That's seperate from what you just said. I know you wish people were robots, but just because you're in denial doesn't make it so. It's okay for some people to feel fine with forcing their babies gender, and for some to think it's not fine. There is no set of logic that, when presented to every person, will cause every person to come to the same conclusion. I know you really wish there was, but it just isn't true.
Of course there is. It's called "freedom." Not everybody agrees either because they don't value freedom(or don't value it consistently), or don't use logic.That's seperate from what you just said. I know you wish people were robots, but just because you're in denial doesn't make it so. It's okay for some people to feel fine with forcing their babies gender, and for some to think it's not fine. There is no set of logic that, when presented to every person, will cause every person to come to the same conclusion. I know you really wish there was, but it just isn't true.
Everyone being logical and coming to the same conclusion isn't freedom, it's software.
The problem is that you see everything in black-and-white. Either a person is logical or illogical. Either they think your way, or they're not thinking. People aren't completely logical, and trying (but failing) to be so doesn't make you any better as a person.
Of course not. Trying is the only thing that matters. I could be completely wrong in my conclusions because I'm missing a crucial piece of information, but with the knowledge given to me, I constantly strive to use logic. Whether I end up right or not is irrelevent.Everyone being logical and coming to the same conclusion isn't freedom, it's software.
The problem is that you see everything in black-and-white. Either a person is logical or illogical. Either they think your way, or they're not thinking. People aren't completely logical, and trying (but failing) to be so doesn't make you any better as a person.
How did you drag me into this again? My reasons for not wanting to plan my child's gender are fine! I don't need to read a book on the topic to come to that conclusion because there is no logical reason why doing so would be a benefit to me. And that's all I have to say about you and your stupid robotface!
No, there isn't, which is why I can't fathom why anyone would want to do it.Originally Posted by ShlupQuack
I love you too.And that's all I have to say about you and your stupid robotface!
But in this case, the parent does. If the child doesn't even have control over his own body, why should his parent have any?Right. It's the same thing whether it happens through parental choice, or nature. Either way the child has no say whatsoever in the matter.
There are logical reasons to other people, based on their values. Which goes back to the main problem with this technology having to do with cultures where males are valued more than females. Or something more simple, like BJ might be for it (I haven't asked him) because he feels responsible for passing on the family name.
Or why shouldn't they? Parents have a lot of control over their offspring that the children themselves don't have.
There is no reason to value males over females if you value individual life(just as there is no reason to value a "family name"). A morality which does not value individual life is not worth considering.There are logical reasons to other people, based on their values. Which goes back to the main problem with this technology having to do with cultures where males are valued more than females. Or something more simple, like BJ might be for it (I haven't asked him) because he feels responsible for passing on the family name.
Why shouldn't they? They will for the first five years of the child's post-birth life; why not pre-birth? THEY made the decision to make the baby. Until that baby has a mind of his/her own, that embryo/fetus is property. The same justification goes to abortion.But in this case, the parent does. If the child doesn't even have control over his own body, why should his parent have any?
I just realized I said the same thing as Shlup for that last part. DAMN YOU SHLUP, why don't you listen to yourself? You should be agreeing with me! ;_;
To you, based on your values.
I thought I was. Mostly.
Yeah, pretty much. But do you even consider moralities which say we must castrate/kill homosexuals? I doubt it. Neither of those value individual life - and both are equally deplorable.To you, based on your values.
Mostly. ;_;I thought I was. Mostly.
Based on my values, no. Nor do I agree with people who value males over females. Either way our logic is still based on our values though.
Oh, go suck an egg.
>>> Planning a child`s sex is harmless, so I think there is nothing wrong with it.
>> The black orb glitters ominously... but nothing happens..
Yes. And since we have the same value, if we use logic we should come up with an objective conclusion. People who come up with a different conclusion either have different information, are being inconsistent, and have a different set of values. Someone who doesn't value life is not worth considering, in my book. You do the same thing when you dismiss fundamentalist religious nuts' arguments that homosexuals should be all killed off.Based on my values, no. Nor do I agree with people who value males over females. Either way our logic is still based on our values though.
That's assuming we either have all the same values, or that values in general run parallel and never conflict with each other, and that we never have to prioritize when our values conflict. There are circumstances where my value for something else takes precedence over my value for individual life.
Posting Permissions
