d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Abortion 2021
Prev12345618Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jan 30 2021 12:52pm
Quote (dro94 @ Jan 29 2021 04:10pm)
Expel something? You make it sound like having a shite

Why shouldn't the foetus have a right to life unless there is a really good reason to deny it, like endangering the health of the mother

What is a morally acceptable reason to abort a foetus by saying it's part of you instead of an independent being - literally anything because it's inside you?

I mean, it's 9 months at the end of the day. You can give birth to the baby and never see it again if you don't want to. There are millions of people desperate for kids and the taxpayer would gladly subsidise the raising of children if some parents didn't want them


As I said before, even if we establish the fetus is a person with a right to life, that doesn't mean it automatically takes precedent over the mother's right to do what she wants with her body. When rights conflict it's often a messy matter to figure out which right wins.

Also, birth comes with the potential for serious medical complications. "You can give birth to the baby and never see it again" ignores this factor.

So anyway, my stance is that prior to ~23 weeks the fetus is not a person since it has never had a brain and therefore there can not be a conflict of rights that overrides the bodily autonomy of the mother.

After 23 weeks its about who wins the conflict between the fetus "right to life" and the mother's right to do what she wants with her body. I'm not convinced one way or the other on this question.
Member
Posts: 33,928
Joined: Oct 9 2008
Gold: 2,528.52
Jan 30 2021 01:01pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Jan 30 2021 01:52pm)
As I said before, even if we establish the fetus is a person with a right to life, that doesn't mean it automatically takes precedent over the mother's right to do what she wants with her body. When rights conflict it's often a messy matter to figure out which right wins.

Also, birth comes with the potential for serious medical complications. "You can give birth to the baby and never see it again" ignores this factor.

So anyway, my stance is that prior to ~23 weeks the fetus is not a person since it has never had a brain and therefore there can not be a conflict of rights that overrides the bodily autonomy of the mother.

After 23 weeks its about who wins the conflict between the fetus "right to life" and the mother's right to do what she wants with her body. I'm not convinced one way or the other on this question.


Yes it does. Murder is morally wrong.

You can lie to yourself, but deep down you know you just ended that life form's entire life and future.
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jan 30 2021 01:04pm
Quote (EndlessSky @ Jan 30 2021 01:01pm)
Yes it does. Murder is morally wrong.

You can lie to yourself, but deep down you know you just ended that life form's entire life and future.


Sure, at that point a life may have been ended. However, even if it is morally wrong that doesn't mean you don't have a right to do it. Like, you have a right to keep existing even though morally you should at least castrate yourself to prevent from spreading your sick moose genes.
Member
Posts: 33,928
Joined: Oct 9 2008
Gold: 2,528.52
Jan 30 2021 01:26pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Jan 30 2021 02:04pm)
Sure, at that point a life may have been ended. However, even if it is morally wrong that doesn't mean you don't have a right to do it. Like, you have a right to keep existing even though morally you should at least castrate yourself to prevent from spreading your sick moose genes.


You aren't conscious most of the time. I plan to abort you and use your tax dollars to do it.
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jan 30 2021 01:32pm
Quote (EndlessSky @ Jan 30 2021 01:26pm)
You aren't conscious most of the time. I plan to abort you and use your tax dollars to do it.


Important distinction between "never been conscious" and "not currently conscious". My brain is still there, still functioning, and still undertaking processes necessary to maintain my personhood. Just because it isn't currently expressed doesn't mean I don't still have a personhood and an underlying valuable consciousness.

However, if it was a choice between my life, and the life of ten thousand others, then there would be a compelling interest to override my right to life and my right to bodily autonomy. I'm not convinced which direction it falls in the case of abortion after 23 weeks.
Member
Posts: 41,270
Joined: Apr 14 2006
Gold: 1,788.71
Jan 30 2021 01:48pm
Quote (EndlessSky @ Jan 29 2021 12:03pm)
Why is welfare legal if we want less poor births?



Why support and be adamant for higher volumes of unwanted low socioeconomic births but refuse welfare is the better question
Member
Posts: 53,552
Joined: Mar 6 2008
Gold: 1,908.33
Jan 30 2021 02:10pm


🔥🔥

Quote (dro94 @ Jan 29 2021 04:48pm)

Even less convincing is the argument that being pregnant means the baby is you. It's a disgusting assertion


Agreed. Its a very common talking point and its clearly wrong.
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jan 30 2021 02:11pm
Quote (cambovenzi @ Jan 30 2021 02:10pm)
https://i.imgur.com/FfLdItu.png

🔥🔥

Agreed. Its a very common talking point and its clearly wrong.


Cam wants small government until people do what he doesnt like.
Member
Posts: 53,552
Joined: Mar 6 2008
Gold: 1,908.33
Jan 30 2021 02:12pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Jan 30 2021 03:11pm)
Cam wants small government until people do what he doesnt like.


We already know you are dishonest. Continuous reminders are unnecessary.
Member
Posts: 35,291
Joined: Aug 17 2004
Gold: 12,730.67
Jan 30 2021 02:26pm
Quote (cambovenzi @ Jan 30 2021 12:10pm)
https://i.imgur.com/FfLdItu.png

🔥🔥



Agreed. Its a very common talking point and its clearly wrong.


I would distance myself from her. She's dumb as hell.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev12345618Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll