ISIS 'issues fatwa ordering suffocation of babies with Down’s syndrome'

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

The West and ISIS both view Down's babies as undesirble. The West's method of reducing their population is somewhat different that ISIS's. The results are ultimately the same.

Somewhat different?

In the West, a fetus that is likely (or depending on the test, confirmed) to have Down Syndrome can be aborted up to 23 weeks of maturation.

ISIS is actively using strangulation and lethal injection to kill children (already born) between the ages of 1 week and 3 months.

The fact that Down Syndrome is seen as undesirable in the West is true, due primarily to quality of life, life expectancy, and a heavily increased economic responsibility that some people cannot accommodate. That said:

If you cannot tell the vast difference between having the choice to abort a fetus considering the risks and adversity ahead, and being told your already born child must be killed, then I'd be shocked. A fetus before a certain age =/= a living child.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I'd like to suggest that climate change is increasing the rate at which children get Down's Syndrome. I've got a chart here somewhere...

I thought that global warming correlates with the disappearance of pirates, proving that pirates are cool.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I thought that global warming correlates with the disappearance of pirates, proving that pirates are cool.

So what you are saying is, ISIS are sand pirates? And more global warming will create more deserts, leading to more ISIS? Or wait... fewer ISISes. Now I'm confused.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I thought that global warming correlates with the disappearance of pirates, proving that pirates are cool.

[Jason14h]

I'm confused. Is Donald Trump a pirate or not?

[Knalus]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Stellar. So this is now,

1. An ISIS thread;
2. A Trump thread;
3. Double-Godwin'd; and
4. An abortion thread.

If we can manage to work gun control in here somewhere we might have ourselves a perfect storm.

Ok, I can't be the only one who has issue with Godwin's law. That stupid convention means that honest discussion regarding National Socialism, Facism, Institutional Racism, and the path towards Totalitarianism cannot be discussed, or "the thread is Godwin'd, it's irrelevant". I mean, for goodness sake, Hitler was a real person, he did horrible things, and he convinced otherwise decent people either to do them, or at the very least not speak about them. It may be the most horrible thing that happened in the last 300 years, certainly the last 100, and we can't talk about it??? It happened.

Talk about misguided intentions.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

You can talk about it, but comparing modern people to Hitler or modern governments or organizations to the Nazis is usually just done for effect and never adds a damned thing to the discussion. "THIS GUY = HITLER = EVIL YOU GUYS" is as nuanced as that crap gets. It also conflates a bunch of generally "bad stuff" that shouldn't be - Trump has some insane policies, including some borderline fascist ones, but he isn't advocating murdering babies and taking women as sex slaves.

ISIS, Trump, they're their own entities with their own unique brands of awful. Nazis don't need to be involved.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

You can talk about it, but comparing modern people to Hitler or modern governments or organizations to the Nazis is usually just done for effect and never adds a damned thing to the discussion. "THIS GUY = HITLER = EVIL YOU GUYS" is as nuanced as that crap gets. It also conflates a bunch of generally "bad stuff" that shouldn't be - Trump has some insane policies, including some borderline fascist ones, but he isn't advocating murdering babies and taking women as sex slaves.

ISIS, Trump, they're their own entities with their own unique brands of awful. Nazis don't need to be involved.

No, but comparing some of the rhetoric and propaganda tactics that Trump has used to those used by fascist governments of the past is fair.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I mean, I guess, but it seems like a lazy way to tar a guy, particularly when there are so many legitimate ways to tar him on things he's advocating for himself.

[Knalus]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

You can talk about it, but comparing modern people to Hitler or modern governments or organizations to the Nazis is usually just done for effect and never adds a damned thing to the discussion. "THIS GUY = HITLER = EVIL YOU GUYS" is as nuanced as that crap gets. It also conflates a bunch of generally "bad stuff" that shouldn't be - Trump has some insane policies, including some borderline fascist ones, but he isn't advocating murdering babies and taking women as sex slaves.

ISIS, Trump, they're their own entities with their own unique brands of awful. Nazis don't need to be involved.

There is a massive difference between discussing Nazi policies, and their current analogs, to THIS GUY = HITLER. I thought you in particular were very clear and forthright on this forum about discussing ideas and divorcing those ideas from other things they are associated with. Just because I see a parallel in how the National Socialists came into power, or some of their policies, doesn't mean I'm saying HOLOCAUST!! HOLOCAUST!!! However, apparently, I cannot say that, because Godwin means it cannot be serious.

The whole concept of Godwin's Law means that the entire discussion ends there. We have spent over a decade avoiding discussion involving any kind of policy that occurred between 1935 and 1945, even though those policies resulted in the most significant changes in our social make up in the last 100 years. Many people don't discuss the fact that the original arguments that the left and right have been squabbling about incessantly in the past 20 years have direct lines of causality from the visceral disgust western society had to the policies of Mengle and Himmler, yet we cannot talk about it, without some well meaning person shutting down discussion, because Hitler.

The worst part is that it shuts down discussion among the more intelligent, because it is usually someone with lesser intellectual talents that Godwin's a discussion with something inane like OBAMA=HITLER. I understand the original idea about the Godwin's Law, and it has it's reasons, but I feel that it's too broadly applied, and has become an impediment.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I think that's a fair criticism.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I mean, I guess, but it seems like a lazy way to tar a guy, particularly when there are so many legitimate ways to tar him on things he's advocating for himself.

I don't think it's necessarily as much about tarring a guy as it is about having a frank discussion about the dangerous places that kind of rhetoric has historically led to.

[CliffFletcher]

Demagogue =/= fascism. Fascism requires a degree of government control of society that Americans will not tolerate. I doubt Trump even believes the stuff the spews.

The best historical analogue to Trump is George Wallace, another American demagogue who didn't really believe the things he said, but saw an opportunity to gain power by telling lies to people he thought were fools.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Stellar. So this is now,

1. An ISIS thread;
2. A Trump thread;
3. Double-Godwin'd; and
4. An abortion thread.

If we can manage to work gun control in here somewhere we might have ourselves a perfect storm.

Lets be realistic about this, if the Americans had gotten the NRA and the gun lobby under control years ago, we could have put all of these gun manufactures out of business, keeping modern weapons out of the hands of the crazies. ISIS never would have taken all this territory.

[Knalus]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Demagogue =/= fascism. Fascism requires a degree of government control of society that Americans will not tolerate. I doubt Trump even believes the stuff the spews.

The best historical analogue to Trump is George Wallace, another American demagogue who didn't really believe the things he said, but saw an opportunity to gain power by telling lies to people he thought were fools.

Would it be fair to say not all demagogues are fascists, but all facists are demagogues?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Knalus

Would it be fair to say not all demagogues are fascists, but all facists are demagogues?

Tough to say. Demagogues often don't believe the things they say - they just exploit mob anger in order to gain power. Fascists tend to be true believers.

[Charcot]

It looks like this has not yet been substantiated.

Snopes

[Chingas]

Originally Posted by #-3

Lets be realistic about this, if the Americans had gotten the NRA and the gun lobby under control years ago, we could have put all of these gun manufactures out of business, keeping modern weapons out of the hands of the crazies. ISIS never would have taken all this territory.

You do realise that the US is not the only manufacturer of weapons right? They may be the largest producer today; (the US is estimated to have sold nearly three quarters of the value of new arms in 2012), However history shows that where there is a void it almost always gets filled. One would have to assume that closing all American arms manufacturers might serve to create a dip in availability for only a very short time.

[Buster]

A thread that got Godwin'd turned into a debate on Godwins that was more interesting that the original debate. Internet = redeemed.

Also, I'm no expert on Trump's policies, but I think the only one that seems overtly "fascist" is the suggestion to register Muslims. His suggestion to close immigration to Muslims is a an established US policy, with US law established on this topic since the 50's. Jimmy Carter did it in the 70's.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Somewhat different?

In the West, a fetus that is likely (or depending on the test, confirmed) to have Down Syndrome can be aborted up to 23 weeks of maturation.

ISIS is actively using strangulation and lethal injection to kill children (already born) between the ages of 1 week and 3 months.

The fact that Down Syndrome is seen as undesirable in the West is true, due primarily to quality of life, life expectancy, and a heavily increased economic responsibility that some people cannot accommodate. That said:

If you cannot tell the vast difference between having the choice to abort a fetus considering the risks and adversity ahead, and being told your already born child must be killed, then I'd be shocked. A fetus before a certain age =/= a living child.

I really hate posts like this. How can you sit there and definitively talk about people's quality of life based on their disability? I've spent time with special Olympians and they taught me a very real lessons about quality of life. The fact that people decide when these fetuses are only a "few inches long" they aren't fit for life makes me sick.

You can try to sugar coat it, but an abortion is ending the life of a baby. It has a heartbeat. What's the difference between 23 weeks of maturation and 24 or 25 weeks?