[Zarax]

"Oh, and I highly doubt that the EU will ever obtain the same status as the United States. God forbid that ever happen."

Tell me when some god forbade EU to became a world superpower and show me where...
I won't be rude but i want to remember you that if the US are a superpower today is also thanks to the toil and ingenuity of many europeans.
An enlarged EU, with the resources coming from Russia and north african countries can very well be a world class superpower.

And about abortion: banning it won't solve the problem, it will just make it harder and more risky for mother's life. People would go to illegal ways and still do it.
If you want to reduce abortion you have to make adopting children MUCH easier and allow for much better support for "orphan" (might be an unadequate word) children.
However, this would require public spending and a basic welfare support that right parties would never allow.

[Goober5000]

Wow, well said, Mongoose.

[Mr. Vega]

Mr. Vega: I am opposed to artificial contraception, so yes, I think it is a shame when couples decide to not have children.

Overpopulation! Famine! Disease! W00T!

Drop the birth rate to zero and there wouldn't be hearing about people dying by the thousands in countries like Ethiopia.

Personally I'm all for dropping the population to 2 or 3 billion until we begin space colonization.

"Oh, and I highly doubt that the EU will ever obtain the same status as the United States. God forbid that ever happen."

If that happens it will be because they got their act together, in which case I welcome them. The EU is far more culturally suitable to be a superpower than the US.

[Gloriano]

Originally posted by Black Wolf
I voted vegetable because I am a potato. Mmmmm.

[moddy]

Originally posted by Mr. Vega

If that happens it will be because they got their act together, in which case I welcome them. The EU is far more culturally suitable to be a superpower than the US.

I don't think, we (europeans) are really more suitable to be a superpower than the US
The US has at least not a history of twisted military struggles, political wars (even World Wars !!!) and such. They only had the secession war and that ended in an early stage of development and even today many US citizen want a less global state and more federal rights for the states...

So, it is very unlikely that the EU will be similar to the United States without disregarding civil liberties

So, we are not really culturally more suitable, but we are on a philosophic basis more likely to succeed becoming a superpower, since we have enough socialist elements to do so

[Mr. Vega]

Originally posted by moddy


I don't think, we (europeans) are really more suitable to be a superpower than the US
The US has at least not a history of twisted military struggles, political wars (even World Wars !!!) and such. They only had the secession war and that ended in an early stage of development and even today many US citizen want a less global state and more federal rights for the states...

That's my point. Europe is very heterogenous culturally and thus it has much more experience in cross-culture communication than the still-has-some-isolationalist-tendencies US.

[Genryu]

Plus, moddy, I'd say that it's because of these wars that we're more suited. For exemple, many UE countries made the same mistake that the US is making with Irak, : France with Algeria, England with India. That is, trying to 'free' a country that never asked for us.
Due to the fact that we've got more of an history than the US, and that, despite inherent stupidity by most of the politics in the world, people can learn from this history, I do think that UE in general would be suited to be a superpower. And believe me, I don't want to wait for China to develop enough to be a superpower. I've been there, and to think of the place as a superpower scares me like you wouldn't believe:shaking:
But then, that's only the opinion of a 'cheese-eating-surrendering-monkey'

[Zarax]

China is a superpower...
They got atomic weapons, can kick pretty much any near nation butt (even russian one) and not even bush would dare to try invading it...
If you don't believe me try looking where many things you buy are made, and take a look at their economy figures...

[Deepblue]

China could win a ground war, but never an air\naval war. (against the US)

Period.

[Genryu]

Good point Zarax.
*yawn*
Too tired to argue the point now, but i'll try to find exemple of what i said later.

[Kazan]

Mongoose

Kazan: Abortion isn't just an issue of the mother.

no **** sherlock holmes - however it is HER body

Millions of people from my generation have been killed because of it.

Incorrect for reasons you are incapable of comprehending

I could have lost best friends, co-workers, and even my future wife because of abortion.

*Yawn* appeal to emotion, patent logical fallacy

It really does affect society as a whole and is much more than a personal "choice."

Except in a good way, despite your assertions to the contrary

Abortion truly is killing our future,

No, abortion would be killing our future of our birthrate declined because it legalizing it -- hint: it didn't decline

removing the potential for human growth that all of those lives represent.

quality over quantity

By your description, a fetus is something akin to a tumor, dependent on its host for nourishment.

It is

I hope I speak for most people when I say that this is far from the truth.

Not biologically speaking

You keep making reference to "mother's health," but very few abortions are performed for that reason.

Mental and physical health - and if you cannot afford a child you doom them to a sad life, better to safe them from that cruelty


BTW: brining a child into the world who is mentally, or physically deformed is an act of unconsciousable cruelty and selfishness

"Health," as stated in Roe v. Wade, has come to mean such things as emotional well-being or lack of mental stress.

Roe V Wade didn't make that definition -- DOCTORS DID

For the most part, abortion has nothing to do with physical well-being and everything to do with convenience.

You are truely ignorant of reality

[Ghostavo]

United Europe = Modern Roman Empire

[Kazan]

Originally posted by Mr. Vega


Then at what point does the fetus become more than that? When it's born? When the brain develops (which is well before birth)?

'Date of Viability' ie when it becomes capable of living outside it's mothers body without the help of medical science

[Mongoose]

Kazan, I'm not going to even bother replying to the assertions in your last post.  It sickens me to think that people like you exist.  "Quality over quantity"?  Good God, who died and appointed you supreme overlord?  And how is millions of deaths due to abortion a "logical fallacy" or "incorrect for reasons beyond my comprehension"?  Do these "tumors" walk the Earth today?  No, they don't.  Obviously, they were never born.  Think about how many abortions are performed each year.  If they were not performed, there would be that many new births each year.  But there must be some other mitigating factor "beyond my comprehension" that renders this statistic meaningless.  Please, enlighten this ignorant peon .

[Ghostavo]

Mongoose, if two people don't have a child, even if they can, aren't they too "killing" a potencial child, adult, etc...? I don't have fixed views about abortion, but such reasoning I find to be... well... flawed.

Kazan, try to be less agressive. You are making a fallacy yourself.

[moddy]

You are shooting over the target, because first of all, with every time a fertile cell or a sperium dies, the possibility of new life dies.

Second, it is a point to argue about since what time the fetus can really be called a human being, but who are you (I suspect that you are not a girl ?!) to say when it is.

Third, I think that an unborn child is only a human in potentia, while the mother is already an existing human being, so her well-being is of more importance than the child. She can decide what happens with that life, because she will have the trouble and reputation for the child.

As you put it, the legalization of abortion would result into a drastoc decrease of birth rate. I don't think this will be the result, because you are doing the "Green"-reasoning, which means you use fears to validate your argument. And you consider women to be stupid and amoral, don't you?
Otherwise you would have to acknowledge that some other humans might come to the same conclusion that this life is a beautiful thing even though it will be hard to raise and she will abstain from abortion. Still the right to abortion should always be protected.

And Mongoose, please point me to a statistic that shows the numbers you are claiming to know?

-----

To the EU thingy:

Well, yes, we had our time on imperialism, but still, we have a history of blood-shed between France, Germany, GB, Spain, Italy and Poland which isn't easily forgotten and which will always set us apart from each other. A supra-nation like the US is very unlikely, still the EU can be a military super-power in the future, but this wouldn't be anything like the US.

First, the EU-forces would be slower to deploy, because of struggles in command-chain and the still nationalistic tendencies in the bigger nations (Spain, Italy, GB, Germany and France)...
If you ever met a French, you will probably know

It think we can assume that the EU can merge to something like the Holy Roman Empire (which was the prelude to Germany), but it would be hard to go further, because we don't have many common cultural traits.
(different languages, different habits and different philosophies, although it is called western-culture it has a lot of diversity)

[Kazan]

Originally posted by Mongoose
Kazan, I'm not going to even bother replying to the assertions in your last post.

because you're completely and totally incapable of doing so

Originally posted by Mongoose
It sickens me to think that people like you exist.

Look in the mirror, you'll find someone 1,000,0000 times worse staring back at you

Originally posted by Mongoose
"Quality over quantity"?

With less overcrowding individuals have a higher quality of life, and are capalle of achieving greater educational levels with less hardships

Originally posted by Mongoose
Good God, who died and appointed you supreme overlord?

Way to inject useless, irrelevant exclaimations of your lack of comprehension

Originally posted by Mongoose
And how is millions of deaths due to abortion a "logical fallacy" or "incorrect for reasons beyond my comprehension"?

Because you are incapable of attaining the third psychological level of moral --- as evidenced by your own lack of understanding

an unborn entity, dependant on it's mothers body has any potential rights it has trumped by it's mothers rights

you do not have the right to be born, but once you are born you have rights

Originally posted by Mongoose
Do these "tumors" walk the Earth today?

way to pick out an irrevelant word from a weak analogy and attempt to make an argument out of it -- that's called the Straw Man Fallacy

Originally posted by Mongoose
No, they don't.  Obviously, they were never born.

You were born, I was born -- many other people were born -- the individual matters nothing until they make themselves worth something.   You are only making yourself a detriment to our society -- i know you are fully capable of climing out of the cesspool of ignorance you have dove into, but whether you have the will to do so is entirely up to you.

Originally posted by Mongoose
Think about how many abortions are performed each year.  

Which is completely and totally insignificant next to the number of naturally occuring abortions -- and is furthermore completely irrelevant to this discussion -- numerics matter nothing

Originally posted by Mongoose
If they were not performed, there would be that many new births each year.

Among the most impoversished section of humanity causing a surge in poverty -- impoverished people tend not to get a sufficient education -- insufficiently educated people flooding into society cause a massive increase in the crime rate, the wellfare rolls, etc.

It is the mature decision for these mothers not to bring a child into the world to be faced with a life of subsistence living and hardship.  It is merciful and responsible.

Originally posted by Mongoose
But there must be some other mitigating factor "beyond my comprehension" that renders this statistic meaningless.  Please, enlighten this ignorant peon .

What you cannot comprehend is the third psychological level of moral cognition - known as the post-conventional stage.   The average adult human being never attains such refinement in their psychological developement, however the line drawn between those  that do and do not is absolutely clear and unwavering.    

Thos stuck in the mire of the second level - the convnetional stage -- stick to moralities that are authoritarian in nature "it is this way because someone said so", typically that someone is a god or godess or other irrelevant nonexisting entity which they believe in because it is emotionally appealing and they do not have the intellectual maturity to realize that reality is not subjec to the emotions of the individual.  Authoritarianism is repressive by nature and cares nothing for reality.    

Thus your inability to comprehend the reason is wholly psychological and completely evidence to anyone who knows this about human psychology.

I know you're capapble of maturation, whether you're willing is a different story.

Ghostavo: name it and point it out

[Mr. Vega]

Originally posted by Kazan
'Date of Viability' ie when it becomes capable of living outside it's mothers body without the help of medical science

Ok, but from an emotional standpoint the fetus posseses brain function (and thus it can feel) before that, even if it isn't conscious, so the distinction between it and a newborn baby or a child vanishes (again, on a strictly emotional standpoint, but emotions are why we care about living things).

I have been pro-choice but I'm starting to have second thoughts. If you can convince me, great. If not, I keep thinking.

[Mongoose]

Kazan, if "maturation" means becoming something like you, I'll wholeheartedly stay immature.  At least I still have a shred of decency and morality.  And yes, I am a Catholic.  Personally, I think atheists are the ones who have not obtained the highest level of moral order, since they seem to willfully blind themselves to fully opening up and seeing the true wonder that this universe is.  By the way, psychological quackery and techno-babble doesn't impress anyone; most of us have realized that you can't simply explain away some things in this world.

What's more, you keep avoiding one of my primary assertions:  How is killing a preborn child "merciful"?  If that fetus had a voice, would it agree?  It is very disturbing that you feel that no life is better than a life with hardships.  Again, I say that many have risen up out of impoverished, difficult lifestyles and have made a difference in this world.  By your logic, however, these people would never have existed.  And just explain it to be clearly:  how do people not have the right to be born?  The most basic and fundamental of human rights is the right to live, without oppression and fear of death.  Read the Declaration of Independence, unless you consider it beneath you.  As I said before, that unborn "lump of cells" has every right to exist that its mother has.  After all, the mother helped bring it into existence; she therefore has the responsibility to care for it.  And, as I keep repeating ad nauseam, all of us were once embryos.  This is not an irrelevant fallacy but a cold fact.  The fact that none of us would even be here if our mothers had chosen abortion is a solid truth.  Could you try giving an intelligent response to it, instead of continuing in your own sense of "higher being"?

I'm just thankful that I've never met someone like you, who seems so self-absorbed in their own psychological "superiority."  And yet I'm "1,000,000 times worse" for wanting to save the lives of unborn children.  Yeah, I see the psychological rationale in that.  If that's what true advancement feels like, I'll continue to be ignorant and blissful, thank you very much.

[Ghostavo]

Even in your previous post...

Look in the mirror, you'll find someone 1,000,0000 times worse staring back at you

Although he didn't do much better...

Try to... ignore the person at hand and focus on their thoughts and opinions.

And about this...third psychological level of moral cognition... does this have something to do with Piaget?

P.S.
Just saw Mongoose's post, and something tells me this thread is gonna get pushed towards euthanasia