Addressing the elephant in the womb


#744

It’s stupid to argue strictly one or the other. I’ve already argued the scientific aspect of it. And you need to quit moving the goalposts.


#745

I’m not moving the goalpost. I’m showing you why whether or not a being should be killed is a philosophical question - not a scientific one.


#746

Doesn’t preventing pregnancies reduce abortion? Seems like if your goal is to reduce abortions that you might consider reducing unwanted pregnancies. The issues go hand in hand.

Cool.

What better options are there? The IUD experiment has been proven to be amazingly effective. You are free to offer alternatives but at least we know the IUD solution is very strong in reducing abortions.

And again with the govt? Nobody forces the kids to have an IUD. It is a choice. You seem intent on making sure the govt doesn’t pay for solutions even if abortions are reduced. Is money more important to you than life?


#747

It’s both, really. Although if I were to have argued strictly philosophically you would have accused me of being on a moral high horse, so that’s initially why I took the science route.


#748

So then you admit philosophy and ethics play a major role in the abortion debate?


#749

Weak.


#750

You’re attacking perceived inconsistencies in my argument and not arguing why abortion isn’t murder. You’re parsing my posts and picking out little parts to argue against, not the entire post.


#751

I’m sorry about your friend. Is your position that there can be NO bad outcomes? Every medicine I know of has potential harmful effects.

Again, nobody forces the kids to have an IUD.


#752

Science does too. They both do, equally.


#753

Fully agree Matt. Pro-Lifers go down a bad road, when they invoke Jesus/the bible as their reasons. It should be purely about human life/persons being denied life/liberty without due process of the law.


#754

No I’m not. You explicitly said philosophy has no place in this debate. You’re wrong.


#755

Yes you are. And you are wrong. You’re arguing purely on philosophy, which is stupid. Admit it.


#756

It does which is why I’ve included brain development and consciousness as an input to my philosophical stance on abortion’s morality.


#757

Consciousness and self-awareness alone don’t determine whether someone is worth living or not.


#758

I’ve consistently used brain development as a supplemental input for my moral stance. You’re just flat out wrong here and mistaken.


#759

That’s the philosophical question now isnt it. Thanks for joining the debate finally.


#760

You have yet to provide one source backing up your claims. So your argument is trash. I’ve provided several sources to back up my argument.


#761

Well it’s what you argued, so by your own standards you need to stand behind it.


#762

You’ve done no such thing. There is no brain mechanics in early term fetuses that correlate with neurological activity seen in conscious individuals.


#763

Oh yes I have. An australian site about neural development, Psychology Today, etc.

You have yet to back up your argument.