However, I thought you did a decent job of stating your arguement and didn't see it as being impolite. I still disagree and think you are a horrible monster (Rawrrr!!! JUST KIDDING!)
We all draw arbitrary lines when it comes to morality though. I could take pro-life arguments and use them to justify outlawing killing animals for food. What makes animals arbitrarily less worthy than humans to live? Life is life. But that isn't where I have chosen to draw my line even though I rarely eat meat myself.
We all draw arbitrary lines when it comes to morality though. I could take pro-life arguments and use them to justify outlawing killing animals for food. What makes animals arbitrarily less worthy than humans to live? Life is life. But that isn't where I have chosen to draw my line even though I rarely eat meat myself.
I guess this could be taken as a potentially insensitive argument (babies aren't animals!) but it's one that's always really made sense to me. Fetuses are apparently no more sentient than animals.
Is life in and of itself a reason to spare a fetus? The answer, unless you are a vegetarian, is presumably no. So the real argument (excluding those who consider the lives of animals to be as significant as the lives of fetuses) seems to boil down to this: is the potential of sentience a reason to spare the life of a fetus? And if so, why?
My stance on abortion has been moderated over the years from being very pro-life to understanding what some women are up against. If I had the time and money to fight abortion I would use it to help more women feel that they had the choice to have or keep the baby. There are so many complexeties involved that I can't paint with a broad brush anymore. I would rather encourage and assist than simply outlaw and leave the women deal with it on their own.
Yes.
I have a fun mental exercise for everyone
- 07/01/2011 06:47:47 PM
1003 Views
Germany sucks
- 07/01/2011 07:52:13 PM
691 Views
lol, I don't think I've ever clicked on something as fast as I did that.
- 07/01/2011 11:27:50 PM
650 Views
*NM*
Ok then.
- 07/01/2011 09:13:57 PM
631 Views
are you a woman? if not, fuck off. you have no uterus, you have no say. *NM*
- 07/01/2011 10:00:32 PM
345 Views
horse shit
- 07/01/2011 10:28:40 PM
653 Views
I cannot agree
- 08/01/2011 01:29:45 AM
621 Views
"Choose partners carefully to avoid this situation" cuts both ways; "choice" is the operative word.
- 14/03/2011 02:38:41 AM
725 Views
*Sigh* This is not what I wanted
- 07/01/2011 11:53:37 PM
581 Views
a debate based on morality is not rational. humans aren't actually rational creatures, you know.
- 08/01/2011 02:05:05 AM
603 Views
I wasn't aware women had a monopoly on dispassionate objective arguments.
- 08/01/2011 12:59:33 AM
560 Views
I wasn't aware they had the capacity for it
*NM*
- 08/01/2011 02:45:54 AM
249 Views
*NM*
- 08/01/2011 02:45:54 AM
249 Views
Oh, I'm quite aware of and familiar with their capacity; hence my disappointment.
- 08/01/2011 03:01:41 AM
614 Views
It is true that the person with the uterus gets to make that decision.
- 08/01/2011 01:46:15 AM
600 Views
Your arguments pro choice are poor.
- 07/01/2011 10:59:43 PM
789 Views
Gotta disagree with your rape argument
- 07/01/2011 11:15:34 PM
698 Views
I agree with this. I'm interested in knowing what Helen's response is
- 07/01/2011 11:55:23 PM
617 Views
Re: Gotta disagree with your rape argument
- 08/01/2011 01:32:06 AM
643 Views
Discussion merits discourtesy apparently
- 08/01/2011 03:24:09 AM
836 Views
At the end I did say that it was not you but the idea. I guess I didn't phrase that well enough.
- 08/01/2011 06:42:40 AM
658 Views
If you belive a child is a child from conception then does the means of conception change that?
- 08/01/2011 04:52:34 PM
686 Views
Not an argument or even completely applicable to what you just said. Just another viewpoint.
- 09/01/2011 01:06:19 AM
681 Views
The right to wear perfume or generous portions of cologne in a the workplace or public areas
- 08/01/2011 01:24:04 AM
719 Views
I hate this too. *NM*