Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
User Journal

Journal mercedo's Journal: Value of life, again 11

Yeah...You are right..Life is a biological concept. Everyone has to have a very precious ...bestowed life...It's definitely irreplacable.

Of course everybody knows life starts from the moment of conception and of course many people know that law does not allow unborn baby to hold personhood...I know life is a biological concept, but at the same time life should not be regarded as it is.

In this respect, life should be regarded as social rather than biological concept I may say... I assume you put too much emphasis on life of individual body.

Everybody in a civilised society knows individual unit or body is first and foremost important, should be protected by law at any time. But from time to time it is something that has to be sacrificed in the name of public interest. If one's life were useful for helping other's life more than one, one is worth being sacrificed.

Kamikaze turned out to be a worthless act, but at that time, young people believed its beneficial for saving Japan, Japanese people, the Emperor, even their family. So they did.

If someone's life is useful to save tens of thousands of lives, its worth sacrificing it. Death does not mean anything in itself. Death of serial killer brings about general applause among ordinary citizens.

Death of very good doctor who saved tens of thousands of patients brings about thousands of sad cries around the world.

Death of unborn baby causes sadness in its parents, but they can keep it in their minds till the end of time.

Death of very old people causes sadness among those who know well, but still they can give it up as a matter of natural consequence.

As death means always in many ways. A value of life is not equal and should not be equal, either. And in a natural consequence of this argument, there is a difference in weight of life. So if you believe kinds of communal society is an ideal, its a ricecake drawn in a paper( which means something impossible to exist).

Thus I conclude it's the right form of society for us to be exposed by a very sever struggle of life. And I believe this real world we live materialise this idea. So I want to accept it rather possitively.

... I'm going to write about relationship between civilisation and war later...

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Value of life, again

Comments Filter:
  • Whether the law recognizes the personhood of the unborn fetus is totally beside the point. I'm pro-life; and I hope the law never does, or else chances are human babies will be born with 9 months of tax debt...

    However, in 1948 the UN adopted as a part of the new international law an idea called the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. One does not have to be a person to inherit these rights- one needs merely be human. Article 2 of these rights, in part, states that we cannot discriminate (with respect
    • I would like to shed light on this topic from slightly different perspective.

      Suppose we men were different, different animal than women. We men have sometimes have fun with women without serious intent. If protection were perfect, possibilities of her pregnancy would reduce to almost nil. But things are not so well done always. In this particular case, if you were the person, what would you do? You ask her to abort, give her a consent to give birth?

      But you don't love her at all. What would you do?

      Pro-life

      • Suppose we men were different, different animal than women. We men have sometimes have fun with women without serious intent. If protection were perfect, possibilities of her pregnancy would reduce to almost nil. But things are not so well done always. In this particular case, if you were the person, what would you do? You ask her to abort, give her a consent to give birth?

        Of couse let her give birth! Take responsibility for my actions.

        But you don't love her at all. What would you do?

        If you don't lov
        • The UDHR was written by a woman, not a man- Elaenor Roosevelt. The pro-life movement was started by a woman and a feminist, not a man- Susan B. Anthony. So your argument that pro-life is male only is a falsehood to begin with.

          But the nature of pro-life is only convenient for men. In return pro-choice is who's choice? Men's? No, it's women's choice. Pro-choice is for women who happened to be pregnant from irresponsible men and whose pro-choice is unavoidable for economic reason or keeping independent way

          • But the nature of pro-life is only convenient for men.

            No it isn't- women feel the need to be moral and a duty to the next generation as well. It's about taking responsibility for your actions, whoever you are. Both genders are equally responsible for the original act; thus both genders are equally responsible for the outcome of that act.

            In return pro-choice is who's choice? Men's?

            37% of abortions in the United States, according to the Elliot Institute, are due to men pressuring women into getting ab
            • Both genders are equally responsible for the original act; thus both genders are equally responsible for the outcome of that act.

              In reality, women are much more responsible for their babies. Only when women judge they can afford to raise their babies, they should be able to make a decision to have babies. Women are in nature much more pro-life than men. Men don't have to persuade women to be pro-life before men to be pro-life. So I said pro-life is for men who don't want to take responsibility but still w

              • In reality, women are much more responsible for their babies. Only when women judge they can afford to raise their babies, they should be able to make a decision to have babies. Women are in nature much more pro-life than men. Men don't have to persuade women to be pro-life before men to be pro-life. So I said pro-life is for men who don't want to take responsibility but still want their babies in their partner's responsibility. If you agree on this, don't you think it's a selfish idea only for men?

                That's
                • I think that abdication of fatherly responsibilities is a fairly modern invention

                  We have no proof. I cannot assert so. I think fatherhood is common throughout history.

                  having sex is a commitment to family.

                  Very insightful.- Next time I'll try stating before her. Laughing prevent us from doing furthermore.

                  We've stolen something from ourselves when we have sex for recreation rather than for procreation.

                  We procreate as many times as the number of kids. Otherwise, we have sex for just fun. Many people have

                  • We have no proof. I cannot assert so. I think fatherhood is common throughout history.

                    I have some proof in Western culture- just about every power structure in Western culture was patriarchial (father as head of household) which would tend to suggest a fatherhood structure being common in the family units as well. Likewise- this patriarchial structure can also be found in the monotheistic religions- God is almost always considered to be male.

                    Very insightful.- Next time I'll try stating before her. Lau
                    • Partriarchial-not only in the west but in the east too. In primitive aera there might have been matriarchial ages. Both west and east civilisations have already broken out of this histrical stage. You said fatherhood is diminishing. Any proof?

                      Maybe those respectable people didn't have to think about economy for child bearing for several thousand years. It's only in the last 100 years or so when population exlosion occurred. If today we haven't thought about any form of population control -including

                    • You said fatherhood is diminishing. Any proof?

                      In America, there's plenty of proof- and some of it isn't even recent. In _My Bondage, My Freedom_, Freedman Douglas wrote way back in 1855 about how the slave owners in the south separated fathers from families ON PURPOSE to keep the family as slaves. This tradition has carried through to modern African-American families unfortuneately; that community has a large percentage of single mothers trying to raise kids, most of whom had absent fathers themselves g

Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later. -- F. Brooks, "The Mythical Man-Month"

Working...