Jump to content

LoveMyLife

VIP
  • Content count

    516
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

LoveMyLife last won the day on June 1 2016

LoveMyLife had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

169 Outstanding

3 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Exams
    May 2016
  • Country
    Germany

Recent Profile Visitors

12,429 profile views
  1. Hi. I think it would be great if you could try to understand the matter before commenting on it. Not trying to be offensive but with your previous comment, you might get some marks for your combative style, but none for content. Quote: "Abortion is not something needed for subsistence so it is not a direct "has to.": I recommend that you understand what "have to" actually means before you say that. Here: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/have to . Check out definition 3: —used to say that something is desired or should be done You have to read this book. It's fantastic! You have to come visit us soon. You really have to see the doctor about that cough. You have got to come visit us soon. Look at the first sentence. I wouldn't consider reading a book needed for subsistence either. If your best argument is nothing more than asserting that I shouldn't have chosen the word "has to" because it can only be used when we need something to survive, then I recommend that you buy yourself a dictionary. Quote: " You are suggesting in all cases it is "their decision. If a women willingly chose to have a relationship with a man and can sustain a baby, what prevents us from attempting to prevent that women from killing the fetus?" There are some mistakes in your sentence here. And I think you are very confused. It is still their choice. Just because a woman can support a baby doesn't mean we can coerce her into doing so. And there are so many factors that we need to consider here. What if the baby had a medical condition? Or what if the woman used contraception and never wanted to have a baby in the first place? It is incredibly arbitrary and naive to say a woman shouldn't be able to decide her future just because she is financially stable and is in a relationship. It might surprise you. But women have moral rights too. Sometimes the right to ownership of their bodies and the right to decide their own future can override the fetus's right to live because the fetus that is still inside and is part of the woman's body. If abortion was illegal, it would mean that no matter what happened, whether your pregnancy was the result of rape or sexual assault, you still won't be able to abort the fetus. That is why I said abortion has to be legal. There is no alternative. (The "viable" part is implied by the way. Just don't want you to waste your time nitpicking again) The legal system has a moral obligation to ensure that women are given the choice to make their own decisions, especially when the pregnancy was the result of a tragic event over which the woman had no control. Finally, you also need to understand that your second suggestion " Limitations are placed on abortion" implies that abortion is legal!!! It means legal but with some restrictions. I have always believed that some limitations can be placed on abortion. It is hard to discuss whether abortion should be legal with you when you don't even know what the word "legal" means. Feel free to message me privately. You also seem to be very confused about the difference between morality and legality. So maybe google these keywords before talking about them. They are not the same. Some acts are immoral yet legally permissible, like cheating. And maybe you should read the examples that I gave more carefully. Whether abortion is legal or not highly depends on the situation. The examples that I gave demonstrate exactly that. Aborting babies in the case of rape or incest is not the same as using abortion as a birth control measure. You seem to think the world is binary and abortion is either always right or always wrong. That is actually really cute haha. Would be nice to continue this discussion. But I would hate to reply to a comment that is distinguished by a paucity of argument, again. So sorry in advance if I can't be bothered to reply haha.
  2. I am really torn between the two. There are mouth breathers like MP Jacob Rees-Mogg who think abortion is always morally indefensible, even in the case of rape or incest. I wholehearted disagree with that kind of cynical, blame-the-victim definition of morality. But there are always people who are pro choice and think that there is absolutely nothing wrong with abortion. They say it is not killing because it is not a baby. Well have you seen an aborted fetus? Stare into it and tell me how it is not a baby. We have to face facts. Abortion has to be legal. There are no alternatives. We cannot imprison women because it is still their body. It is their own decision. The fetus is still inside the mother's body (in fact it is a part of the mother's body) and the mother should have the right to do what she wants with her body. But we also need to admit that abortion is not a very nice thing to do. Ultimately, it is still killing a baby (or a fetus if you will). So whether abortion is moral or not really depends on the situation. In the case of rape or incest, I hope we can all agree that it would be wrong to force the victim to give birth to the child of her own rapist. But when dealing with people who have had multiple abortions, despite the availability of contraception, I do think they are being incredible selfish and unreasonable.
  3. The definition of feminism is the "advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes." So yes. Simple as that. There will always be people who take it too far. Like the lady who claimed air conditioning is sexist. These idiots do not reflect what the movement really is about and it would be folly to criticise the entire movement purely based on what they say.
  4. Yeah. I have got friends who barely passed the IB and still got into a university. It depends on a lot of things. Some universities give out unconditional offers, some don't. I even have friends who are doing a bachelor degree at the open university (An online university). But try to do your best and get a good score.
  5. Yes. Our morals can derive from many different sources. (society, religion and self). And who can say the moral values we get from religions are always moral? Last month I just saw a scab-eating bug-eyed chromosomally challenged lunatic from hell insulting a cute gay couple in London. He believed in Jesus. But those who confronted him, some were atheists, some were religious. So you be the judge. Sometimes your religion does enable you to make better decisions in life, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes you might even be better off without it. It is too arbitrary to say people who have a religion always behave more ethically than those who don't, or vice versa. It always depends on the individual.
  6. I don't want to be part of the discussion on whether god exists. But the real question. Does it matter? What difference does it make? Even if god existed, it still wouldn't mean that we have to agree with him. In the case of Christianity, the bible says eating bacon is a sin, so is eating lobster, or having a round haircut. Whether these asinine words come from a suprime being or not, we just have enough common sense to realise how ridiculous they are. But ideas like being kind to people or forgiving your enemies are something on which we should all agree. It is never about god. It is always about how you interpret what god says. People are just picking and choosing the quotes from the bible to justify their own causes.
  7. I think the problem that I have with the statement is the use of the word "only". This is quite a sweeping generalisation in the sense that he/she actually believed that war is the only resort to find peace. It is like saying... Any disagreement, however small, any difficulty, however tiny, can only by resolved by means of violence and barbarism. It is against everything that democracy and liberty stand for. Yes in some cases we need to be confrontational and fight for what we believe in. But "war" is a whole different level. Millions of death, years of suffering, and the feeling of hopelessness. That is why we should always try to resolve differences by understanding and accepting them. In many cases we can, but we just don't, because people believe in crazy statements like this. History sparkles with examples that aggression does not pay. And I think we can do better than this. War is always the last resort. It is not the only resort. The person who wrote this statement did not know what peace means. He/she had not experienced wars and the death of the loved ones. They have no respect for lives.
  8. That is not true. Many universities will accept you with 30 IB points. Although it might be true that it is not a particular high score, you did manage to pass, so congratulations on that Austria: most unis just want you to pass the diploma so you have more or less fulfilled the entry requirement. However, your german must reach at least a B2 level in order to begin your studies in Austrian universities. Germany: the application process is more troublesome. You need to convert ur grades into the german Abitur equivalence and then apply via something weird online. But 30 is more than enough to get into some unis. However, you must do at least one of the following subject: Bio HL/Phy HL/Chem HL/Maths HL. There are more weird requirements. PM me if u are interested in german unis. The Netherlands: Some unis (uni of Eindhoven/groningen have english courses) have pretty much the same requirement (more than 28 points). They might however, have some other specific requirements such as "passing maths HL". So I can't say anything more without knowing the details of your grades. England: I think unis in the UK do care more about your grades than unis in other countries, but I am sure there are unis out there that are willing to accept you with open arms. I wanted to apply to a swedish/norwegian unis as well and most of them don't have specific requirements for the IB. highly recommend you sending an email to the unis that you are interested in. Best way to get info. Good luck.
  9. They are of course not "allowed" from a legal perspective, but whom are we kidding? It is way too easy for them to watch porn. Shouldn't that be a reason for the government to intervene a little bit? Say.... requiring an account to get access to pornographic websites? (and the account owner must prove his/her age?) It might sound naive and it is difficult to enforce and it might invade people's privacy. but if there is a will there's a way. Just because righting the wrong is difficult doesn't mean that we shouldn't at least give it a try.... We are not creatures of despondency.... "parents should stop them watching it as much as possible." -- I am glad that you also think porn should be somewhat restricted, especially when it comes to protecting children. Parents definitely play a huge role here.
  10. I think porn should be restricted. But by that I mean children/kids/even teenagers (under 18 maybe) should not be allowed to watch porn. There is nothing wrong with porn, as long as the audience can distinguish between fantasy and reality and not become addicted to it. Overall, it is human nature to crave for sexual gratification and those with sound minds should be allowed to enjoy porn. Porn can be really awesome, and I bet only my rubbish bin will find comments like "watching porn is immoral/disguising" delicious. However, most children/young teens are not mentally equipped to handle pornography. Most of them are both addicted to and misled by porn, which engenders all kinds of problem. (Teenage pregnancy for example) I know you know how easy it is for young people to get access to porn nowadays and it is simply exposing them to all kinds of danger. This, in my opinion, should be a reason to restrict porn. Call me conservative if you will, but squeamishness about what we want our children to be exposed to is not the same as being stubborn. Some people are simply not mature enough for porn, and you know it. Porn is NOT unequivocally good for all ages! It is just common sense. So let us not defend the undefendable.
  11. To what extent do the concepts that we use shape the conclusions that we reach? Got a B, predicted an A, kinda sad. but I love this essay. Worked really hard on this. Hope it helps.
  12. Tok essay: To what extent do the concepts that we use shape the conclusions that we reach? View File To what extent do the concepts that we use shape the conclusions that we reach? Got a B, predicted an A, kinda sad. but I love this essay. Worked really hard on this. Hope it helps. Submitter Justin Torbjørn Submitted 08/06/2016 Category Sample TOK essays  
  13. Research question: How to decide which method - Cardano’s method or the trigonometric substitution method, to use for solving cubic polynomials with real coefficients? My Maths EE. It was written in IB1 so the maths isn't like super super sophisticated. Got an A with this essay though. A labour of love. Hope it can help those who want to write their EEs on maths. It is hard, but rewarding I think this essay could be a lot better, but please don't say anything hurtful.
  14. IB Mathematics Extended Essay Sample (Got an A) View File My Maths EE. It was written in IB1 so the maths isn't like super super sophisticated. Got an A with this essay though. Labour of love. Hope it can help those who want to write their EEs on maths. It is hard, but rewarding I think this essay could be a lot better, but please don't say anything hurtful. Submitter Justin Torbjørn Submitted 08/06/2016 Category Mathematics  
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.