[Debate] Gay marriage : Pro or against ?[New poll : Would you use a surrogacy ?]

[Úlfheðinn]

People in general are assholes, the cops certainly don't have a monopoly.

The only problem is that cops like politicians can actually affect our lives.

 

[Radalan]

So the poll title seems to pretty much answers the question by itself. Are ethical.

It goes in the long list of reasons why cops are assholes.

Yay, more generalizing!

Exceptions are few.

Yeah sure, maybe in Greece.

 

[Wellenbrecher]

It goes in the long list of reasons why cops are assholes.

Exceptions are few.

No, they're not. Or rather the percentage of arseholes amongst cops is more likely than not the same as amongst the population as a whole.
Now, you can make the argument that folks that become cops are more likely to have a certain political outlook than others, but
a) that doesn't automatically make them arseholes
b) it's not what you said, so your posts are still bull****

 

[Bromden]

Our cops are assholes, but not because of their political outlook, but because that's what is expected of a police force that is there to give power to the current elected dictatorship. They are not for the people, but for keeping them in line. Assholeness is a job requirement.

 

[PoisonCourtesan]

Now, you can make the argument that folks that become cops are more likely to have a certain political outlook than others, but
a) that doesn't automatically make them arseholes

Yes it does, half of them in this country are Golden Dawn. Far-right extremism is rooted deep within police quarters.
And police in general are chess pieces for politicians to enforce a facade of moral absolutes and to dictate the life of the people. So get your **** straight.

 

[Radalan]

Yes it does, half of them in this country are Golden Dawn. Far-right extremism is rooted deep within police quarters.
And police in general are chess pieces for politicians to enforce a facade of moral absolutes and to dictate the life of the people. So get your **** straight.

Yes, in that country. But you didn't say "Greek cops are assholes" you said "Cops are assholes". 

 

[Radalan]

Tell me, if you so want babies to be able to know their birth parents: How do you feel about adoption?  Is that disgusting and unethical?  How about removing a child from an abusive home? 

That was a subject of debate at some point. As far as I recall he regarded adoption as a part of human trafficking, or was that just when it's related to gay parents? Something along those lines.

 

[Aldric]

Surfing the internet was not normal 100 years ago. It was unheard of. Having someone **** your wife for a price until she gets pregnant, while not probably common was not a totally alien concept (see how babies have a price). "Normality" changes as people get accustomed to things as is not a valid indicator if something new is "good". This should be glaringly obvious.

As far as I am concerned your post contains zero points against same-sex marriage just a load of BS about ethics. As far as I am concerned I'd be hard pressed to find something unethical that doesn't hurt anyone. Who does the concept of a  child grown in artificial womb hurt?

Renting your body, much like prostitution is not in it self human trafficking. Much like assembling sports shoes is not child labor by default. Without hard data one can only assume and assumptions are worth **** if you ask me.

So here we are comparing procreation to surf on internet.
I'm quite sure that for the children, being born from anonymous people who sold their sperm/ovum and raise like cattle in a artificial womb is not exactly the same thing.
Normal was refering to ethic and moral. Which seems to be an outdated concept here somehow.

@Bromen, when you got time to make complete sentence you tell me.

What does this mail order catalogue bull**** (that have been disproved as a baseless fear every the time you brought it up) has to do with gay marriage?

Gays couple can't procreate.
They can't have children without ordering semen/ovum in a catalog.
Gay marriage mean more artificial procreation since national and international number of orphans are limited, especially for young age children without mental/health issue.

Is it any different from factory worker renting his arm, or from a prostitute? Not really, no.
Does choosing a father/mother in a catalog and then renting someone else to bear the child is a form of human exploitation/trafficking  as well as an ethical and moral abomination or is it perfect fine and it's part of the market of services ? The latter
Is this progress ? There's no such thing as progress per se. It's always progress towards a particular ideal. So it depends on what your ideal is.
If the next step is growing baby in vitro artificial womb in labs. Will it be unethical or a part of progress as well ? Don't see any problems with artificial wombs myself.
I would like your opinion, people. Is it normal ? Pretty much, yeah. The entire concept of civilization is stretching and pushing our biological limits. Don't know why we should stop right here.

Now this is interesting .

I reformulate your opinion.
1. A surrogacy is about the same as any other work involving the body.
2. Commercial use of semen/ovum/surrogacy are perfectly fine extension of the market.
3. Progress is what people want it to be.
4. Artificial wombs are just fine.
5. This is normal to bypass natural limitation for this usage.


Some more question then.

1. Would you for the same payroll as your current work. Sell your sperm/ovum and if women get a surrogacy  each 9 months.
2. Quote a few unethical behaviours in modern technology usage by your moral.
3. What make a technological process ethically acceptable 

Aldric, you do realize that you are not debating against gay marriage, yes?  You are making the assumption that all gays want babies, and that to get their babies, they will use various methods of procreation that seem disturbing to you for no reason in particular.

Tell me, if you so want babies to be able to know their birth parents: How do you feel about adoption?  Is that disgusting and unethical?  How about removing a child from an abusive home? 

You are not, and have not, debated gays getting married on the basis of gays getting married.  I'm just going to take a stab at why: I think it's because there isn't actually a reason.  I think it's because you and those on the losing side of this debate cannot find legitimate reasons that two people cannot be married.  Instead, you introduce these other crazy debates that have slightly more complicated answers and say that, unless this other debate is answered, gay marriage is wrong.  That is entirely ridiculous and anyone with a brain should be able  to see that.

Gay couple are anthropologically infertile. They have to use artificial procreation techs if they want children since adoption of a low age, healthy child, is costy and difficult.  (30K$)

 

[Radalan]

Normal was refering to ethic and moral. Which seems to be an outdated concept here somehow.

By my standards your concept of normality is indeed outdated.

 

[Úlfheðinn]

Yes, based on my standards of morals and ethics Aldric is quite the bad guy.

I don't generally find bigotry to be indicative of moral capacity. 

It's why I don't consider various racist groups or religious extremists to be a good example of morality, even if they "swear they are following an ancient holy text to the letter."

 

[Ilex]

Surfing the internet was not normal 100 years ago. It was unheard of. Having someone **** your wife for a price until she gets pregnant, while not probably common was not a totally alien concept (see how babies have a price). "Normality" changes as people get accustomed to things as is not a valid indicator if something new is "good". This should be glaringly obvious.

As far as I am concerned your post contains zero points against same-sex marriage just a load of BS about ethics. As far as I am concerned I'd be hard pressed to find something unethical that doesn't hurt anyone. Who does the concept of a  child grown in artificial womb hurt?

Renting your body, much like prostitution is not in it self human trafficking. Much like assembling sports shoes is not child labor by default. Without hard data one can only assume and assumptions are worth **** if you ask me.

So here we are comparing procreation to surf on internet.
I'm quite sure that for the children, being born from anonymous people who sold their sperm/ovum and raise like cattle in a artificial womb is not exactly the same thing.
Normal was refering to ethic and moral. Which seems to be an outdated concept here somehow.

No I'm saying the definition of the word is relative to the society it is used in. Nothing new can be normal by definition. What you mean by normal in reference to moral I have no idea.

The reactions of children (shockingly enough!) correlates highly with the experiences they have of the subject with people around them. If a child has heard only bad things of the internet, finding out that their father uses it could have bad results. It's all speculation, but even logically you have no point. And besides is the way children were procreated the 1st thing they get to know? Who are you to say that a child will react negatively to an artificial womb-birth when the whole shebang is presented to them as unbiased information. My guess would be that without prior bias it all seems equally crazy to them.

And raised like cattle? Is cattle raised in artificial wombs? Or should children from artificial wombs be raised like cattle? What are you trying to say? One would think that in normal homes children are raised the same way regardless of the way they were conceived.

How is gay reproduction at all related to same-sex marriage? Marriage does not give nor does it take away a person's ability to procreate. You should make a thread about taking rights away from gay people because marriage does not entitle people to have children of their own (this is to say that marriage is by no means required).

 

[kurczak]

Now this is interesting .

I reformulate your opinion.
1. A surrogacy is about the same as any other work involving the body.
2. Commercial use of semen/ovum/surrogacy are perfectly fine extension of the market.
3. Progress is what people want it to be.
4. Artificial wombs are just fine.
5. This is normal to bypass natural limitation for this usage.

Some more question then.

1. Would you for the same payroll as your current work. Sell your sperm/ovum and if women get a surrogacy  each 9 months.
2. Quote a few unethical behaviours in modern technology usage by your moral.
3. What make a technological process ethically acceptable 

1) Not for the same money, no. But I guess there is a price.
2) Generally speaking, any experiments on humans without their consent, or with their consent acquired under duress.
3) Pretty much a rewording of the previous point: genuine consent of everybody involved. Admittedly the baby doesn't consent to it, but then again it doesn't consent to its "natural" conception either. That's the way this world works - you're brought into it without anybody asking you.

 

[Ilex]

I can't fathom how someone is against technology (artificial wombs) that would enable some people who are otherwise unable to have children to have them AND this while no one getting hurt or (supposedly) not destroying the world. This comes off as very evil and ethically wrong to me.

 

[Bromden]

@Bromen, when you got time to make complete sentence you tell me.

I won't waste the time of typing complete sentences for you when you don't have the time to write my name correctly. So:

Gays couple can't procreate.

...the bastards!

They can't have children without ordering semen/ovum in a catalog.

They can't? What's with adoption?

Gay marriage mean more artificial procreation since national and international number of orphans are limited, especially for young age children without mental/health issue.

So you fear that we run out of orphans? That menace is not looming over us.

 

[Magorian Aximand]

I find it somewhat hilarious that Aldric is trying to talk about ethics without ever bothering to define his terms. Without knowing by what criteria Aldric categorizes something as unethical, how can we have a reasoned debate about this? I'll give him a hand and provide what I think about what is moral and immoral.

A particular action or choice is moral or right when it somehow promotes happiness, well being, or health, or it somehow minimizes unnecessary harm or suffering or it does both. A particular action or choice is immoral or wrong when it somehow diminishes happiness, well being, or health, or it somehow causes unnecessary harm or suffering, or again, it does both.

By this standard, Aldric has unequivocally failed to demonstrate how gay marriage is unethical for three reasons: he has failed to support the notion that children are harmed by having homosexual parents, that this harm (were he able to establish that it exists) outweighs the suffering clearly caused by oppressing the homosexual population, and how marriage is in any way related to the ability of homosexuals to procreate. Having failed to do any one of these three things immediately invalidates his position, and thus far he hasn't managed to support any of them.

 

[Lost-Lamb]

1. Would you for the same payroll as your current work. Sell your sperm/ovum and if women get a surrogacy  each 9 months.

God yes, +2k a month for just popping in and popping off a load every so often? Hell, these days I jizz for free, if there's that good money to be made on it I bloody want in on it.

1) Not for the same money, no. But I guess there is a price.

Not all that surprised you'd have a different view about it

 

[Mage246]

I shudder to think of what effect a plague of little LLambies would have on the world.

 

[Lost-Lamb]

Just you wait, my spawn will have their day! Now to find a sperm clinic where I can make that amount of money without looking like a deflated balloon after the first week.

 

[Pharaoh Llandy]

I find it somewhat hilarious that Aldric is trying to talk

You and me both, man. You and me both.

 

[Jhessail]

I find it somewhat hilarious that Aldric is trying to talk

You and me both, man. You and me both.