Showing posts with label murder. Show all posts
Showing posts with label murder. Show all posts

Thursday, October 11, 2012

A Quick/Short Word on Abortion: VP Debate 2012

I just wanted to say some things about things that were said at the 2012 Vice Presidential debate.

I paraphrase.

Paul Ryan said that he believes life begins at conception.  He said he does not just believe this because of his Catholic beliefs; he also believes this because of what the sciences have shown and because of morality.  So, he said that if Mitt Romney was elected they would make abortion illegal, except in cases of rape, incest, and threat to the mother's life.

If one believes that life begins at conception (that, once a sperm gets into an egg, the union is a human, as much a human as a full, grown ass human), then Ryan's beliefs make sense.  You think something is wrong, so you act against it.  You believe something is a human, and you believe it is wrong to kill innocent humans, so you make it illegal to kill (abort) humans.  That makes sense.

Joe Biden said that he also believes life begins at conception.  He said he believes this, because he accepts the Catholic church's position/beliefs about this.  After saying this, he said that he does not believe in telling women what they can and cannot do with/to their bodies (it's between them and their doctors, he said).  He said he doesn't believe in forcing his religious beliefs on others.  He completely changed the subject.  He hid behind his religion; in essence, he made abortion a religious issue, so that he wouldn't have to defend it, and so Obama and he wouldn't have to hold people accountable for their actions.  If abortion is a religious issue, then Biden doesn't have to push it on anyone.  How can someone say that they believe that life (being human) starts at conception (for whatever reason: religious or scientific), and then say it's ok for people to kill (abort) those humans?  Is Biden ok with people killing each other?  Maybe he doesn't want to push his religious beliefs that say killing innocent people is wrong on others.  Maybe he thinks murder is a religious issue too.

Also, if life begins at conception (according to both candidates), then the issue is not one of what women can and cannot do to/with their bodies.  The issue is about what people can and cannot do about a human that is growing in a women or wherever; no one agrees that mothers should have the choice to kill a life.  People say 'pro choice,' as if it is solely about a woman doing something to her body--it is not the case that she is only affecting her body, though.  I don't think women should be forced to have babies, if they don't want to, but I don't think lives should be terminated.  Freeze them maybe?  Or maybe pick the lesser of two evils: force women and men to have the babies they 'accidentally' created; do this, at the cost of taking some freedoms away--life vs some freedom.

In my opinion the issue is a scientific and philosophical one.  If one cannot draw a non-arbitrary line where life begins, then life begins at conception.  This is the case, so life begins at conception.  That means that when sperm enters an egg it becomes fully human and should be entitled to all the rights that all humans should have.

Ryan made abortion a scientific and moral issue.  I commend him for that, and I agree with him.

Whether you are for or against abortion, at least be consistent and have good reasons for believing what you believe.

By the way, you don't have to be a woman to talk about abortion.  I didn't ask to be born, or to be a man (boy?), or to be so handsome.  All people should be free to think philosophically and critically about all issues: this promotes critical and new ways of thinking about things.  Obviously, it affects women in more and different ways, but abortion can affect everyone: woman and man.

Everything can be made into a religious issue, and many things can be considered non-religious issues.  If you believe such things as stealing, raping, physically hurting others, deceiving, killing, lying, cheating, being rich, being skinny and hot are moral issues that governments can address outside of religion--leaving religion out of it--then abortion isn't a religious issue at all.  It is a scientific and moral issue that should be dealt with by a just and moral government that is for and by the people and that protects ALL of its people.

If you're reading this, you weren't aborted... just sayin'.  You might wish you had been aborted, but ya... you weren't.  Weird, huh?  Not weird because I think you should have been aborted, existing is just so strange in general... sometimes--to me at least.

Look at these un-aborted humans--so handsome!


Tuesday, August 7, 2012

GUN CONTROL: Adam and Eve Really Fucked Us

I think what Ice-T says is pretty good [VIDEO AT THE BOTTOM].

Is it true that if we make all guns (or just the gnarly ones) illegal, murder rates will go down?  We can't know.

What we can know is that guns will remain in the hands of mostly two groups: cops, and criminals (i.e. gangsters, murderers, madmen, etc.).  And the criminals will get their guns easily, if they want them bad enough and are willing to pay/take the risk to get them.

All sorts of drugs are illegal in the U.S. and they are incredibly easy to get, and the same two groups control them (cops and robbers).

Back to Ice-T's point, if cops and robbers are the only ones that have the guns, what do normal people have to protect themselves against those two groups?  It would be naive to believe that there are no corrupt cops (look up any atrocious acts by cops, military, and border patrol agents sometime); these people aren't perfect moral beings--they're just people.  Don't get me wrong: I appreciate and love the protection that citizens get from good cops, good military, and good border patrol agents; fucking rotten apples suck, and it sucks that we all have at least a little bit of rotten apple in us (Molls more so ... hehe I make joke).

We seem to know how many people have been killed by people using guns on people, but it's probably impossible to know how many lives have been saved (or crimes thwarted) by guns.  I imagine that guns have deterred many people from committing crimes or killing people; it would be silly to think otherwise.

So if we leave all the guns (or just the hardcore weaponry) in the hands of criminals and cops, I would imagine that crimes and killings would go up--not down.  I don't believe there is any proof that shows that if you pass gun control laws, killings and crimes will go down.

Another thought, it is estimated that over 750,000 Rwandans were murdered by other Rwandans that were armed with only machetes... 500,000 machetes (I got this info from the crazy fuck Greg Gutfeld). You don't need guns for mass murder--just insanity.  And obviously we aren't going to make knives or machetes illegal.

Guns don't kill people: people kill people.

Taking guns away, or making them illegal (or some of them or whatever), doesn't solve the problem.  Rwanda is proof.  Homemade bombs are proof.  Corrupt government officials are proof.

What is the answer?  I don't know.  Keep fighting criminals I suppose.  Not everyone will follow George Harrison's advice: "Everything else can wait, but the search for God cannot wait; and love one another."

Some things are impossible to prevent, and that is a harsh reality.  People fucking suck, but people can be beautiful too.  We simply live in a fucked world and almost always have...

Adam and Eve really fucked us.