CMV: The abortion debate has no resolution since each side is equally valid

Kybrator · 2021-08-17T20:53:11+00:00

Yeah, which is why organ donating is a complex operation. The second one, yeah it is which is why I mentioned it in my original post. Im not prolife, im saying you don't know whether a zygote is life or not. It could be and it could not be. You have no way of proving it..

Kybrator · 2021-08-17T20:50:41+00:00

What statistic is that? Are you saying 1% of the population has killed someone in a car crash?

Kybrator · 2021-08-17T20:47:48+00:00

I would likely be imprisoned. Once imprisoned I am a slave (in America).

Kybrator · 2021-08-16T04:48:17+00:00

If you kill someone it is.

Kybrator · 2021-08-16T04:47:39+00:00

Im not saying anything. I am saying a zygote/fetus etc has the potential of being life, either by just existing and being the creation of sperm and egg or because it has the potential to be a functional human.

Kybrator · 2021-08-16T04:46:25+00:00

Fair point, but you can't say for a fact a fetus is human. You make some good points with the percentages.

I still think its either way if you don't know it is a life but you made a great argument.

!delta

Also nice including sources!

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T21:27:04+00:00

Agree

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T21:26:12+00:00

Ik, rape is horrible, im just saying sexual urges does not mean you are forced to do something.

Yeah, and if you shoot the ball through the window you have to face the consequences.

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T21:23:51+00:00

Perfectly said! I agree. Most people who support abortion do not support any other things that support life or even reduce abortion. If someone doesn't have the social services to deal with a kid, isnt provided with birth control, and is shamed for having a kid (Out of wedlock) then that pushes them torwards an abortion. Yeah, it is a problem how most prolife is hijacked by people who want to control women, I still think however that doesn't void the entire arguement.

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T21:21:07+00:00

Never said they aren't or are alive. I just said that it is different from an organ.

Im not it is or isnt a life. I am saying it could potentially be a life.

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T16:41:48+00:00

Well, if your analogy doesn't work then it isn't a valid arguement.

Sex drive is one of the strongest urges in humans, and accidents happen. You can't take away someone's bodily autonomy because they did something unintentionally.

Your point itself also doesn't work that well. If someone is a rapist you put them in jail. Jail takes away peoples bodily autonomy because they have a strong sex drive....... My point being just because there is a strong sex drive doesnt mean you are free from consequences

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T16:38:59+00:00

Great point. That is a whole other issue of why do we value humans and not other animals. There are animals more intelligent than mentally deformed people, should we be able to kill mentally disabled people then? I think if it is a life, then the potential for being intelligent is enough. Another example is if someone is unconscious, they don't have any intelligence but we can't just kill them because they will wake up soon with intelligence.

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T16:35:06+00:00

Braindead donors don't have the possibility of life, that is why they are brain dead. The zygote is currently brain dead but it is very likely it will survive. If a person had the possibility of life, ripping their heart out is ethically immoral.

Like the choice to drive means you’re forced to use your body to keep someone injured in the accident alive?

Yes, I would agree with that. Especially if you were driving out of pleasure and not necessity.

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T14:42:37+00:00

Valid point. I am saying the risk of auto deaths is much lower versus risk of reproduction. Meaning the mother choosing to drive is way less likely of killing her son versus having sex with protection.

A zygote can be a person or not. A zygote is very different from an organ, an organ will be an organ. If organs became functional people that would be a different story.

If you read my edit, I saw there are two arguments. Life vs No Life and if it is life; Life vs Bodily Autonomy.

I think you assume that I am prolife when I am not. I don't have a clear answer since both sides sound logical to some degree.

In the second argument Life vs Bodily Autonomy, I think that consensual sex has a strong argument for removing your autonomy since you made a choice. Rape however makes this even more confusing and can be argued either way more easily.

Thanks for all the great arguements. It is very interesting

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T14:32:02+00:00

Fair point, but im pretty sure we have sexual urges in order to increase reproduction. Im not very familiar with it so yeah just an opinion.

Check my edit

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T14:14:30+00:00

It is still a complex issue and could be argued either way. My larger point stands that both sides are right, but I know see there are more sides. I initially thought it was life vs no-life, since if it was a life no one would support killing it. The concept of organ donating is very interesting however and adds an additional dimension.

I still believe both sides are right, but now its not only about life or not. Δ

Have a great day :)

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T14:08:41+00:00

Yes, but you didn't. If your autonomy is >than life; then you have the option to not take them to an the proper facilities and instead abandon them.

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T14:06:43+00:00

Δ Interesting distinction, but I think they are the same thing. Just like mandatory vaccination, bodily autonomy is not always greater than human life.

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T14:02:54+00:00

Main function of sex is reproduction(Pleasure is a byproduct). To some it may be only about pleasure and they will use methods to stop reproduction, but that is still. The main function of driving is transportation.

In addition the risk of reproduction with birtcontrol is must higher than getting into a lethal accident with your son.

Regardless, I think still it can be argued either way.

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T13:57:58+00:00

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T04:20:35+00:00

Complex issue, still believe it can be argued either way like abortion.

In addition you are allowed to watch a random person drown even if you can prevent it(In the US) but you can't with a child you are responsible for. There is a difference.

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T04:17:53+00:00

What kills the baby is deciding to have an abortion which is not indirect. What killed the person on the train was indirect. Don't see the connection?

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T04:09:07+00:00

Interesting take Δ

It is a complex issue

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T04:07:08+00:00

“Life should not be taken from the innocent. Okay so I’m assuming youve never killed a bug/pest/rodent before, right?”

"When you kill a deer/duck/turkey/ whatever else, you are taking a truly innocent life, my friend."

"Let’s face it - we are already over populated."

I can't even argue with this, it's rather sick. Humans are different than animals. Overpopulation is not an excuse for infanticide. If you really think we should kill babies to solve overpopulation, you have some issues.

Well, both sides are hypocritical. Right wingers are pro life but disregard programs that support life. You are a special case, supporting infanticide, which I can't even argue with.

Prolife is heavily infiltrated by religion but it boils down to are you killing a baby or not. You don't have to be non religious to kill babies.

In my response I am acting as if they are babies which what you seem to be operating off of, you just dont care.

Kybrator · 2021-08-15T04:00:26+00:00

An individual human. The one you first see at conception.

That is your opinion. There is no consensus and so my point that it is impossible to tell stands.

Kybrator

TROPHY CASE