Captain Obvious

Did you notice how that wins zero arguments?

Not really. It doesn't say a lot. It makes no sense to say that the only people who are allowed to have an opinion favorable to legalized abortions are the ones who have had it done to them. It just isn't sensical, and I know you're one of the more sensible ones on here. I know that this Heller-esque Catch-22 thinking isn't ingrained into you.

True that but what is heller-esque catch 22?

Joseph Heller's Catch-22. One of my favorite works of literature of all time. It plays on the repeated bureaucratic fallacy that a pilot who wants to be grounded from combat is sane enough to obey orders and therefore cannot be grounded from combat, denying pilots in the story any ability that they should by all rights have to discharge their service.

In essence, requiring people who want to affect some kind of change to qualify for the ability to make change on the basis that they wouldn't want to affect change, is a form of control that is prevalent in society but intuitively should not be self-sustaining as a system. It takes no brain thinking at all to realize that this cannot possibly be the criterion to apply in ethics.

I don't mean to be rude but could you simply it?

YOU HAVEN'T READ CATCH 22? I suggest going down to your local bookstore and picking up a copy.

I would ALMOST set it as required reading to my class except that it does itself have some problematic content.

God help your students

Examples from the book:

A woman insists she can't marry any man who wants to marry her.

A policeman shouts that he's allowed to do anything that citizens can't stop him from doing. What law says that? The policeman won't say because the law says he doesn't have to.

A Captain attempts to have a Major deprived of food because he didn't sign an oath of loyalty that the Captain gave strict orders not to be offered to the Major for him to sign.

Simply put, a closed-loop of internal logical contradiction serves only to slant the rules against people of low hierarchy. The contradiction, while unprovable by the same rules that create it, can be seen very clearly on an intuitive level.

That's dissent seem fair

If that gets "the brain thinking" then whoever that applies to has a pretty lame brain.

How so?

Hehe

No shit

Well naw....

Up votes for you

And upvotes for you.

Danke

Nie ma za co.
(That's your welcome in Polish.)