I would say murder the kid who eats the most. Newborn babies are a lot easier to feed, anyway. This makes much more sense than your infanticide solution.
Plus, there is more to eat on the bigger kid.
Not really. You believe in ZPG, right? That means 2.1 babies per couple. Places like Western Europe are having problems because they’re having children under that and the young can’t support the old. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that the majority, even vast majority, of babies are not disasters.
I do. All I’m saying is that most of us live in different circumstances than you, in which infanticide is much less debatable (that is, not debatable). So when you assume your circumstances apply to us, you come off as a raving loon (to us (even though you’re not)).
There you go. Why stop at infanticide? Let’s move straight on to cannibalism.
Waste not, want not.
If you are in a position where infanticide is the most moral option available to you (which necessarily means abortion and giving the child up for adoption aren’t options), then consider yourself unlucky. Virtually all people aren’t. 'Specially in the developed world.
We also have legal abortion. What’s your point? :rolleyes: If we’re going to start all the “what ifs?”, what happens if I’m in a hostage situation with someone with Tourettes who keeps screaming out every three seconds and that’s driving me insane. Is it moral for me to kill him? Even if he’s shrieking like a rooster on helium?
The idea that being against murder is “baby worship” is fucked up beyond all belief. It’s not a sum zero game – either you or me. Life isn’t as black or white as you paint it.
Did you read the thread?
She’s not talking about abortion – she’s talking about killing an actual infant. NOT an abortion. But continuing a pregnancy to term, having the baby, and THEN killing it.
Yeah, I don’t get why reluctance to kill a living baby is viewed as baby worship. I’m the LAST person to be all, “Aww, cute babies are AWESOME” but I’m pretty horrified by the concept of killing them. I mean, yeah, if we’re talking about some Sophie’s choice/MAS*H baby chicken bus scenario, sure, but ZPG, you’re coming across like killing them is so awesome and fun.
Well if we’re in the United States, I’m pretty sure there’s a law that says you can abandon your baby in a hospital or police station until one month old.
After one month, of course, it depends on whether Hitler is taking acid in a burning car.
Darn you, Guin, I wanted to post that link.
Hey, here’s an example – my dog is an incessant barker. She is the type that just will NOT shut up. It especially sucks because on of our cats loves to tease her and make her bark.
Sometimes it drives me insane. Especially right now. But will I kill my dog? No. Do I yell at her and tell her to shut the hell up? Yes, at times. But I’m NOT going to smother the dog, nor would I even have her put to sleep.
(And no, it’s not the kind of barking that the neighbors can hear. It’s not that loud. Just a LOT of barking.)
Now, does that make me a “dog-worshipper?”
ETA:
Both Christian and Muslim in the 1990s would kill a woman who was raped by the other side, so there were probably quite a number of necessary infanticides as a result of that.
Not annoying, sanity-threatening, there’s a difference. Locking someone in a cell for several days with the sound of a crying baby nonstop is a form of torture. If the only way to stop that sound is to smother the baby I have no problem with someone doing just that.
Ah, baby worship at it’s finest. We become less once we’re no longer little babies.
Why is it baby worship to logically point out that sometimes it’s okay NOT TO KILL BABIES, but it’s not…I don’t know, baby phobic, to try to justify killing them?
While, I am not a lawyer, I believe killing someone who is actively putting your life in danger is considered a form of self-defense and morally defensible.
I wouldn’t consider it fun, but if it’s necessary someone who has to do it shouldn’t be be held in contempt for it.
Because there are circumstances were people have to kill babies just like there are circumstances where you have to kill teenagers and adults. And just because it’s a baby doesn’t mean the death is somehow more horrorific or terrible. Hell, killing a conscious teenager or adult that actually knows what’s going on around them is even crueler from the emotional standpoint of the victim.
Well, if it’s a situation where there’s a lack of food, wouldn’t it make sense to kill the biggest person and eat them, rather than the measly baby?
We have acknowledged that. You seem to think that those circumstances are normal, and common, which is what is weirding us out.
Only if you have means of perserving the meat.