Why Svenskaflicka shouldn't watch hospital soaps

[Svenskaflicka]

Except, possibly the meaning behind it. Adn yes, in *your* world, there are no gods. But you don't know that for sure. You can't know that. But this isn't just your world, hon. And people aren't forced to live by your definition of what's right and wrong.

*sigh* The world would be SO much nicer to live in if they were... well, to me atleast.

I think that's a bit condemning and narrow-minded on your part, 'flicka.. Who's to say what's right and what's wrong. Maybe they're right, maybe you're wrong. Maybe we're all wrong. You have to believe in *something* - Whether that something is god, religion, fate, your own ability to make the right decision, even when faced with a situation like that.....

Still, I have much greater understanding for a woman who says "I'm keeping the baby because I want it, even if it's risky", rather than for a woman who says "I'm keeping the baby because that's what God wants". If God wants kids, let God give birth to them - my body's MY body.
Sorry to offend people who believe in God, my intention is not to hurt you, but to explain how I'm feeling about the matter.

You believe what you believe. However, enforcing that belief system on others is, in my opinion, just plain wrong.

But that was what the parents in Babylon 5 DID. The kid wanted to live, he didn't believe that he'd be soul-less from the operation, but the parents forced their believes on him by killing him in order to protect their religion. They chose religion over their child.

If my very best friend in the world believed with all his heart and soul that the right thing for him to do tomorrow was to shoot himself in the head, then I'd load the gun.

Because I respect his beliefs, no matter how much a) I might disagree with them, b) they might hurt me personally and c) they might hurt him.

They're his beliefs. He's entitled to them.

I'd do anything I could to change my friend's mind in a situation like that. And to change the situation so that he/she didn't need to feel like that. Life's too precious to throw away over something like that.
Dying for your believs are pretty useless, in my eyes. Staying alive to go on believing is much better.

 

[raphy]

*sigh* The world would be SO much nicer to live in if they were... well, to me atleast.

Y'know, I think we all think that .. .. I know I sure do. I guess that's why we prize tolerance as a virtue..

*Still, I have much greater understanding for a woman who says "I'm keeping the baby because I want it, even if it's risky", rather than for a woman who says "I'm keeping the baby because that's what God wants". If God wants kids, let God give birth to them - my body's MY body.
Sorry to offend people who believe in God, my intention is not to hurt you, but to explain how I'm feeling about the matter.

I do understand your point of view - Obviously to a fully-religious god-fearing woman, your statement "If God wants kids, let God give birth to them - my body's MY body" would sound arrogant and conceited. What God wants comes above and beyond what you want - That's what faith is all about.

*But that was what the parents in Babylon 5 DID. The kid wanted to live, he didn't believe that he'd be soul-less from the operation, but the parents forced their believes on him by killing him in order to protect their religion. They chose religion over their child.

And over themselves, don't forget that. You think they *wanted* their child to die? Not at all. They just couldn't see any way of keeping him alive. Remember, they weren't going to let their child die because they thought that was what their God wanted. They were going to let him die because they believed in their heart of hearts that if he was operated on, his soul would die, and he would be an empty shell.

How do you argue that point with people who believe it so fully? You simply can't, because there's no empirical evidence you can give that they're wrong and you're right. And there's no empirical evidence that they can give to you to convince you that you're wrong and they're right.

You can't *prove* it, one way or the other. So you *have* to do what Sinclair did, and rule that the family be allowed to decide for themselves what is best for their child, within their own moral and social legal and ethical strictures.

And actually, they didn't impose their beliefs on an unwilling child - At least, not any more than parents impose their beliefs on all children. If you recall the episode - At the beginning, the kid DID believe that he'd be soul-less if he had the operation. He said that he didn't want to die, but that he also didn't want to lose his soul.

*After* the operation, he said to Franklin that he didn't feel any different. Watch the episode again (If you have it on tape) - It's a very well written story, and doesn't actually side with either view - Like so much of B5, it leaves it open to the viewer to take what they want from it. People have said it's pro-religion and anti-religion, when the truth is, it's simply pro-discussion.

*I'd do anything I could to change my friend's mind in a situation like that. And to change the situation so that he/she didn't need to feel like that. Life's too precious to throw away over something like that.
Dying for your believs are pretty useless, in my eyes. Staying alive to go on believing is much better.

In your eyes, aye.... Not necessarily in everybody else's, and maybe not necessarily in your friend's eyes.

I'm not trying to change your mind here, 'flicka. But I am trying to get you to say "I believe this, but it's okay for you to believe that."

 

[Dirt Man]

Life's too precious to throw away over something like that.
Dying for your believs are pretty useless, in my eyes. Staying alive to go on believing is much better.

If life is so precious to you, then why did you say at the beginning of this thread that you would abort a 7 to 8 month old fetus to save your own life? Obviously you must mean that your life is too precious.

As to dying for one's beliefs; What does it profit a person to live in fear of their life when their time here is limited at best? IE, if as you say, "There is no God," then when you do die, which everybody does sooner or later, what was the reason for ever having lived in the first place? What makes life so precious if all there is is death, and a lonely grave at the end of it? After all, if I die today, somebody else will be born to take my place, right? Without God why should the sun rise for me tomorrow? Why bother to grow old. In a hundred years nobody will care if I lived or died anyway, right? For a person to contemplate suicide in that invironment isn't surprising to me. But that's what living without faith in a supreme being comes down to, there is no hereafter without God. Without God, there is no need, or will for an afterlife because without God one just dies, and turns to dust.

I'm no preacher, so don't expect an evangelical surmon from me to change your mind, or try to convert you to Christianity. We all have free will, and life as well as death is all about the choices that we each make. What you failed to see in all of this was that this woman in the soap, (which is supposed to be imitating real life,) had no real fear of death for herself because of her faith. If that makes her fanatical in your eyes, then so be it. It was her choice, not yours.

What is FAITH? It is the confident assurance that something we want is going to happen. It is the certainty that what we hope for is waiting for us, even though we cannot see it up ahead.

As Always
I Am the
Dirt Man

 

[Guest]

I don't have my selfish opinions to insult you or hurt you feelings, Perdita. I have them because that's who and what I am.

Flickamou, I was not speaking of you. Frankly, I thought Raphy and others were judging you personally and I thought that wrong. I do not think you selfish, I know otherwise.

Perdita

 

[raphy]

I'm not judging anyone. I did, however, think that flicka was judging those women by her disapproval of their actions.

I'm certainly not judging flicka for her opinions about the subject. If she was in that situation and chose to terminate the pregnancy, I'd respect that decision as much as I do the decision to continue with the pregnancy - Which after all, is what I've been preaching for the last few posts - And I made my personal opinions on the subject very clear. It's the woman's perogative. Her choice.

I'm not saying either side of this argument is right. Or if I am, then I'm forced to say that they're both right. That's why this is such a difficult argument - Because I believe, in this, that there is no universal right or wrong. Simply what's right for the woman concerned.

If you're wondering why I was presenting arguments counter to Svenskaflicka's arguments, it was not because I stood on the side of those arguments, it was because without seeing the other side of the coin, no middle ground can be reached, no 'agree to disagree' can be said.

But I am in no way judging anyone.

 

[SlickTony]

the truth is men here in America have no authority whatsoever concerning the fetus anymore, and women did make that happen

What about around ten thousand years of men trying to exercise control over women's bodies and their babies? What about boys whining, oh, no, it couldn't be mine even if the girl's virgin blood still exists as a spot on his mattress or the back of his car? What about the men/boys getting transferred/packed off to military school/running around scot-free to do it to some other girl while the woman/girl gets stoned/sent to one of those Irish convents for a life of soapsuds and virtual slavery/packed off to the Fallen Girls home? What about hundreds of years of male-generated laws making it a crime to even discuss female anatomy or birth control? What about insurance companies and employers even today refusing to cover birth control (while being ok with shelling out far more money for deliveries and miscarriages)?

If women made this happen, they probably had a reason. It's good that men want to behave responsibly nowadays, but they're working against a lot of history that they themselves created.

 

[Svenskaflicka]

If life is so precious to you, then why did you say at the beginning of this thread that you would abort a 7 to 8 month old fetus to save your own life? Obviously you must mean that your life is too precious.

Well, this is where we would go into a whole other type of discussion. See, I think that a fetus isn't a child until it has been born. Ergo, it isn't a life yet, IMO, just a bunch of nerves and cells. Others say that it's a living child as soon as the egg has been fertilized.
But that's a discussion for another thread, the "When Is A Fetus A Child?"-thread.

Originally posted by raphy
I'm not trying to change your mind here, 'flicka. But I am trying to get you to say "I believe this, but it's okay for you to believe that."

Oh, I accept that others have different opinions than me - but if I don't like those opinions, I will say so. And if I think that those opinions are directly harmful - like, say, a guy who thinks that bestiality is OK, or like the example you mentioned, with the person wanting to shoot himself - then I WILL NOT accept that person's right to decide for himself. I will try to protect the innocent from the criminal, and the lost soul from himself.

 

[raphy]

Well, this is where we would go into a whole other type of discussion. See, I think that a fetus isn't a child until it has been born. Ergo, it isn't a life yet, IMO, just a bunch of nerves and cells. Others say that it's a living child as soon as the egg has been fertilized.
But that's a discussion for another thread, the "When Is A Fetus A Child?"-thread.

Except that it isn't a different question, is it? It's directly related. If a woman believed that her child was her child from the moment it was conceived, then does that make it somewhat easier to understand why she'd value it's life a little more?

Oh, I accept that others have different opinions than me - but if I don't like those opinions, I will say so. And if I think that those opinions are directly harmful - like, say, a guy who thinks that bestiality is OK, or like the example you mentioned, with the person wanting to shoot himself - then I WILL NOT accept that person's right to decide for himself. I will try to protect the innocent from the criminal, and the lost soul from himself.

*sigh*

Okay, I'll try again. In my opinion, you were arrogant to state that those people were wrong. You're more than welcome to say that in their place, you would choose differently, but you have absolutely no right whatsoever to take the high moral ground and say 'You were wrong to do that.'

Your two examples are fundamentally different. Bestiality is illegal for a reason. Animals can't give consent.

As for the person wanting to cause himself harm - That is HIS choice. HIS choice. Not yours. HIS. You have zero say in that. You get what I'm saying?

edited to add: If you (god forbid) should ever find yourself in that situation, then it will be YOUR choice, no one else's. And I would hope that people will respect the choice that YOU make. I know I would, and not think any less of you for it, whichever road you choose.

 

[Svenskaflicka]

Except that it isn't a different question, is it? It's directly related. If a woman believed that her child was her child from the moment it was conceived, then does that make it somewhat easier to understand why she'd value it's life a little more?

I DO understand THAT she thinks so. I just don't agree, and that's why I think it's wrong. I DO realize the difference between "It is wrong" and "I think that it is wrong".

Okay, I'll try again. In my opinion, you were arrogant to state that those people were wrong. You're more than welcome to say that in their place, you would choose differently, but you have absolutely no right whatsoever to take the high moral ground and say 'You were wrong to do that.'

Your two examples are fundamentally different. Bestiality is illegal for a reason. Animals can't give consent.

As for the person wanting to cause himself harm - That is HIS choice. HIS choice. Not yours. HIS. You have zero say in that. You get what I'm saying?

Again. I'm not saying they are wrong, I'm saying that I think that they are wrong. I have the right to state my opinion.

As for the gun-thing, I understand your principle, but I think that the situation overrides any normal principle. I think that a person who wants to take a life, his own or someone elses, shows that he's mentally instable, and therefor should not be allowed to decide for himself. I will TAKE the right of deciding away from him, and put it in my hands, in order to save his life.

Wrong? Possibly. But standing by and watch someone die, when I COULD save him, is even more wrong, to me.

 

[raphy]

I DO understand THAT she thinks so. I just don't agree, and that's why I think it's wrong. I DO realize the difference between "It is wrong" and "I think that it is wrong".

Again. I'm not saying they are wrong, I'm saying that I think that they are wrong. I have the right to state my opinion.

Oh, I agree - totally. What I don't agree with is saying "You're a bad person for making that choice" which is what I felt you were saying in your original post. If I misread you, I apologize.

As for the gun-thing, I understand your principle, but I think that the situation overrides any normal principle. I think that a person who wants to take a life, his own or someone elses, shows that he's mentally instable, and therefor should not be allowed to decide for himself. I will TAKE the right of deciding away from him, and put it in my hands, in order to save his life.

Wrong? Possibly. But standing by and watch someone die, when I COULD save him, is even more wrong, to me.

And that's the beauty of free will. In my (admittedly extreme) example, I'd want to be 100% sure that that's what my friend wanted before I stood aside and let him do it. If I was sure, then yes, I would stand aside and let him go ahead and commit suicide.

As for taking someone else's life, that's an entirely different kettle of fish and all the circumstances I can think of that justify that are even more extreme... But I think that's material for a different thread.

The last time I talked with someone about the B5 episode, I was actually arguing the other side - Your side, if you will. I'm actually not 'for' or 'against' either side. I'm 'for' choice. I like to think that you and I are friends. If you were to do something I disagreed with on principle, I'd say 'I think you made the wrong choice there, but it's your life, and you have to live with your choices. If you think you did the right thing, more power to you."

 

[Svenskaflicka]

You're forgiven. No go forth and sin no more.

Seriously, we'll have to agree to disagree.