RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions

RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

LadyEllen -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 3:30:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CuriousLord It is a prejustice. The human mind works off prejustices and generalizations. This one will serve me well in life; why should I regret it? The funny part is that, if I were born into a world where everyone's a child molester, I'd call them monsters, too.. and it'd be probably even more illy received, people talking of glass houses and the evils of sterotypes. So, in the end, one must find their values and work off them.. not being controlled by what others think of their opinions. By this logic then I should fear all black people - because most gun crime in the UK is apparently committed by black people, ergo all black people are carrying guns and ready to shoot me at the drop of a hat. This will serve me well, because if I stay away from black people then it follows I shall never be shot by a black person. Why should I regret it? Youre a bright young man CL - youve shown it on many occasions here, but seriously my dear, you will come to realise that whilst prejudices are natural human instincts, we only become truly human when we realise that we can and sometimes should override them, and that generalisations are always over-generalisations. E

CuriousLord -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 3:34:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen quote: ORIGINAL: CuriousLord It is a prejustice. The human mind works off prejustices and generalizations. This one will serve me well in life; why should I regret it? The funny part is that, if I were born into a world where everyone's a child molester, I'd call them monsters, too.. and it'd be probably even more illy received, people talking of glass houses and the evils of sterotypes. So, in the end, one must find their values and work off them.. not being controlled by what others think of their opinions. By this logic then I should fear all black people - because most gun crime in the UK is apparently committed by black people, ergo all black people are carrying guns and ready to shoot me at the drop of a hat. This will serve me well, because if I stay away from black people then it follows I shall never be shot by a black person. Why should I regret it? This is why I was telling laurr3n that she was confusing absolutes and sterotypes. Such as, because most gun crime in the UK is apparently committed by black people.. the conclusion "ergo all black people are carrying guns and ready to shoot me at the drop of a hat" is absurd (as you of course know) because it's acting as though the sterotype were an absolute. What you can take away from this, though, is that if you're around 100 random white people or 100 random black people, you're more likely to get shot in the latter case. (It's just a statistical truth.) So, if not getting shot was your primary agenda, it would be advisable to stay away from black people. It's hardly PC, though it's scientifically true. :P PS- So there's no one offended.. I was taking a statistic someone gave me and applying it. This is not to say that there's something wrong with black people or anything of the sort. (Which I'm sure most readers already knew, just.. well, trying to avoid being insensitive.)

LadyEllen -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 3:55:53 PM)
I think the issue CL, is that youre applying your brilliant talent in hard science to the softest end of sciences - those which deal with people and society and which are only deemed soft because of their inability to be precise about their subject matters. Yet you acknowledge that it is impossible to derive absolutes in these fields whilst at the same time seem to rely on stereotypes, which in my experience, are just another form of absolutes when combined with the prejudice to which you admitted. E

Level -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 3:56:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 Somehow I'm having a hard time picturing infanticide as every being "good" for humanity personally. Me either; I was being facetious.

CuriousLord -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:01:26 PM)
I'm curious, though, as to what's wrong with having a prejustice? I suffer no misunderstanding that everyone in prison is a monster, however I do acknowledge that a random person drawn from a pool of prison inmates is, according to the observations I've made in this life, more likely to be a monster than someone outside of that prison. As far as I know, this is true. Also, I can't see why this can be a problem. So it seems that either there's something I'm unaware of or people are reading too far into my generalization.

CuriousLord -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:02:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 Somehow I'm having a hard time picturing infanticide as every being "good" for humanity personally. Me either; I was being facetious. If the infanticide was selective, it could save a lot of "doctor"s a lot of time.

LadyEllen -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:11:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CuriousLord I'm curious, though, as to what's wrong with having a prejustice? I suffer no misunderstanding that everyone in prison is a monster, however I do acknowledge that a random person drawn from a pool of prison inmates is, according to the observations I've made in this life, more likely to be a monster than someone outside of that prison. As far as I know, this is true. Also, I can't see why this can be a problem. So it seems that either there's something I'm unaware of or people are reading too far into my generalization. As I said CL - prejudice is a natural human instinct, and in this case, statistically informed as you are, it would be wise to hold such a prejudice perhaps, for your own safety. Yet, we also need to understand that prejudice is exactly that - our view prior to proper judgement of the person, and be ready to adapt to our actual experience of that person, discarding where appropriate the prejudice we formerly had of that individual as part of a group which we might reasonably be wary of. E

CuriousLord -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:22:33 PM)
No need to state the obvious. But, for the first part.. "for [my] own safety"?

KRANWEST -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:22:39 PM)
As a youth, I used to think that abortion was wrong................an arrogant rebuke to the Natural Order.....................a half-assed, supercilious notion that man's moral judgment surpassed that of the Creator. These days, every time I go to the grocery store and see a Hispanic woman desperately trying to pacify seven or eight unruly little devils, while digging in her purse for those blasted food stamps, I wish that abortionists rode through the inner cities in ice-cream truck setups, offering undercutter rates to young, unprepared mothers of any race. I say that prisoners should receive FREE abortions, compliments of the state. If Americans do their best to clean-up this dysgenic mess now, it won't blow up in our faces later, like India or China.

CuriousLord -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:25:57 PM)
I think I'm going to have an alt profile more in line with TuffDom- only more Ford Tuff than he could ever be- but you often cause me to wonder if a different direction might also yield some benefits. ;)

Zensee -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:32:30 PM)
First of all, there is NO SUCH WORD AS PREJUSTICE. If you must subject us to your semantic antics then at least have the courtesy to misuse real words. Secondly, Lady Ellen has already completely and decisively dismissed your rationalisation of your clearly admitted preJUDICEs. Thirdly, it is clearly evident by your consistent misuse of both terms that it is you who does not know the difference between stereotypes and absolutes. Fourthly, you obviously know very little about criminals or the prison system or rehabilitation or mental illness. Fifthly, repeating bullshit statements does not improve their odor. Sixthly, declining to "debate" you is not proof of your thesis. Seventhly, you have homework to do and you are shirking by being here. Eighthly, (this space reserved to reply to new offenses or as yet undiscovered yet preexisting ones). Z

CuriousLord -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:39:58 PM)
As insightful as always, Zensee. =/ Well, I guess I'll only waste time with two of these. If you really want responses to the others, find a grade schooler. :P quote: ORIGINAL: Zensee First of all, there is NO SUCH WORD AS PREJUSTICE. If you must subject us to your semantic antics then at least have the courtesy to misuse real words. You really think I haven't noticed how it's spelt? Have you stopped to consider for a moment why I might spell it like that? Or are you under some kind of elementary assumption that words have to be official to be used? PS.. ..aren't you the one bringing up semantics..? I was citing statistical supports and all, but.. well.. what is it with you and semantics, anyhow? quote: ORIGINAL: Zensee Seventhly, you have homework to do and you are shirking by being here. In a way, you are my homework. PS 2- Actually, okay. I'm kinda confused as to if you're joking or if you're actually this silly?

bipolarber -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:40:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread. Anatole France, The Red Lily, 1894, chapter 7 French novelist (1844 - 1924) Nothing new under the sun. R Except of course, in the case of abortions, the rich have the ability to go to the nearest state/country where it IS legal, and have it done there. Naturally, the poor do not, and they have to support an unplanned and possibly unwanted child, thus KEEPING THEM POOR for the rest of their lives. So, ultimately, the abortion issue becomes one of class, rather than morality.

christine1 -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:40:38 PM)
i don't think prisoners should be given free anything. i don't know why my hard earned tax dollars should go to support someone who can't abide by the laws. i think they should have to work in some way for what they get. giving a prisoner a free ride in any area just doesn't make sense to me. i work my ass off to pay for health insurance for myself and my family, i'm not working my ass off to pay for someone elses screw up...personal accountability needs to play a part somewhere. just my opinion...if anyone has a problem with my opinion, please click the link below.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:45:00 PM)
quote: however I do acknowledge that a random person drawn from a pool of prison inmates is, according to the observations I've made in this life, more likely to be a monster than someone outside of that prison. you aren't taking into account that you might be holding that random "monster" person from prison up against a SMART, LUCKY, SOCIALLY ACCEPTED "monster" person from the outside world, with no ability to reproduce...Cardinal Mahoney from the Los Angeles Dicoese springs to mind.[:'(]

CuriousLord -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:46:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: however I do acknowledge that a random person drawn from a pool of prison inmates is, according to the observations I've made in this life, more likely to be a monster than someone outside of that prison. you aren't taking into account that you might be holding that random "monster" person from prison up against a SMART, LUCKY, SOCIALLY ACCEPTED "monster" person from the outside world, with no ability to reproduce...Cardinal Mahoney from the Los Angeles Dicoese springs to mind.[:'(] Heh. That's what I mean by "more likely to be". Plenty of monsters in and outside of prison. :P

KRANWEST -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:46:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: christine1 i don't know why my hard earned tax dollars should go to support someone who can't abide by the laws. I feel the same way about my tax dollars going towards oil-wars in the Middle East, but I never quite possessed the balls of a Thoreau or Willie Nelson.

camille65 -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 4:55:47 PM)
I read the article a few days ago but I don't want to read the thread, I know there is a lot of anger and emotion. IMO damn right a woman in prison can/should go have her pregnancy terminated if she needs/wants to. She should be forced to give birth and hand her baby over? Nope.Just because someone is in jail, they should not be forced to give birth. Some pregnancies result while incarcerated. Some before. Either way the mother of the child will have to hand that child over, which IMO negates her reason for giving birth unless she had previously had the mind set of adoption over abortion. There. That is how I feel about it, and I will gladly pay my taxes towards it.One thought.. do they have access to birth control while in prison? Since sex is available, then the means to protect oneself ought to be there too but I have no idea.

Zensee -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 5:33:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CuriousLord quote: ORIGINAL: Zensee First of all, there is NO SUCH WORD AS PREJUSTICE. If you must subject us to your semantic antics then at least have the courtesy to misuse real words. You really think I haven't noticed how it's spelt? Have you stopped to consider for a moment why I might spell it like that? Or are you under some kind of elementary assumption that words have to be official to be used? PS.. ..aren't you the one bringing up semantics..? I was citing statistical supports and all, but.. well.. what is it with you and semantics, anyhow? Since you have not defined this wonderful (but as yet unofficial) new word we (each reader) must draw our own conclusions and it seems to me that when speakers may coin words at will and listeners may interpret them with even greater liberty, the communicative function of language is pretty much, you know, fucked. As far as "semantic antics" go, this coinage is merely your most egregious in this thread. With the exception of lifestyle terms or new technical terms, I expect to find most words in a dictionary. That is considered a standard even for word games like Scrabble or in spelling bees. I don't think this is a fascistic expectation on my part. But let's assume you have license to coin words and oblige me to use them. What might I deduce about your intentions for the word prejustice? (BTW - I was well aware you had not merely misspelled the word, please give me a little credit.) This new word obviously intends to be a new shading of it's ancestor, prejudice, since it is being used in the same context. The definition I derive; *prejustice / noun (from latin justitia* or justus)** - an improved form of prejudice where the bigot is clearly and demonstrably right about his broad generalisations or groundless assumptions, based on race, ethnicity, religion or other arbitrary category. Perhaps the official dictionary definition will eventually disagree with me. Z.

CuriousLord -> RE: Missouri must allow inmates abortions (1/23/2008 5:37:17 PM)
I think that, in my time here, I've spent somewhere between twenty and fourty posts explaining the English language to you. Kinda bored of it, Zensee. And I'd to avoid dignifying the bickering quality of the post. Peace 'n such.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125