See title.
08-03-2014 12:04 AM
#1
| |
I work as an escort at an abortion clinic, ask questions or troll as you see fit.See title. | |
| |
08-03-2014 12:24 AM
#2
| |
Do you have to give the clinic a percentage? | |
| |
08-03-2014 12:37 AM
#3
| |
|
That's funny because I escort as an abortion at a work clinic |
08-03-2014 12:56 AM
#4
| |
Pot $31 | |
| |
08-03-2014 04:53 AM
#5
| |
|
abort it!!! seriously , you are risking rilla's wrath posting poker hands in the commune . |
08-03-2014 07:11 AM
#6
| |
08-03-2014 07:12 AM
#7
| |
also on a serious note | |
08-03-2014 08:03 AM
#8
| |
| |
08-03-2014 09:51 AM
#9
| |
| |
08-03-2014 09:57 AM
#10
| |
Man for several beats after I read this I thought that you were a gigolo who fucks depressed post-abortion women to make them feel better. | |
08-03-2014 10:49 AM
#11
| |
|
How do you get past wanting to attack the vermin who stand outside these places and abuse young women who are probably in one of the hardest times of their lives? |
08-03-2014 12:19 PM
#12
| |
08-03-2014 12:29 PM
#13
| |
| |
08-03-2014 12:29 PM
#14
| |
Have you ever fucked any of your clients? | |
| |
08-03-2014 12:30 PM
#15
| |
Ok I didnt know this was actually a thing... | |
| |
08-03-2014 02:08 PM
#16
| |
| |
08-03-2014 02:10 PM
#17
| |
| |
08-03-2014 03:12 PM
#18
| |
08-03-2014 03:35 PM
#19
| |
Last edited by spoonitnow; 08-03-2014 at 03:47 PM. | |
08-03-2014 03:58 PM
#20
| |
Sorry for not clarifying. Spoon is right that I do escort women past prolife protesters that stand outside of the clinic. The vast majority of protesters are older white men and most of them have signs that range in offensiveness. I've gotten in shouting matches several times but have gotten better at controlling my anger and better understand that nothing I say is going to change their mind. | |
08-03-2014 05:17 PM
#21
| |
| |
08-03-2014 05:20 PM
#22
| |
h5 goodguy kingnat. | |
| |
08-03-2014 06:13 PM
#23
| |
I've only ever seen them yell. There are cameras for surveillance so if anyone was ever physically assaulted they'd be hauled away. Our regular protestors generally know what they can and can't get away with but they need to be reminded about not obstructing the sidewalk occasionally. | |
08-03-2014 06:26 PM
#24
| |
I always enjoy these sort of out-of-the-norm positions. People so often chose which side they feel is right, then adopt the logic tree put forth by the voiced advocates of that side. I am curious about your stance on it being murder though. Is the threshold conception? If so or if not, why is this an appropriate threshold? | |
08-03-2014 08:11 PM
#25
| |
Without derailing the thread into the abortion debate, here's a quick rundown of the logic: | |
| |
08-03-2014 09:16 PM
#26
| |
I've grown a bit weary of the "no-derailing" unwritten rule, esp in a off topic forum. Coherence in discussion is paramount, but nonetheless interesting discussions often start as derails. We could always split the thread, so I guess there's that... | |
08-03-2014 11:26 PM
#27
| |
|
I think the benefit of the concept of murder is in utility, yet the way most consider murder is within a moral framework. A cut and dried definition of murder doesn't exist, and if we're trying to be purely logical about it, we will always let something slip. A utilitarian approach bypasses this because it doesn't intend to be perfect since it attempts to simply be a reflection and interpretation of reality. It allows us to frame some "killing of humans" circumstances within a murder concept, and sometimes not |
08-03-2014 11:39 PM
#28
| |
|
Beyond that, it's hard to find something more ludicrous than to think somebody who has an abortion is a murderer. There's a canyon of differences between somebody who gets an abortion and somebody who deliberately ends the life of a fellow person. Calling abortion murder is vastly overstating what it is and belittles real murder |
08-03-2014 11:59 PM
#29
| |
Yeah, people and their fondness of absolutes is understandable but terribly frustrating. For example, yes, consent is important, but no every drunk girl who has sex was not raped. Yet this sensible assertion suddenly makes you a misogynist, racist, holocaust denier in the eyes of a non-insignificant portion of the population. | |
08-04-2014 12:30 AM
#30
| |
The definition of murder and semantics aside, it's still the premeditated killing of a human being (unless we want to define human beings by how many cells they have). And again, I don't think that the premeditated killing of a human being is necessarily wrong. With that having been said, I am a much more amoral (not to be confused with immoral) person, so this viewpoint isn't for everybody. | |
Last edited by spoonitnow; 08-04-2014 at 12:35 AM. | |
08-04-2014 01:16 AM
#31
| |
|
I think it is important to maintain that the concept of murder applies to people instead of humans. This is because if we don't, we end up calling 1-month old fetuses things that can be murdered. It should be clear that killing a 22-year old person isn't remotely close to a woman getting an abortion. I think the reason why this isn't clear to a lot of people is that it has become commonplace to think of killing humans as murder, when the reality is that murder applies to people, not humans. Remember that "humans" i.e. "homo sapiens" is a very new concept. Abortion wasn't an issue in basically all of human history because they didn't confuse themselves by equating a biological or genetic specification with being a member of a society. |
08-04-2014 01:23 AM
#32
| |
|
That said, it isn't necessarily exactly right to call murder something you do to people instead of humans. Different races used to not be considered people, partly because they weren't considered humans. But also, that specification changed based on social interactions, not a biological discovery of homo sapiens. |
Last edited by wufwugy; 08-04-2014 at 01:26 AM. | |
08-04-2014 01:31 AM
#33
| |
|
How about this: you can't murder a glob of goo and you can't murder something that is essentially your own body. |
08-04-2014 03:28 AM
#34
| |
| |
08-04-2014 04:53 AM
#35
| |
I've always been basically pro-choice, but since I've come to disagree with pro-choice people on almost every other issue (especially economic issues), I've felt the need to re-evaluate how I feel about abortion. I'm still pro-choice I think, but I think when you empathize with the women who get abortions, some curious thoughts emerge: | |
Last edited by Renton; 08-04-2014 at 04:57 AM. | |
08-04-2014 10:22 AM
#36
| |
08-04-2014 10:40 AM
#37
| |
I've thought about this quite a lot actually. There's plenty of time to stand around thinking disturbing thoughts. I think the chances are relatively small as this type of thing doesn't happen as much these days, but I think I'd have to kick my own ass for being a coward if this was the thing that kept me from helping in this small way. | |
08-04-2014 11:23 AM
#38
| |
In my experience, there are very few women who come to get an abortion who have a 100% clear and free conscience as you describe. Most are scared, concerned, the majority are not financially well off to say the least. There's a shitload of misinformation and conflicting ideas surrounding this issue. Abortion is heavily stigmatized and is almost never discussed in the open. People generally tend to have extreme beliefs or don't want to talk about it at all. I think the evidence suggests that women tend not to regret there decision but they also tend to not feel good about it. | |
08-04-2014 11:49 AM
#39
| |
| |
| |
08-04-2014 01:08 PM
#40
| |
I mostly agree with Ong above, but I like to further say that I don't believe that those who feel no remorse for it are pieces of shit either. | |
Last edited by aubreymcfate; 08-04-2014 at 01:18 PM.
| |
08-04-2014 02:47 PM
#41
| |
The shades of gray lie in the very normal reaction of feeling bad about destroying something with the potential to be a human being, and I don't think anything in my post ruled out this possibility. My problem is the logic behind what abortions people condemn and allow is inconsistent, often ridiculously so. | |
08-04-2014 04:19 PM
#42
| |
Renton, the child of incest or rape and the mother of that child have a much higher chance of being absolutely fucked up for life than a woman attending college who had a condom rip on her. Abortion is a tool, and a tool which imposes finality when employed. When a process is irreversible it makes complete sense to be hesitant to use it and weigh all the factors first. The incest and broken condom cases pose the same dilemma, an unwanted pregnancy, but there are myriad differing factors which can dictate how this is best handled. | |
08-04-2014 04:31 PM
#43
| |
Is it even possible for consciousness to develop in the womb...? Don't our minds kind of "turn on" way after we're born? I mean, even killing a live baby is different than killing, say.. a 2 year old or something. | |
| |
08-04-2014 05:17 PM
#44
| |
08-04-2014 05:19 PM
#45
| |
I think the idea of deciding if it's okay to kill something based on whether or not it has consciousness is ridiculous. | |
| |
08-04-2014 06:09 PM
#46
| |
|
Gotta frame it within personhood. I think this seems like such a complicated issue because people frame it through life or consciousness or humanity. I don't think any of those are pertinent because the purpose of the murder concept is how it applies to people, not life or consciousness or humanity |
08-04-2014 07:45 PM
#47
| |
I guess I should clarify that I am referring to the act of killing a person in moral/legal terms. Of course its natural to feel bad about it, but I'm more interested in the reasons why you feel bad. I think that if you get an abortion and you think that abortion = killing a person, that makes you a willing perpetrator of murder from your own point of view. I think this is true even if you think there's a 1% chance you're killing a person. Sort of like how 1% of infinity is still infinity, the risk that you are killing a conscious sentient human being is unacceptable. | |
Last edited by Renton; 08-04-2014 at 07:48 PM. | |
08-04-2014 07:52 PM
#48
| |
Life isn't precious in and of itself but I think we all agree that we would like to live in a world where people can't perform acts of aggression against one another with impunity. The abortion issue is interesting because it questions what a human being is. I find it interesting in particular because it's one of the only issues I've seen that even libertarians are split on, as the right to choose is an issue at the core of liberty, but so is the right not to be murdered. | |
08-04-2014 08:05 PM
#49
| |
I'm not advocating that all unwanted pregnancies be aborted or not, I'm simply stating that all abortion is wrong or none of it is wrong. | |
Last edited by Renton; 08-04-2014 at 08:08 PM. | |
08-04-2014 08:35 PM
#50
| |
I'm not so sure. It is generally seen as more deserving of condemnation to kill something which more closely resembles our understanding of consciousness vs something more alien. So the idea is that consciousness isn't binary, and therefore the closer you are to what we would consider full consciousness the more valuable and worth protecting your life is. Most people wouldn't bat an eyelash at you if you smushed a spider in front of them, but they would go ape-shit (ha) if you curb stomped a baboon. | |
08-04-2014 08:38 PM
#51
| |
In practice, what is the difference? I can go and edit my post so that it more accurately reflects your clarified stance, but I'm not sure what purpose this would serve other than pressing for an answer you don't seem willing to give. | |
08-04-2014 08:56 PM
#52
| |
Sounds like an unusual and interesting job. I wonder if there are many protestors or escorts in the UK? Anyway: | |
08-04-2014 08:56 PM
#53
| |
Why is the 1% infinity? I mean, yes, something is fucked up with a person who "fully" believes they are committing murder, and goes through with it anyways, but someone who is conflicted due to the current state of the issue is not the same as the former example. I mean, I'd venture to say that most women getting abortions are not any where near shallow philosophical depth we are right now. Some do, but calling those who don't, and therefore are conflicted, horrible people is.. I mean.. where are you even going with this? | |
08-04-2014 09:17 PM
#54
| |
|
I think the points boost is making, as well as a lot of the points made by others, intentionally or unintentionally, highlight the need for a utilitarian approach. For example, very few people who support abortions can reasonably feel 100% confident in themselves, but that doesn't mean the other option is they're wrong. |
08-04-2014 09:26 PM
#55
| |
| |
08-04-2014 09:43 PM
#56
| |
08-04-2014 09:49 PM
#57
| |
|
|
08-04-2014 09:49 PM
#58
| |
| |
| |
08-04-2014 09:54 PM
#59
| |
|
Your phrasing tells the story. "Aborted a baby". Could somebody simply not consider a fetus a baby, and thus not be making a hard decision to abort a fetus? |
08-04-2014 10:03 PM
#60
| |
I should've said potential baby. | |
| |
08-04-2014 10:38 PM
#61
| |
The cutoff should be the end of the 18th trimester, as I stated above. | |
| |
08-04-2014 11:31 PM
#62
| |
08-04-2014 11:45 PM
#63
| |
Sometimes I realize that the only thing keeping us as a species from solving the abortion debate is to recognize the plainly obvious fact that the value of life is dynamic. But then I remember that we really are dumb enough to prefer generations of dissimulation about human life: | |
08-05-2014 12:33 AM
#64
| |
The idea would exist, however it would be a peripheral philosophical topic out of the mainstream and it would look much like the discussion we are having here I would like to think(hi five everyone). | |
08-05-2014 01:41 AM
#65
| |
There are 3 branches of Philosophy: what is (Physics/Metaphysics), what we can know about what is (Epistemology), and what is the value of what is (Aesthetics/Ethics). Ethics is simply the inquiry into the value of different actions. If you prefer your steak medium rare and you tell the server you'd like it well done, you have acted unethically. It is clear that your action is of poor value. | |
08-05-2014 02:05 AM
#66
| |
Sentience is an important point of demarcation because at that point a human can *value itself*. In utero, if the mother and father don't give a fuck what happens to this human/fetus/humanoid/ball of cells/I don't give a fuck what you call it, then it is valueless. The second a human is has achieved sentience, its life holds value--if through nothing else--through its own valuation (I couldn't think of anything less relevant to the fetus' value to the world than the fact that some guy in Kansas thinks that Jesus whispers "Abortion is wrong" in his ear every night while he's asleep). | |
08-05-2014 02:36 AM
#67
| |
|
I think I was having trouble explaining my point. I was referring to attempts to devise perfect answers within the kind of framework that most in the abortion debate use. I don't have an answer for that other than trying to point out the futility and irrationality of considering reality to behave according to moralistic abstractions instead of, well, however reality is |
08-05-2014 02:53 AM
#68
| |
|
This is an important way in which we disagree. Utility doesn't need to be categorically right or wrong. In fact, it isn't, it kinda can't be, since it is a reflection of an amoral reality. |
08-05-2014 10:50 AM
#69
| |
The point is that stabbing a 29-year old person walking to night class isn't the same as stabbing a 30-year old person walking to work. Nothing is the same as anything else. It doesn't mean that exactly one will have a positive result and exactly one will have a negative result, but it would be sheer coincidence alone if they had exactly equivalent value. Approaching ethics as a categoricalist is like offering generalized poker advice; the anti-categoricalist is the one that says "It depends." | |
Last edited by surviva316; 08-05-2014 at 11:03 AM. | |
08-05-2014 02:10 PM
#70
| |
I think we probably agree, but a lot of the terms would have to be cleaned up. If we replace "morals" with "any ethical code that considers anything beyond the subjects of an action", and "idealism" with "categoricalism", and "Imposing morality lets ... rule" with "lets ... rule universally" (at least two of the examples are useful things to follow). | |
Last edited by surviva316; 08-06-2014 at 11:39 AM. | |
08-05-2014 02:26 PM
#71
| |
A line has to be drawn for policy's sake[1]; a line does not have to be drawn for ethics' sake. It might sometimes be right to undergo partial-birth abortions and might other times be wrong to take a morning after pill. | |
08-05-2014 02:44 PM
#72
| |
|
Good posts |
08-05-2014 03:39 PM
#73
| |
I don't know if I've escorted anyone multiple times. I don't pay too close attention to who is coming in and it wouldn't matter to me if they were coming in multiple times though. | |
| |
08-05-2014 10:12 PM
#74
| |
Cool thread. Where are the cat pics? | |
| |
08-05-2014 11:12 PM
#75
| |
| |