|Funny Pictures||Funny Videos|
|Funny GIFs||YouTube Videos|
Rank #9168 on CommentsLevel 126 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry
OnlineSend mail to omnomonom Block omnomonom Invite omnomonom to be your friend
- Views: 60240utoob(one)
2715 102 Total: +2613
- Views: 1363Godzilla
15 1 Total: +14
- Views: 2674bj(1)
16 6 Total: +10
- Views: 1096neckbears flock to scent of fedora
8 5 Total: +3
- Views: 609Fucking Canada
9 8 Total: +1
- Views: 744IQ - 1
1 6 Total: -5
latest user's comments
|#11 - First content I've laughed at today, this was hilarious||03/23/2014 on Okay||0|
|#8017 - Comment deleted||03/22/2014 on Hottest Girls on FJ Submission||0|
|#7968 - Comment deleted||03/22/2014 on Hottest Girls on FJ Submission||0|
|#2507 - rood||03/21/2014 on Hottest Girls on FJ Submission||0|
|#440 - why not [+] (10 new replies)||03/21/2014 on Hottest Girls on FJ Submission||+115|
#707 - anonymous (03/21/2014) [-]
#643 - anonymous (03/21/2014) [-]
Dat username pretty much sums up my thoughts.
|#179 - Serbia gets mentioned by random comment, swell with pride [+] (1 new reply)||03/18/2014 on Facts||0|
|#124 - Animals that we hunt/eat = not sentient but mass of barely sp… [+] (6 new replies)||03/13/2014 on (untitled)||+1|
#278 - malific (03/14/2014) [-]
Someone definitely DID NOT read my entire comment.
Like the second to last line where I said: "For that matter newborn humans aren't sentient is it okay to kill them if they aren't wanted? It should be since you only care about sentience."
I'm not arguing that fetuses are sentient, i'm arguing that 1) Sentience should not be a basis for deciding whether or not to kill things, and 2) very few animals are actually sentient.
#327 - kievaughnb (03/14/2014) [-]
Newborn babies are sentient, though. They can experience some of the emotions and all of the senses that adults experience. The real argument here is when they stop being a mass of cells in the uterus doing nothing and start being sentient.
I can see that you're very passionate, and there's good reason for that. I'm not attempting to belittle your views. I just would like a bit of insight on your opinions.
My question is: what do you think should be the basis for what should and shouldn't be killed? It seems like you have a lot of empathy, but that empathy only extends to humans and possibly pets. Psychologically, that's typical of humans, so there's nothing wrong with that. I'm just observing.
#349 - malific (03/14/2014) [-]
I draw the line at conception, for human life.
The reason why.
For a human of any age, they will live a long life, full of experiences, unless some outside force (disease, accident, or intentional harm) interrupts and ends that life. It WILL happen. That life WILL be lived.
This applies to you, to me, to every life in every form on the planet.
This also applies to the single cell inside of a female that has divided into 2 cells. Without outside influence those cells WILL live a long life full of experiences.
As to the animal side of it, I've already stated I value human life over other animals, and i see this as a natural reaction being a human. I don't LIKE that fact that animals are butchered enmass to support us and our lifestyles, but I also know it's a necessity of our existence. The human population has become too large to support it with a simple hunter gatherer system back in the early days of civilization.
So while I don't like the fact that cows are herded and butchered in inhumane conditions, I realize that inhumane applies is used for terms of being cruel, and the conditions bovines are kept in is not intentionally so but more necessarily so. I see it as inhumane as a pride of lions taking down a giraffe by corralling it, and slowly wounding, bleeding, exhausting it to death. A very tortuous and inhumane situation.
As to pets, That's a more difficult concept. Pets seem more along the lines of family. And I find myself unable to decide which life I would value more, that of my pet or a stranger. I believe that if another human was attempting to kill my pet I would most likely cause them very grievous harm but I doubt I would kill them. Of course that is something I am unsure of what exactly I would do, having never encountered it.
#363 - malific (03/16/2014) [-]
Contraception is fine to me since it prevents conception.
From there I'm sure your next question would be, something along the line of contraception being an outside influence that prevents the life. Going that route you would have to believe that every single sperm is a life. This is actually where the Bible comes into play also with it's rule of no masturbation, since spilling seed outside of the womb is considered a loss of life.
I look at it more pragmatically as survival of the fittest on this end. 1 of millions MIGHT make it to the egg, the rest die. So from here I can't apply the thinking that it WILL be a life. It Might be, versus very astronomical odds, but most likely it will simply be bodily fluid, like blood, and thus does not warrant the same level of protection as a fertilized egg.
Overpopulation isn't a factor to abortion in my mind and should be dealt with via abstinence and/or contraception if it's an issue.
#364 - kievaughnb (03/16/2014) [-]
That wasn't my next question, actually, but I thank you for the thorough answer. I look at it slightly differently, but I'm generally of the same opinion when it comes to sperm; I think that sperm doesn't have the potential to be a person before it actually makes it to the ovum.
|#40 - I can't so many evens that I now must odd||03/13/2014 on Caesar Salad||0|
|#1 - Comment deleted||03/12/2014 on Tumbler n'shit yo||0|
|#36 - What's missing? a kickflip||03/11/2014 on whats missing?||0|