You must log in or # to comment.
As a libertarian I would advocate selling liquor to all babies who want it.
Man, I miss the “As a libertarian” guy on reddit. Dude would start every comment like that before saying something insane.
Hilariously redundant.
Praximis_Prime_ARG iirc, the best part was that they’d include a link to a libertarian actually saying that exact thing.
Yeah!!! That’s the guy. He’s used multiple accounts over the years. Dude was funny as hell.
Omg you guys are taking me back. Fucking loved this guy. Best bit ever
As a libertarian, I’d also still comment on Reddit.
As a libertarian I would advocate selling liquor to all babies who can afford it.
FTFY
If they want it enough they’ll get a good enough job to afford it so that’s redundant.
As a 19th century physician I can only agree, and suggest pairing it with a spoonful of soothing cocaine syrup for maximum efficacy.
Liar, you’re not a 19th century quack. Mine prescribed tincture of laudanum
Nonsense! Can you look at how that kid’s bouncing off the walls and honestly tell me that cocaine isn’t a healthy and energizing remedy?
(Yeah, I was trying to think of morphine but wrote cocaine because brain = dumb)
I mean they’re two lines away from each other (with cannabis in the middle) for doc duckerson’s miracle cough expressant, it’s an easy mistake to make
Don’t waste my fucking time, baby beer.
As a libertarian I would advocate selling
liquor to allbabies who want itAs a progressive with libertarian tendencies, I would add that alcoholic babies should also have access to rehab if they want it.
Don’t be ridiculous. Babies can’t consent to treatment!
should also have access to rehab if they
want it.can afford it.Ftfy what kind of libertarian did you say you were
The kind that cares about individual liberty, not the “bUt WhO’s GoInG tO pAy FoR iT” kind.
It’s got what babies crave
Objection! They believe that life starts at conception, but not that aging starts at conception! This is why people are not considered 9 months old at birth!
Conceptually, people can also be frozen at any age, which “pauses” or slows their aging (see: Captain America, Han Solo, Dave Lister)
that’s a good steelman. but this is why I think the better argument is Hasan’s usual hypothetical about this: there’s a fire in a hospital and you can only get into one of the rooms in time to save some people. do you go into NICU where you could save a couple babies or to the IVF section where you can save thousands of embryos?
This hypothetical is great as it forces them to admit born babies are more important than embryos, but it doesn’t prove embryos are not alive
it’s not about them being alive; embryos are alive, that’s not even disputed. it’s about whether the life is a person. if you think the babies are more important you’re already conceding the embryos don’t have personhood, or at least not to the degree that babies do.
either case they shouldn’t have the same rights as actual people. if you think an embryo is a person then you can’t choose the couple babies over so many people. or if you do it’s still going to be fun hearing you try to justify it without conceding.
Ooh yeah makes sense
In a fertility crisis with aging population (e.g as bad as upside down population pyramid) people might save the hundreds of embryos
Edit: I didn’t notice that you said babies the first time i read that tbh. Lol.
Yes even a eugenicist would say the babies are more valuable than embryos because you can see that they’re healthy, whereas with an embryo it’s unproven.
Many would also prioritise them because they have reached consciousness so there is “suffering cost” at play.
Doesn’t prove that embryos aren’t life though, as another commenter said.
theres no fertility crisis, its an economic crisis. greedy rich people are ruining the world and making existing unaffordable so no one can afford to have babies.
Like I tell a friend of mine who was premature: Do you want to celebrate your birthday today or in a couple months when you should have been born?
Didn’t give them any ideas lol
Your age is defined by your birth Thus your age before birth is negative. And an estimate. Quod erat ipsum dolor et maximus.
I struggle to parse the Latin. My first reading would be “That’s why it was pain and the greatest…”
What does the maximus refer to? Is it an attribute to dolor, and if so, what does the et refer to?
Or am I supposed to read it as an implied duplication or retroactive emphasis? “pain, the greatest (pain) even.”
Or is there something I’m missing between morning brain and rusted skills?
Or is it not actually sound Latin and I’m trying way harder than I should?
Let me help you a bit since you got morning brain
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Morbi ac ultricies ipsum, nec fermentum quam. Ut gravida nisl purus, et interdum risus porttitor a. Aenean euismod tellus ante, viverra fermentum tortor commodo a. Praesent lacus mauris, efficitur eget odio a, mollis fringilla eros. Orci varius natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Duis bibendum euismod mi id maximus. Vestibulum lacinia tincidunt sapien vel lobortis. Curabitur consectetur iaculis iaculis. Mauris tincidunt elit ac quam finibus, id dapibus leo sodales.
I suspected that, but couldn’t find the specific bit in the Lorem Ipsum text, nor in the original its fragments were lifted from, so I assumed it was a genuine quote or self-constructed sentence.
I’ll file it under “went way too hard on a throwaway blurb” then, thanks.
Conceptually
icwydt
Freezing an adult would be murder.
not if they can be un-frozen
Right, that’s not a thing. So murder.
“Conceptually” makes a lot of heavy lifting, along with the fictional examples like Captain America
Is Dave Lister an actual real life person? Or is it a fictional character like the others? Otherwise, they can’t be taken as examples. That’s like saying that oh yeah, a toddler can totally lift a car no problem… see Superman.
He’s an absolute smeghead.
You can’t talk about Cloister that way!
Bro don’t get mad it’s just fun.
Pretty sure cryogenic freezing will exist one day - scientists seem very bullish on it.
If there was a fire and you only had time to save one of these, which would you save: a one-month old baby, or a flask containing 100 frozen human embryos.
Is the fire making me uncomfortable? I might just sit there saying “This is fine” until it’s too late to save either.
Or scout outside to make sure it is really safer than inside before discovering it’s too late to save either.
Or maybe flip the lever between the front wheels and back wheels going over the switch for some multi-track drifting–ah nm, that doesn’t work for this version of the trolly problem.
I respect your rejection of the premise.
For real though, I’d save a baby (or adult) seal before the 100 human embryos.
Can I just leave them both?
I don’t have kids and do you have any idea what one of those smoothies costs. I choose 100 horse sized human embryos
Who leaves their infant in an IVF clinic? If I walk out with the flask they’ll suspect me of arson. If I walk out with the baby, who knows. Call 911 and let the fire fighters save the rest of the buildings occupants.
If one one-month old baby and 100 embryos spontaneously combusted I’d assume the world was ending in flames. In that case, where humanity is on the line, I would save the embryos because we need to repopulate the earth after the fires extinguished. I’d probably trip though with the case and break all the embryos.
If we were to actually treat this as a moral dilemma, without external factors or trying to challenge the premise:
One of these is sentient. The other hundred are not. Much as my heart might bleed for the potential humans that will never be realised, my priority would be the living, feeling, crying one.
Actually, the crying might be an issue. I tend to be sensitive to some sounds, and particularly in a stressful situation, a wailing baby might be a detriment…
Still, I’m susceptible to emotional bias. I don’t like babies or small children, but I won’t pretend to be immune to the kind of protective reflex they tend to evoke in (sane) adults. So on top of the above reasoning, I would most likely save the baby, headache be damned.
And then I’d go and find whoever set up this cruel choice in the first place. Why would I be in such a clinic in the first place? Why would it catch on fire? Why does God hate us?
Why would I be in such a clinic in the first place?
You are visiting your partner at the their place of work, which happens to be a lab, with your newborn baby and an accident happens and a fire breaks out. /s
I believe I would save the baby simply because I can emotionally relate to it and not a flask with some frozen content.
their place of work
Home?
which happens to be a lab
I mean, it does house all my code experiments, so I guess it’s a lab. The sort filled with abominations begging to be relieved. “Delete me!” I can sometimes hear them cry if I open
~/Projectsand linger a little too long.with your newborn baby and an accident happens
If she carries a baby to term, there have been at least two accidents already, what’s one more?
Though I’d probably be saving her instead. Odds are the baby could crawl faster than her after pregnancy is done with her.
Shame about my PC though. I’ve got all the important stuff backed up, but there’s a few code projects I’ve been meaning to get back to some time…
I believe I would save the baby simply because I can emotionally relate to it and not a flask with some frozen content.
Yeah, I think that’s on the mark. I can’t in all honesty say I’d stand there rationally weighing the ethics of the situation and morality of the choices. The baby feels “more human” than the jar. It also probably has better chances of surviving the lack of refrigeration.
puts on devil’s advocate hat
No, because liquor laws don’t care about when life began. They care about date of birth. Life beginning at conception does not erase date of birth as a valid type of data.
removes hat because I’m not pro-life
We should not rely on “pro-lifers are too stupid to understand how to refute this” when deciding our views.
Can I have your hat? I eat them, they’re an acquired taste. Yours seems interdasting to my entrenchables
If you get a pro lifer giving this excuse comment about how “When life starts and age start are different.”. Then flip it into a gender vs sex being different and see where they go.
Will I sell booze to this baby? Absolutely.
Will I extend this baby booze on credit? Not in this economy.
I dunno, how big a baby?
Elon Musk sized.
I’ll fight the ducks please. That’s one brobdignagian baby.
I read that cut-off sign as saying
“YAY!
IT’S
TRANSFEM”
and all I could think was “imagine knowing that early AND having supportive parents”
The baby’s 30 so it’s not that early /s
What I really want to know: Is Abortionado pronounced like afficianado, and they are an expert in abortions? Or is it like Tornado, and they are a tornado of abortions?
I assumed the first one before reading your comment, probably because I am too feeble to imagine an abortion tornado on my own.
That’s okay I can help you imagine.
It’s very gooey.
Like I always say, abortionado, abortionado 🤷♂️
Well, for starters, I don’t think DOS would handle the amount of memory modern PCs use…
Isnt it called birth day for a reason?
whoosh, huh
What if baby was born in Asia?
They…have days over there too.
Asian countries will count the year a child was in the womb as part of their lifespan. A person who is 30 in America is 31 in China, for example.
But it’s also like year 12,000 or something in China, so they’re all much older in general and why they only have one babby now, because there country is so old.
That still wont make the baby in the post 30 years old because embryos arent frozen in the womb.
Has he been frozen inside a womb this whole time?
They have Jello shots like that now, with nitrogen n stuff
I’m not sure, sometimes they develop embryos to a certain stage and freeze them to implant later, sometimes it’s just the eggs.
No, how can the sun set on the land of the rising sun, China?
As long as the ID looks legit and the baby isn’t already visibly drunk, I’ve done my job.
Don’t tell me what to let my baby do. Now excuse me but I’m taking little Babythan to the dog fights.
at least homie’s not knee deep in debts at 30. practically dodged a bullet
How is this confusing anyone? We count age from date of birth. Anything that happens before that has nothing to do with your legal age any more than whether you were carried for more or less than 9 months. This would only become interesting if someone froze a toddler for 30 years or something.
Yeah, seems like this might be a bad faith argument intended to cause more division. It’s a flimsy argument that people who like the point it’s trying to make might ignore that big thing that makes it fall apart while those against it won’t ignore that and will see the other side ignoring it as dishonest.
Jokes on you: the kid can’t pay for liquor!
But you can sell the kid for liquor, therefore if you have kids you always have booze!
He can buy it, but maybe he should wait to drink it.
My rule is, if you are dead when brain dead with a beating heart then you are not alive until you are brain alive with a beating heart. Life starts with brain activity, around 16 weeks.
More like 32 years.
Never for some…
Waiting to be alive any day now
Oh, you mean I get to have some brain activity soon?
I go by the Jewish rule.
In the Old Testament, God breathed life into Adam, and thus he became a living soul.
So until the infant takes its first breath, it’s not an actual soul. It is a lump of tissue with potential.
I hope that there are as few abortions as are absolutely necessary, but I will not begrudge a single person their choice to have an abortion regardless of the stage of the pregnancy at which it happens.
it’s not an actual soul. It is a lump of tissue with potential.
It’s part of the mother according to Jewish law.
Is this one reason why Jewish doctors were historically the only ones okay with performing abortions?
Yes but abortion procedures are not unique to Jewish doctors. Egypt, China, India, Rome; all of them practiced abortions both medically induced and surgical.
Respiration still occurs through the umbilical. You shouldn’t use sky fairy tales for scientific bases.
Internal (diffusion of gases from the bloodstream into the tissues of the body) respiration =/=external respiration (diffusion of atmospheric gases through the alveolus into the bloodstream)
And respiration is only half of breathing, the other half being ventilation.
Don’t use science to put someone down when you don’t even understand what you’re talking about
Removed by mod
It would seem turning the other cheek isn’t part of your religion.
Removed by mod
Nah man, religion kills people, still, today. It deserves a bit of derision.
But once again, the point was not religion, it was a stance on abortion.
Kind of frustrating that the moderator I’m assuming removed my remarks, but still.
Logic is typically lost on the feeble-minded. I’m aware you are around us. Believe what you want, but it should play zero role in public policy.
Also, public policy should ensure nobody goes hungry.
Alas, that’s not the legal definition. Another reminder that legal is not necessarily ethical, and vice-versa.
Bible says life begins at first breath.
Trees are alive without a brain. I think what you mean here is sentience
Nathan, is that you?
PS: To anyone who hasn’t yet, I can highly recommend watching the TV show Nathan for you
I am pro-choice & think that life begins at birth, but this argument is fallacious. Even if you believed that life begins at conception, you could coherently claim that this baby is physically still a baby and cannot safely take alcohol
Safely? No.
Legally though?
And what about hilariously? When did we start leaving that one out?
Did you go to little Bobby Two Pints’s birthday party? The little shit falls asleep after two pints of whiskey. Wimp.
Same thing. You don’t see
nazispro-lifers saying their newborn child is 9 months oldAge for legal purposes generally begins counting at birth, even for people whose cells have been active, and whose organs and such have been growing and maturing for longer than that.
If you could put a baby into suspended animation of some form, and return it to usual biological function 25 years later, there might be a real legal issue. As it stands, I don’t see it.
When someone asks me my age and I feel like being a smartass, I tell them I’m “younger than my tongue, older than teeth”. Sometimes I sub “asshole” for “tongue” depending on my mood
