Hyper

, is a reason not to do something as simple as, "it's frowned upon"?

, that is morally wrong. Somebody's value shouldn't be based on their disability status either way.

, the point of the post was to inspire discussion, and to that effect, it accomplished its purpose. I stated my reason for believing something, and in...

, I don't find what one should do is synonymous with what one is morally required to do, and in that vein, the question isnt, "why should somebody do ...

, good point

, I agree.

, just because something "seems" wrong doesn't mean it is wrong. There is a difference between the two, that being that the adult person has had the o...

, because we can't prove that they exist as anything other than concepts.

, this reasoning is the same, as I said before, as eugenics for disabled people. Would you likewise bar disabled people from procreating?

, the point is that your analogy is inaccurate. Like I said, it would be similar if in both cases the car crashed. If you shoot the driver, chances ar...

, I just said that in both cases the fetus would die. This doesn't have the same implications. This would be similar to the car case if the person die...

, no, because in both cases, the "passenger" or the fetus would die. They would, however, be entitled to try to stop them from jumping.

, you are reading too much into it. I am saying that the concepts exist. And that the target of those concepts also exists, as a concept. And they sti...

That is just eugenics for the disabled.

, I'd agree.

, I completely agree. There are very few instances where there isn't some imbalanced power dynamic that would cause it to be a toxic relationship.

. What a strawman. Bearing any children would be better than bearing no children, or would you be in support of eugenics for the disabled?

,

, because the only case in which this life exists is if the act is done.

This argument just comes down to our definition of real. This definition of real is that anything that exists is real. Both fake and real are real bec...

, I appreciate your ability to compromise issues to reach a larger demographic. I think that political outrage is ridiculous. Republicans and Democrat...

, could you please explain this line of reasoning? I am genuinely confused. How do you have a logic statement that contradicts itself?

, I said that everything exists, not that everything has the same utility.

, I would say that there is no distinction between the matrix and the real world, or at the very least that it would be useless to do so. A simulation...

The only reason people use it as money is because people think it is money. People thinking that it is useful is the only reason it is actually useful...

, This isn't the compositional fallacy, because in this case it isn't a fallacy. Whenever I think of a giraffe, neurons in my brain exist in the physi...

, even though both bills can't be used for transactions, they still both exist.

That isn't how that works. I could say if p, then q. Just because q is true doesn't mean p is also true, just that if p is true, then q is also true. ...

Stoicism wasn't something that required effort. Stoicism, to me at least, was just the natural state of somebody's mind when they have lived a life of...

I said fundamentally, which means that they have the same effect of terminating life.

If anyone could prove the existence of God, there would be very few atheists.

They should, and have already, arranged peace meetings. Say what you want about Trump, but foreign countries respect his power and fall in line.

murder isn't fundamentally different from abortion. Any descriptor of the beginning of life that could be mentioned could be countered by giving an ex...