|
|
Post by nicebutdim on Jan 13, 2009 20:47:23 GMT
I'd terminate. I couldn't condemn any child to a life, however short, with two heads. I`m with Puffin on this. |
|
|
|
Post by Libby on Jan 13, 2009 22:03:15 GMT
Seems to be what most think so far Nice
|
|
voice
New Member
Goals are a form of self inflicted slavery
Posts: 41,236
|
Post by voice on Jan 13, 2009 22:09:23 GMT
Wel if it lived it could always audition as Zaphod
|
|
avieder
New Member
never lie
Posts: 8,871
|
Post by avieder on Jan 14, 2009 7:40:26 GMT
And, anyway, is being even potentially 'unhappy' an excuse to end life? Not happy? Wow, you have a gift for understatement, we're talking continuous low intensity physical and mental torture 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for the entirety of their short lives, everything will be misery, eating, walking, hygene, sleep, no solitude/privacy or dignity, everything will be a painful burden. Far better to abort them and give them peace now than making them suffer through years of that misery. You are right NYer "you have a gift for understatement", I acquired it in my youth in London. - Bad habbits are hard to get rid of..... You know that there is a gigantic difference between people who are born with a disability and people who become disabled. I mentioned above the examples of: All the other humans having wings - and you don't then you are disabled (relatively) Hellen Keller who could never sense the outer world, yet had a meanigful life. Therefore I find it hard to think and make up my mind if: not being is better than being (and suffering relatively to others). Remember that we were all "not being" before (birth) and will be after our short spam of being. You may ask Prof. Stephen William Hawking ...... |
|
|
|
Post by wetkingcanute on Jan 14, 2009 7:48:17 GMT
Assuming they live; What about their soul? (if you believe in a soul).
What if one head became a devout Christian and the other an Atheist? When they died where would they go?
|
|
|
|
Post by newyorker on Jan 14, 2009 8:58:53 GMT
Not happy? Wow, you have a gift for understatement, we're talking continuous low intensity physical and mental torture 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for the entirety of their short lives, everything will be misery, eating, walking, hygene, sleep, no solitude/privacy or dignity, everything will be a painful burden. Far better to abort them and give them peace now than making them suffer through years of that misery. Therefore I find it hard to think and make up my mind if: not being is better than being (and suffering relatively to others). Remember that we were all "not being" before (birth) and will be after our short spam of being. You may ask Prof. Stephen William Hawking ...... Well, we all were in a state of not-being for 14 billion years before the begining of our existence as human beings in this short life, funny thing is that those 14 billion years went by quite instantainiously to us all, and it didn't hurt at all. Y'know, after we die, the next billions of years until the big crunch of the universe, and the next big bang, should go by just as instantainiously from our perspective, hey, maybe we'll come back for the next round.  |
|
avieder
New Member
never lie
Posts: 8,871
|
Post by avieder on Jan 14, 2009 11:26:16 GMT
Therefore I find it hard to think and make up my mind if: not being is better than being (and suffering relatively to others). Remember that we were all "not being" before (birth) and will be after our short spam of being. You may ask Prof. Stephen William Hawking ...... [/quote] ....., hey, maybe we'll come back for the next round. [/quote] You do not seem to a 'religios' person NYer, yet your last quoted sentence could be seen as the essence of any religous life - If we are for any eternity in a state of "none existance" (perhaps our souls are...) and we have a chance to have an existance - would that be preferable, even with a disability, to the state of 'soul' l or "none existance". That is not a question, but a view point for the twins and their parents and the people who said NO !!!!. |
|
radge
New Member
Posts: 1,776
|
Post by radge on Jan 14, 2009 11:31:57 GMT
what you dont know cant hurt ya. dont let them out the womb and theyve lost nothing.
|
|
sweet soul
New Member
Keep The Faith !
Posts: 5,106 
|
Post by sweet soul on Jan 14, 2009 11:33:19 GMT
you have to ask yourself. would YOU like to be stuck with 2 heads and attached to the body of you vrother or sister?? its terrible for all i feel sorry for the parents, but being a twin myself, i would rather be dead then be born that way!!!
|
|
avieder
New Member
never lie
Posts: 8,871
|
Post by avieder on Jan 14, 2009 12:02:06 GMT
you have to ask yourself. would YOU like to be stuck with 2 heads and attached to the body of you vrother or sister?? its terrible for all i feel sorry for the parents, but being a twin myself, i would rather be dead then be born that way!!! "Dead" can only be for someone who was alive. Since I do not know what the state of "non existance" means and since I now exist, I just feel that if an ezistance is potentially possible it would "overide" the continuing "non existance". I already pointed out that what we perceive as a disability is only relative to the other people that exist about us. For oneself (or two-selves in this matter) it IS an existance and the right to extinguish it could only be in the hands of those who created it, or if it endangers the mother (health) |
|
radge
New Member
Posts: 1,776
|
Post by radge on Jan 14, 2009 12:19:40 GMT
We talk about rights in this context things get blurry. Rights are something man made to help balance the world for all (supposidly) yest no one has a right to take life, so why do people have a right to give life? I think rights dont help this arguement because a woman doesnt have a right to a child, she has a possibility of a child. So along those lines why does existence over-ride nonexistence? i think thats rather biased. I also think my post is sounding rather confused  but my question still stands. whats your perspective? |
|
avieder
New Member
never lie
Posts: 8,871
|
Post by avieder on Jan 14, 2009 12:27:44 GMT
what you dont know cant hurt ya. dont let them out the womb and theyve lost nothing. You do not know that for sure, do you? Now that you exist and have a life and had many "earthly" experiences, If I ask you what would you prefer to be in great pain or die, the answer would be very complicated. Its not a staight verdict that you prefer death. If a 'soul' has to chose between "to be or not to be", I think it would go for the first optionn even if it entails RELATIVE suffring. |
|
avieder
New Member
never lie
Posts: 8,871
|
Post by avieder on Jan 14, 2009 12:37:11 GMT
We talk about rights in this context things get blurry. Rights are something man made to help balance the world for all (supposidly) yest no one has a right to take life, so why do people have a right to give life? I think rights dont help this arguement because a woman doesnt have a right to a child, she has a possibility of a child. So along those lines why does existence over-ride nonexistence? i think thats rather biased. I also think my post is sounding rather confused but my question still stands. whats your perspective? Confused is correct  ..... As to your question, my pespective is that life has purpose. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2009 12:51:40 GMT
I couldn't terminate a pregnancy, life is too precious.
|
|
radge
New Member
Posts: 1,776
|
Post by radge on Jan 14, 2009 12:58:12 GMT
a soul doesnt exist without the person thinking they have one in the first place, so a soul couldnt choose either way
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2009 13:07:21 GMT
Would you like to be the one walking around with two heads, Joyce?
|
|
radge
New Member
Posts: 1,776
|
Post by radge on Jan 14, 2009 13:10:53 GMT
and fair point you believe life has a purpose, does that mean you believe in having a right to life?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2009 13:11:22 GMT
If I was born with two heads, yes.
I have nothing against women who decide to abort, but it's something I have always been against, so, that's all I can say really.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2009 13:22:07 GMT
'If I was born with two heads, yes.'
I don't believe you. Either that or you're devoid of imagination.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2009 13:28:14 GMT
That's your choice, but since I wasn't born with two heads and have no idea what it would be like, I can only imagine that being alive and cope the best way possible, is better than not been given that chance at all.
|
|
