaser

That line of thought doesn't work with the structure I used.
Oh wait, you are ImmortalPig. Moving on and not looking back.

Originally Posted by ynvaser

Let's say you accidentally get your gf pregnant (for most of you, use your imagination). If your twitch reaction is to abort that baby, you need to re-think having sex in the first place. It's a real possibility you have to think about before, not after the mistake was made.

Originally Posted by duck

Both me and my GF have no intention of raising, caring or having a baby.

Originally Posted by ynvaser

Then you shouldn't...

...

Show

---

In all seriousness, that should be enough precaution (the rubber). But I'd put him in a foster home instead, and perhaps re-adopt him once I have the means to provide him what he needs. (/she /her where applies)

Adoption is not nearly as effective as it seems to be. I don't have the numbers available, but a good chunk of children that parents put up for adoption, either through the hospital or afterwards, go into either orphanages or group homes. And many of those children do not get adopted, or if they do, they do not stay in the foster homes. In 2012 (latest available statistics) 23,000 children aged out of the US foster care system. Of those 23,000, only 48% were employed, and I imagine that most had trouble holding that job.

Originally Posted by duck

The adoption thing was already adressed in this thread by hawke

Originally Posted by ynvaser

Wasn't talking about adoption. I was talking about foster homes, and re-adoption at a later date. You can take your own kid home when you have your shit together.

Actually there are several solutions to this problem without being a terrible human being.

Originally Posted by Zelda

Child-birth still kinda sucks, but I guess it is worth it to save a human life if you intend to ensure that the life you saved/created is worthwhile.

I wouldn't say you are a terrible human being for not wanting to give birth. I mean you can always just have another baby to replace it when you get your shit together, I don't see the difference if all you are aborting is a mindless human recipe.

Sorry if I am making this thread primarily ethical again, I know it will likely increase the number of moronic 'contributions'.

Originally Posted by CloudFair3

Logically, I'd say abortion is fine. If we were to go with the human construct of human rights, who are you to take away the freedom of choice of a human being. She doesnt want to take care of her baby, let alone be burdened with months of pain, let her. How would you feel if you wanted go out on a Friday night instead of study for some huge test tomorrow but was told you can't under any circumstances, "This is something beautiful if you let it be, you just have to put in effort and time into it". I say that because, while yes it may be a huge choice for you, you should have full responsibility and right to do so. Noone can take that away from you. Same goes for murder. Honestly, the only thing that dictates that murder is bad is mankind. They're just constructs of our own human brain. We live in a dual world. A world of objective truths, a tree falls when you cut it yada yada, and a human constructed world, money has value, numbers have meaning, letters mean something, we have rights, that kind of shit. But when you get to the core of it, there really is nothing bad or good. It's just your interpretation of it. We all have varrying standards of morality. While yes, I think murder and abortion is disgusting to a degree, I dont think I have the human constructed right to deny a person to choose to kill someone or abort a baby or whatever. If you won't prevent person from killing a mosquito, I dont see why you should prevent a person from killing another person. "Person" loose term but I use it as human being just for the sake of argument.

Originally Posted by CloudFair3

My stand on this issue that people just overlook and go TL: DR. I honestly wanna see what you guys say about it. But basically I said, human ethics is a human construct, we have as much rights as the next animal, we're basically an animal a few steps ahead of the rest with regards to evolution.

The thing that makes us different is our ability to create thoughts and beliefs. We live in a dual world. One side being objective truths, the only world the animals live in, (a tree falls when you cut it, it's dark at night, that kind of stuff) the other being one of our human construct (money has value, letters put together mean this certain thing, numbers pertain to a certain value) [one can argue religion is also a human construct but I dont wanna go there].

That being said, I dont see the issue here. We kill animals on the daily, we eat them, we keep them as pets. Did they have a choice? No. Do they have a right to make a choice? Objectively speaking, no. The best they can do is to avoid it. That's what we're basically doing, except we're using a mental or "ethical" form of evasion. Smart? Yes. Practical? For us, yes. Natural? Technically, no. Nature has a way of things and we're basically the wildcards with our secondary world.

To conclude, I'll just reiterate my main idea, (I think) were just animals a few evolutionary steps ahead. We have as much rights as any other animal, if you argue we have rights, then all other animals have rights, ask them if they want to be slaughtered or not. If you argue animals dont have rights, point made.

The article I read that sorta gave me this perspective.

http://ideas.ted.com/why-humans-run-the-world/

Again, I personally dont like abortion or murder to a degree, I do however think people should have the choice to do it if they want to.

Finally, someone read my original post, I kinda feel you guys are just picking the posts you have arguments to. Even an acknowledgement as "Fair enough" would suffice.