Why support it if you cannot stomach it?

[Bells]

I do not consider throwing out fetuses with trash as an acknowledgement. Nor do I consider not counting the victims of war or mislabeling them as "insurgents" "militants" etc as acknowledgement. Does anyone know [or even remotely care] how many people have died in the wars they enabled? We keep better records of the cells we store.

So by your reasoning, women who naturally abort their fetuses by way of miscarriages are also failing to acknowledge their dead 'child' when they don't bury it themselves, but instead, prefer for the hospital to dispose of it. Is that correct? Should women who miscarry at 8 weeks for example, be made to have funerals for the 8 week old fetus? Buy a burial plot and visit it on every anniversary to lay flowers on it?

And yes, some who are killed in the current wars are insurgents and militants who are willing to kill their on people or neighbours to achieve their political means. Or are you saying everyone killed in Iraq as a result of the war is completely innocent who has not done any harm to others? Would you say the same if soldiers shot and killed a man with bombs strapped to his chest as he threatened to blow up a school for example? Would you consider labeling him as an insurgent or a militant to be misleading? Or is he an innocent victim?

 

[kenworth]

Sure, without your enabling the war, that child along with "we don't do body count" others, would be alive and well.

because iraq was a happy place of puppies and ice cream before america went in,right?

 

[S.A.M.]

So by your reasoning, women who naturally abort their fetuses by way of miscarriages are also failing to acknowledge their dead 'child' when they don't bury it themselves, but instead, prefer for the hospital to dispose of it. Is that correct? Should women who miscarry at 8 weeks for example, be made to have funerals for the 8 week old fetus? Buy a burial plot and visit it on every anniversary to lay flowers on it?

Since they did not enable it or it was not their decision, thats a different matter. If a rat dies in the animal facility, I do not need to make sure he is properly disposed of, since I was not involved, but if I kill him, I will make sure he is.

And yes, some who are killed in the current wars are insurgents and militants who are willing to kill their on people or neighbours to achieve their political means. Or are you saying everyone killed in Iraq as a result of the war is completely innocent who has not done any harm to others? Would you say the same if soldiers shot and killed a man with bombs strapped to his chest as he threatened to blow up a school for example? Would you consider labeling him as an insurgent or a militant to be misleading?

Based on what? US media? Negroponte is followed by suicide bombers wherever he goes. Saddam never inspired such devotion.

 

[Simon Anders]

I would be very surprised to see someone who is squeamish about needles in a protest for more blood drives.

However, that is different from war or abortion where the casualties have no choice. So yes, I think everyone who wants others to go to war or have an abortion should make an informed choice. Not a stab in the dark.

Does this run in the other direction? Everyone who does not want to pursue a course of action must look at images that come from this choice? And if they are squeamish does this mean they are hypocrites?

 

[S.A.M.]

Does this run in the other direction? Everyone who does not want to pursue a course of action must look at images that come from this choice?

Not necessarily, but one could at least comprehend the logic behind their choices.

 

[Bells]

Since they did not enable it or it was not their decision, thats a different matter. If a rat dies in the animal facility, I do not need to make sure he is properly disposed of, since I was not involved, but if I kill him, I will make sure he is.

So it's alright if she miscarries and considers the fetus to be medical waste. But if she aborts it... well.. murderer.. bury it and know what you did... is that about right?

Based on what? US media? Negroponte is followed by suicide bombers wherever he goes. Saddam never inspired such devotion.

If you see footage of soldiers shooting a man with bombs strapped to his chest after he says he wants to blow up a school, you'd consider that to be false reporting? Media propaganda?

Is he an innocent victim or not?

 

[S.A.M.]

So it's alright if she miscarries and considers the fetus to be medical waste. But if she aborts it... well.. murderer.. bury it and know what you did... is that about right?

Sure, similar to a mother whose child dies in an accident vs she smothers him with a pillow. Accountability depends on circumstances. Most women who miscarry want to see the child, but are advised against it. Many want to take the remains as well.

If you see footage of soldiers shooting a man with bombs strapped to his chest after he says he wants to blow up a school, you'd consider that to be false reporting? Media propaganda?

Is he an innocent victim or not?

depends on what he went through to get to that place. If he was just released from Gitmo for example, I could see his point of view.

 

[Simon Anders]

Not necessarily, but one could at least comprehend the logic behind their choices.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'one' and 'their' in the sentence. Do you mean, for example, that you would be able to understand the logic of their choices if the ones who are against a certain action could look at the photos?

If there is a revolutionary movement against a government considered dictatorial by this movement....
I would assume from your OP that participants and supporters of such a movement should not be squeemish about seeing photos of soldiers and police killed or maimed by the movement.
And I am raising the issue of whether those who do not support the revolution should also not be squeemish seeing the victims of that regime?
The same of course would go for the government side of things: those who support the government should look at photos of the victims - or judged criminals receiving justice , depending on who is defining - of that government.
And then those who do not support the government practices or the revolutionary practices, well, I guess they have to look at a lot of different photos.

 

[S.A.M.]

For example, if you supported the death penalty, I would advise you to go sit through the final moments of a person who is given the death sentence. As a non supporter, I am not obliged to, but as one who believes in it, you are.

 

[Enmos]

Basically it comes down to this: SAM wants us to make decisions based on emotion rather than rationality.

 

[Simon Anders]

For example, if you supported the death penalty, I would advise you to go sit through the final moments of a person who is given the death sentence. As a non supporter, I am not obliged to, but as one who believes in it, you are.

If the person is given a long sentence and released are you obliged to look at a video of the death of his victims if he kills again.

If a killer announces that the only thing that might have made him hesitate to kill was if he knew he might be subjected to the ______________ - some specific form of the death penalty - are you obligated to view videos of those killings he performed before receiving his life sentence?

(I am by the way against the death penalty. I am just trying to see if inaction avoids culpability or and always retains the right to be squeemish.

 

[S.A.M.]

Basically it comes down to this: SAM wants us to make decisions based on emotion rather than rationality.

No, I just beleive that if you think something is justified, you should be prepared to do it. If you think waterboarding is not torture, here's your kid, waterboard him. You think capital punishment is justified? You should be willing to sit through it when someone is killed. You think abortion is right? Here are abortion products that you said were not a child. You think this war is right? Here is an item about 80 children under 12 who were killed yesterday and then called insurgents. Thats not emotion, thats accountability. You enabled this, so stand for it.

 

[nietzschefan]

I've received PMs from people regarding "shocking" images. While I understand the shock value of such images, I find it odd, for instance that people who do not consider a fetus as alive would find the products of conception as "shocking". Or people who support war would find images of war "shocking".

If you cannot even look at it, how do you support it?

I can stomach it.

 

[Simon Anders]

Basically it comes down to this: SAM wants us to make decisions based on emotion rather than rationality.

No war is fought and no baby is aborted without emotional factors, generally strong ones. (don't assume from this that you know my positions on these issues). So the positions that SAM is fighting against are also based on emotion. Also I see no reason to view this as either or.

 

[S.A.M.]

If the person is given a long sentence and released are you obliged to look at a video of the death of his victims if he kills again.

If a killer announces that the only thing that might have made him hesitate to kill was if he knew he might be subjected to the ______________ - some specific form of the death penalty - are you obligated to view videos of those killings he performed before receiving his life sentence?

(I am by the way against the death penalty. I am just trying to see if inaction avoids culpability or and always retains the right to be squeemish.

I think the same principle applies to killers. If they kill someone, they should be given the responsibilities of the person(s) they killed.

 

[Enmos]

We are going to hunt the tiger to extinction.
Oh.. you are against it, well.. then you will have to look at photos of disfigured tiger victims.

SAMs reasoning can create some pretty weird situations.

 

[Simon Anders]

No, I just beleive that if you think something is justified, you should be prepared to do it. If you think waterboarding is not torture, here's your kid, waterboard him. You think capital punishment is justified? You should be willing to sit through it when someone is killed. You think abortion is right? Here are abortion products that you said were not a child. You think this war is right? Here is an item about 80 children under 12 who were killed yesterday and then called insurgents. Thats not emotion, thats accountability. You enabled this, so stand for it.

Does this include slaughtering meat?
Mining?
Computer parts, I believe, often use elements that come from abusive work conditions. Does owning a computer mean that one must be willing to be the abusive boss of poor workers?
How much is one responsible TO FIND OUT what might be seen as the actions involved that you are openly or tacitly supporting?
I think also the relationship with the police would be very tricky in many countries. If one wants police but some of their practices - or enforcement of certain laws - is abusive, but legal. Must one be willing to perform those acts that seem abusive.
It seems you are against war. Does this mean you are for the unilateral disarmament of India?
If India is attacked and its war machine - as every war machine will - committs attrocities, should you be willing to be a soldier in that war because you were not for disarmament?

 

[Simon Anders]

I think the same principle applies to killers. If they kill someone, they should be given the responsibilities of the person(s) they killed.

That is not my question. My question is for those who are against the death penalty? Or, essentially, is deciding not to do something a choice that has responsibilty?

 

[S.A.M.]

That is not my question. My question is for those who are against the death penalty?

I'm watching Peter Brooks Mahabharata and your subtleties escape me.

So I shall ask you to clarify. According to me they are not obliged to change their beliefs based on the number of people killed by the criminal, since they are opposing emulating his acts.

Does this include slaughtering meat?
Mining?
Computer parts, I believe, often use elements that come from abusive work conditions. Does owning a computer mean that one must be willing to be the abusive boss of poor workers?
How much is one responsible TO FIND OUT what might be seen as the actions involved that you are openly or tacitly supporting?

As much as possible. Does it matter that "Free Trade" leads to 20,000 children dying of preventable causes everyday? Or not?

That cows are tortured in confined spaces in farmed conditions? That chickens are not allowed any movement so their muscles remain soft and do not toughen? Or not?

I think also the relationship with the police would be very tricky in many countries. If one wants police but some of their practices - or enforcement of certain laws - is abusive, but legal. Must one be willing to perform those acts that seem abusive.
It seems you are against war. Does this mean you are for the unilateral disarmament of India?
If India is attacked and its war machine - as every war machine will - committs attrocities, should you be willing to be a soldier in that war because you were not for disarmament?

Do you care if your cop or soldier rapes a woman prisoner? Inserts pipes up their arses? Is your safety a justification for that? Ignoring is also enabling. Or would you rather not know?

 

[Simon Anders]

I'm watching Peter Brooks Mahabharata and your subtleties escape me.

Oh, I loved that.

OK.
SAM: If you are for a war, you should look at the consequences of that war.
Me: If you are against a war, should you look at the consequences of not fighting it?

So I shall ask you to clarify. According to me they are not obliged to change their beliefs based on the number of people killed by the criminal, since they are opposing emulating his acts.

It may not be the best example. Take my revolutionary one I mentioned earlier. Does this mean you are against all armed struggle, by the way?

As much as possible. Does it matter that "Free Trade" leads to 20,000 children dying of preventable causes everyday? Or not?

Hmm. Gosh. 20,000 children. Oh, I can't decide.

Anyway. So if you eat the meat from a certain animal you are willing to kill, dress and cook it.

If you use materials that were mined you would be willing to work in the mines in the conditions experienced by the specific miners who mined that metal or element?

Do you care if your cop or soldier rapes a woman prisoner? Inserts pipes up their arses? Is your safety a justification for that? Ignoring is also enabling. Or would you rather not know?

So you are against there being a police force. You are from India. The Indian police are a mixed lot and there are systemic problems. ARe you against the existence of the police? If you are against the existence of the police must you look at photos of the victims of crimes they would have prevented? If you are for the police must you look at photos of the victims of the police's sytemic violence and torture?