D
Deleted member 1
Guest
This thread is to discuss the philosophical underpinnings of different beliefs on abortion. Please keep it polite. I will post my own views later.
I completely disagree. I think there are exceedingly few situations where you can say that living is worse than death, especially in the western world.. However, we understand that in certain circumstances -- of shameful poverty unalievated by an uncaring State, of famine and thirst gripping nations, of profound deformity that would only cause cruelty and ill to the souls of both the unborn and the parents -- that abortion may be the least worst of a set of worst options.
I completely disagree. I think there are exceedingly few situations where you can say that living is worse than death, especially in the western world.
There are few times where its needed as triage. Its a much easier and quicker procedure to induce birth than to have a late term abortion.I don’t consider it acceptable afterwards except as triage.
If you knew a cow in 9 months would be able to say "hey, goldranger, how are you doing today?" Would you still eat steak?As I have stated in other places on the board, I am solidly pro-choise. I consider abortion to be an inalienable right, I do not consider the life of a first trimester (and possibly a bit later) fetus to be anything even approaching the worth of a real human's life (more closely an insect's perhaps), and I feel abortion - again, as long as the fetus is not yet sufficiently developed - should be freely available without the need for any sort of reasoning beyond a whim.
If you knew a cow in 9 months would be able to say "hey, goldranger, how are you doing today?" Would you still eat steak?
Whats the value of an infant as compared to an adult?1) A fetus is not going to be saying anything in 9 months.
Is it okay to eat a baby?2) A cow is a completely different story from a fetus. Much more intelligent and developed. I still eat it.
Its not. A sperm is not a unique human being. Its a sperm. Left alone it remains a sperm. If you decide not to deliberately kill a fetus and nothing tragic occurs it will eventually be able to talk to you.3) Every single one of your sperms is a potential conversationalist just waiting to happen. I don't see anyone bemoaning their fate.
You dont wanna debate dont enter the thread. I am curious though. You said its an inalienable right. I dont get that. To support abortion human rights must necessarily be alienable, given that youve essentially determined that depending on how old and developed a human being is they are alienated from their rights. My question would be how do you justify abortion as inalienable?I've been having the same conversation with you guys multiple times already (starting in the PM actually), I won't budge, you won't budge, leave it at that.
The inalienable thing is news to me. I just really want to get your idea for how its inalienable or what makes an inalienable right if you only get it once you hit a certain point in development and intelligence, because to me that would necessarily make it alienable.Again, already discussed all this, not getting into debate.
There are the rights of two potential humans here at stake. One of them is, at some point, an insect, not human. Determining the exact point at which it is no longer an insect but a human with rights equal to its mother is a matter of your particular ethical flavor rather than science.The inalienable thing is news to me. I just really want to get your idea for how its inalienable or what makes an inalienable right if you only get it once you hit a certain point in development and intelligence, because to me that would necessarily make it alienable.
Whats yours though? What makes rights inalienable? And its never an insect, always a human. That is not something you can dispute ethically, its a scientific fact that it is a unique human being.There are the rights of two potential humans here at stake. One of them is, at some point, an insect, not human. Determining the exact point at which it is no longer an insect but a human with rights equal to its mother is a matter of your particular ethical flavor rather than science.
Why are one rights supposed but the other inalienable?Forcing a woman to suffer physically and psychologically with consequences that will never go away throughout her life in order to entertain the supposed rights of a tiny blob is a tragedy and a travesty.
Whats yours though? What makes rights inalienable? And its never an insect, always a human. That is not something you can dispute ethically, its a scientific fact that it is a unique human being.
Why are one rights supposed but the other inalienable?
A random collection of cells has the exact same genetic makeup as I do and no potential for autonomous thinking in the future if left to its own devices. It absolutely is unique and seperate. Mothers dont have two hearts, two hands, two brains, four hands and four feet. Not the same.It's not an insect morphologically or genetically, but it's pretty much an insect in terms of autonomous thinking (and therefore moral value), except dumber. It's not a unique human being since at that point it's not any more a human being than a random collection of cells from your body are a "unique human being".
But both are obviously human beings. Its not arguable that it isnt human. You dont go from not human to human. You are and always have been a human being.Because one is a human being and one isn't, obviously.
Well you cant just drop posts directly arguing with me and then expect me not to talk about it. Even still I really want to hone in on the inalienable rights bit because you really havent explained that framework at all and I just want to get down to the meat of what you believe inalienable rights to be, how abortion relates to that and what actually gives you inalienable rights. If you dont want a circular debate then dont quote me and argue with me, or better yet dont turn it in circles. Progress and explain inalienable.You have a bit of a problem with understanding the words "not entering a circular debate over this", do you?