Author Topic: Human rights  (Read 301 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tero

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 726
  • Darwins +18/-5
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Human rights
« on: April 07, 2012, 07:48:27 AM »
As mentioned in another thread, I don't appreciate either philosophy or religion very much. When I was younger I would debate politics. I was naive. I thought there were some truths in politics, there are not, only opinions. Winners and losers.

Out laws are based on the morals people have learned to live by, and are mainly from religion, but do have lots of technical details.

I've formed some extreme opinions about human rights. The rights that concern mainly you alone I would defend to the extreme.

You have the right to determine your own fate. Sign a paper that says you will not be kept alive by artificial means if you go into a coma, and it should hold. Commit suicide when you want.

Abortion concerns a fetus and a woman. A male impregnated her, but I do not believe he has any rights to the fetus, only the baby that is finally delivered. Therefore, she gets to decide, even if she is only 9 years old.

All my opinions try to avoid any judge being involved in the decision. It may be that a family wants you to die and so inherit you. There you may need to have a court involved, if there is a conflict between what you stated when you were of sound mind and could communicate. But if you can still communicate, you decide.

I do not get involved too much in these issues, but if I get tio vote, I may support a wacky candidate or referendum if my rights are involved.

The rights do not extend to guns, my opinion, as there other people are involved, not just you.

Offline stuffin

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 734
  • Darwins +26/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Human rights
« Reply #1 on: April 07, 2012, 09:11:43 PM »
As mentioned in another thread, I don't appreciate either philosophy or religion very much. When I was younger I would debate politics. I was naive. I thought there were some truths in politics, there are not, only opinions. Winners and losers.

Out laws are based on the morals people have learned to live by, and are mainly from religion, but do have lots of technical details.

I've formed some extreme opinions about human rights. The rights that concern mainly you alone I would defend to the extreme.

You have the right to determine your own fate. Sign a paper that says you will not be kept alive by artificial means if you go into a coma, and it should hold. Commit suicide when you want.

Abortion concerns a fetus and a woman. A male impregnated her, but I do not believe he has any rights to the fetus, only the baby that is finally delivered. Therefore, she gets to decide, even if she is only 9 years old.

All my opinions try to avoid any judge being involved in the decision. It may be that a family wants you to die and so inherit you. There you may need to have a court involved, if there is a conflict between what you stated when you were of sound mind and could communicate. But if you can still communicate, you decide.

I do not get involved too much in these issues, but if I get Rto vote, I may support a wacky candidate or referendum if my rights are involved.

The rights do not extend to guns, my opinion, as there other people are involved, not just you.


Registered Nurse who worked 15 years in the ICU. Like a guardian waiting and watching people at the end of their life span die. Yes they were very sick.

I kept a few alive and in position to live their future. BUT, the over whelming subjective evidence supports having your wishes regarding life and death certainties to be made clear long before it becomes a crisis.

I think the pregnant female should at least get the opinion of the one who impregnated her but, the final choice should be made by the pregnant individual.

And generally yes with the OP.
When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.

Offline Ice Monkey

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 239
  • Darwins +5/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Fund schools. Tax pot.
Re: Human rights
« Reply #2 on: April 07, 2012, 09:58:22 PM »
As mentioned in another thread, I don't appreciate either philosophy or religion very much. When I was younger I would debate politics. I was naive. I thought there were some truths in politics, there are not, only opinions. Winners and losers.

Out laws are based on the morals people have learned to live by, and are mainly from religion, but do have lots of technical details.

I would disagree with the suggestion that laws are "mainly from religion".  Laws are from us.  As is religion.  Religion has been used extensively as a tool to convey the rules.  The guys running the religion made 2 types of laws.  Laws that attempt to keep order, and laws that protect the tool.  (but not in that order, of course.  See the 10 commandments for a good example)  I'm oversimplifying, but a very good book on the subject is Alan Dershowitz's Right's from Wrongs.  An excellent choice if you're in a book club, as the following discussions were very interesting. 
http://www.chapters.indigo.ca/books/Rights-Wrongs-Secular-Theory-Origins-Alan-Dershowitz/9780465017133-item.html?ikwid=alan+dershowitz&ikwsec=Home

Quote
I've formed some extreme opinions about human rights. The rights that concern mainly you alone I would defend to the extreme.

You have the right to determine your own fate. Sign a paper that says you will not be kept alive by artificial means if you go into a coma, and it should hold. Commit suicide when you want.

Don't disagree with you.

Quote
Abortion concerns a fetus and a woman. A male impregnated her, but I do not believe he has any rights to the fetus, only the baby that is finally delivered. Therefore, she gets to decide
,

Right.

Quote
even if she is only 9 years old.

Wait.  What?

Quote
All my opinions try to avoid any judge being involved in the decision. It may be that a family wants you to die and so inherit you. There you may need to have a court involved, if there is a conflict between what you stated when you were of sound mind and could communicate. But if you can still communicate, you decide.

Well, ya, if I'm still of sound mind and can communicate, I'm certainly going to argue that I don't care what I said 10 years ago, I want to be kept alive, so stop pulling the dang plug out, Sis!

They inherit me? 

Quote
I do not get involved too much in these issues, but if I get tio vote, I may support a wacky candidate or referendum if my rights are involved.

How Unamerican!    :D

Quote
The rights do not extend to guns, my opinion, as there other people are involved, not just you.

You should have the legal right to run with scissors.  You shouldn't have the right to run with scissors at people.
Religion. It's given people hope in a world torn apart by religion." -- Charlie Chaplin

Offline Quartinium

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 29
  • Darwins +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Human rights
« Reply #3 on: April 08, 2012, 02:53:40 AM »
The problem I see with women being the only ones who decide if they will carry their fetus to terms is the extremely implausible situation where all of the women of the world unanimously decide to terminate any and all pregnancies. It would mean the end of humanity, decided by only one sex.

If our society wants equality and equal oppurtunity then this will have to change.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11041
  • Darwins +285/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Human rights
« Reply #4 on: April 08, 2012, 03:01:49 AM »
Your example is a reductio ad absurdum, and your conclusion is less than rational.
Women are the ones who suffer for the kids' birth. Not men. Women are the one risking their lives. Not men. Men have zero (unwanted) problems if they're the ones who want to keep the fetus. The women should listen to the kids' dads, but ultimately, the decision is theirs and theirs alone.
The opposite is what needs to be fixed - men are being forced to pay for the kids women want to keep.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline kin hell

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5379
  • Darwins +152/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • - .... . .-. . /.. ... / -. --- / --. --- -.. ...
Re: Human rights
« Reply #5 on: April 08, 2012, 03:04:28 AM »
The problem I see with women being the only ones who decide if they will carry their fetus to terms is the extremely implausible situation where all of the women of the world unanimously decide to terminate any and all pregnancies. It would mean the end of humanity, decided by only one sex.

If our society wants equality and equal oppurtunity then this will have to change.

..... equal opportunity does exist 

every bloke could decide (all at the same time) not to impregnate.....



>sigh<
"...but on a lighter note, demons were driven from a pig today in Gloucester."  Bill Bailey

all edits are for spelling or grammar unless specified otherwise

Offline Quartinium

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 29
  • Darwins +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Human rights
« Reply #6 on: April 08, 2012, 04:34:06 AM »
I could accept a world where some children have no fathers because those fathers don't want to support them, and mothers can terminate pregnancies because they don't want to have them. I could accept a world where people say, "I don't wanna." and then be relieved of their responsibilities. The world as it is would certainly be a better place without any personal acountability.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11041
  • Darwins +285/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Human rights
« Reply #7 on: April 08, 2012, 04:37:56 AM »
I could accept a world where some children have no fathers because those fathers don't want to support them,

The kids have fathers. They're just not supporting them. Huge difference.

and mothers can terminate pregnancies because they don't want to them.

I can live with that too. I disapprove of the practice, but I support the right to choose. Protection of free will is the basis for any fair society, IMO.

I could accept a world where people say, "I don't wanna." and then be relieved of their responsibilities. The world would certainly be a better place without any personal acountability.

According to theism, that's what the world is like. Did something wrong? It was the devil. Apologize to the god(s) and all is forgiven.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Quartinium

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 29
  • Darwins +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Human rights
« Reply #8 on: April 08, 2012, 05:53:04 AM »
I agree, theism relieves people of personal accountability.

Offline Tero

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 726
  • Darwins +18/-5
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Human rights
« Reply #9 on: April 08, 2012, 08:33:39 AM »
Nice to see some of my opunions supported.

The discussion on these issues in Europe is put under the broader umbrella of human rights. Some of these rights are supported by Christian political parties. In the US the religious always side with the right wing. The social democrats of Nordic countries are the supporters of single parents and gay parents.