Abortion

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
chaos

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor
17,324
4,839
The Ancient_sl said:
Equivalence is not an arbitrary concept. Worse than a "strawman" is the way you keep disparaging any argument by calling it arbitrary. You keep doing it like it makes you some sort of master debater too, it doesn't make your position look particularly strong.

Would you place equivalent value on a brain dead human and a conscious one? It's not a difficult question, clearly we both already know the answer to it. Is the difference between a brain dead already born human and a fertilized egg arbitrary? Is the difference between a fertilized egg and an almost fertilized egg arbitrary?
Click to expand...

Calm down, princess. It was a joke, all day I've been using the word over and over because I am tired and lazy. I was making fun of that.

I don't think the word "equivalent" fits there. I don't think there is a scale to measure that sort of thing on. All I can tell you is that I value all life and think it should all be respected.
 
chaos

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor
17,324
4,839
Selix_sl said:
So is it valid to infer from this statement that your definition of "human being" does not include conciousness? If I were to go further and would your definition resemble this "A human being is one with genetic code seperate from another human that could possibly develop through birth."
Click to expand...
One extreme or another with you guys, all black or white.

Why do you throw the words "possible " and "birth" in that second definition? Is a human that isn't born not human? If it isn't possible for a human to be born, is it not human? Is a person lacking consciousness not human?

I really don't understand where this is going.
 
Sebudai

Sebudai

Ssraeszha Raider
12,022
22,504
chaos_sl said:
I don't think a fertilized egg is a being, I know it is.
Click to expand...
This might be the most obstinate you've ever been on this forum by a huge margin. I mean really, Chaos? What are you going to tell me you "know" next, that Jesus is our lord and savior?
 
chaos

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor
17,324
4,839
Sebudai_sl said:
This might be the most obstinate you've ever been on this forum by a huge margin. I mean really, Chaos? What are you going to tell me you "know" next, that Jesus is our lord and savior?
Click to expand...
Well what the fuck would you call it? Two people's DNA combine to make a separate entity of some sort with unique DNA made in combination from the two parents. It is what it is. It is in no way comparable to religion.
 
T

The Ancient_sl

shitlord
7,386
16
chaos_sl said:
One extreme or another with you guys, all black or white.

Why do you throw the words "possible " and "birth" in that second definition? Is a human that isn't born not human? If it isn't possible for a human to be born, is it not human? Is a person lacking consciousness not human?

I really don't understand where this is going.
Click to expand...
It's fair to say you value all life. It's completely fair, it's completely justified, for you to say I value a life which has yet to be born exactly as much as I value the mother who needs to carry it to term. It's fair to say that I value the life of the conscious mother more than the potential life inside of her because I recognize her as a fully realized being and the zygote as a potential one.

It's not fair for you to say "I'm right because my definition is concrete and yours is arbitrary". You can claim it's a joke now, but it's not just a word; You've been basing your entire argument around it.
 
chaos

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor
17,324
4,839
The Ancient_sl said:
It's fair to say you value all life. It's completely fair, it's completely justified, for you to say I value a life which has yet to be born exactly as much as I value the mother who needs to carry it to term. It's fair to say that I value the life of the conscious mother more than the potential life inside of her because I recognize her as a fully realized being and the zygote as a potential one.

It's not fair for you to say "I'm right because my definition is concrete and yours is arbitrary". You can claim it's a joke now, but it's not just a word; You've been basing your entire argument around it.
Click to expand...
No, I've been arguing that what Sebudai is using as a metric is arbitrary, because I feel it is. That is it, only a small part of the overall argument. And yes, I have been joking about how I am using the word a lot today.

As I said before, I don't think there is a scale you can measure that one life is worth X and another is worth Y. I think it is fair to say I value both, and I think I have said that, but I don't think I have ever said that I value both equally.
 
T

The Ancient_sl

shitlord
7,386
16
The Ancient_sl said:
It's not fair for you to say "I'm right because my definition is concrete and yours is arbitrary". You can claim it's a joke now, but it's not just a word; You've been basing your entire argument around it.
Click to expand...
chaos_sl said:
No, I've been arguing that what Sebudai is using as a metric is arbitrary, because I feel it is. That is it, only a small part of the overall argument. And yes, I have been joking about how I am using the word a lot today.
Click to expand...
"your whole argument is that your definition is concrete and his is arbitrary"
"no my argument is that his metric is arbitrary"

Are you fucking with me right now?
 
chaos

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor
17,324
4,839
That isn't even the argument. It is one small portion of the argument that has dominated the past page or so because people on MMO forums are anal retentive as fuck. I never said "I'm right because my definition is concrete and your's is arbitrary" I said "The basic timeframe for when a human becomes a human Sebudai is using to establish his argument is arbitrary and I do not believe the one I am using is" and that dominated the conversation for a while. And I still believe that.
 
T

The Ancient_sl

shitlord
7,386
16
A size-able number of people don't think it's arbitrary and your assertion that you FEEL it, doesn't do much to show them otherwise.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
47,943
82,663
Selix_sl said:
So is it valid to infer from this statement that your definition of "human being" does not include conciousness? If I were to go further and would your definition resemble this "A human being is one with genetic code seperate from another human that could possibly develop through birth."
Click to expand...
I would agree with your definition and would only modify it to be 'that will very likely develop into through pregnancy and birth' since the birth rate in this country is very high.
 
chaos

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor
17,324
4,839
The Ancient_sl said:
A size-able number of people don't think it's arbitrary and your assertion that you FEEL it, doesn't do much to show them otherwise.
Click to expand...
A sizable number of people probably feel that it IS arbitrary as well, so what? Even if it is arbitrary, so what? This is America, you can be as arbitrary as you arbitrarily feel like on any arbitrary day. That seems to be pretty much where the conversation stops, anyway. His criteria can't be defined in a universal way and you can't really argue against a vague notion like "consciousness" so I guess all that is left is for us to debate what is or is not arbitrary for an arbitrary number of pages.
 
Selix

Selix

Lord Nagafen Raider
2,149
4
chaos_sl said:
One extreme or another with you guys, all black or white.

Why do you throw the words "possible " and "birth" in that second definition? Is a human that isn't born not human? If it isn't possible for a human to be born, is it not human? Is a person lacking consciousness not human?

I really don't understand where this is going.
Click to expand...
You said that you know a fertilized egg is a being but you never defined what a (human) being is. This is a problem because some definitions of being include consciousnesses. This more accurate description of a fertilized egg is a zygote or even more accurately a human zygote. Hence using the term "being" with reference to a human zygote is being arbitrary.

Why is this important? Well for one thing we assign certain rights to "human beings" unquestionably and a healthy newborn is unquestionably a human being. But on the other hand a fetus (please understand this is ONLY a single example) without a brain can arguably be said to never become a human being. Now this is CERTAINLY arguable from both sides but the point is that the distinction is not nearly so clear as to be unanimous.

Your own statement that you know an fertilized egg is a being makes it necessary that you explicitly state what you mean by being. You did not do so and I was just trying to help.

As I said before, I don't think there is a scale you can measure that one life is worth X and another is worth Y. I think it is fair to say I value both, and I think I have said that, but I don't think I have ever said that I value both equally.
Click to expand...
There is a scale it is just that it is hard to measure in small values but becomes easier to measure with larger values. I.E. (all other things being equal) The life of 1 vs another or the life of 1 vs 5 million)
 
T

The Ancient_sl

shitlord
7,386
16
chaos_sl said:
A sizable number of people probably feel that it IS arbitrary as well, so what? Even if it is arbitrary, so what? This is America, you can be as arbitrary as you arbitrarily feel like on any arbitrary day. That seems to be pretty much where the conversation stops, anyway. His criteria can't be defined in a universal way and you can't really argue against a vague notion like "consciousness" so I guess all that is left is for us to debate what is or is not arbitrary for an arbitrary number of pages.
Click to expand...
Arguing over positions you recognize as arbitrary sounds pretty fucking stupid to me. That was in factmy argument.
The Ancient_sl said:
Where you decide you place value on a not yet realized conscious being is arbitrary, not the science behind how that being attains consciousness. I'm not even forabortion, I'm annoyed at the hypocrisy or stubbornness I'm witnessing here. "Your definition is arbitrary but mine isn't"IS SO STUPID.
Click to expand...
Maybe you don't think it's stupid though, so I'll just leave you to it.
 
chaos

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor
17,324
4,839
Selix_sl said:
You said that you know a fertilized egg is a being but you never defined what a (human) being is. This is a problem because some definitions of being include consciousnesses. This more accurate description of a fertilized egg is a zygote or even more accurately a human zygote. Hence using the term "being" with reference to a human zygote is being arbitrary.

Why is this important? Well for one thing we assign certain rights to "human beings" unquestionably and a healthy newborn is unquestionably a human being. But on the other hand a fetus (please understand this is ONLY a single example) without a brain can arguably be said to never become a human being. Now this is CERTAINLY arguable from both sides but the point is that the distinction is not nearly so clear as to be unanimous.

Your own statement that you know an fertilized egg is a being makes it necessary that you explicitly state what you mean by being. You did not do so and I was just trying to help.



There is a scale it is just that it is hard to measure in small values but becomes easier to measure with larger values. I.E. (all other things being equal) The life of 1 vs another or the life of 1 vs 5 million)
Click to expand...
Yes, I meant human being. I was just speaking in general terms, I guess.

As far as the scale goes, I don't know, there are too many other factors for me to really say. To bring this back toabortion, I don't really think you find too many people who say a woman whose life is threatened by pregnancy shouldn't get anabortion. When you're talking about a woman whose weekend is threatened by a pregnancy, I think that is where you find the dispute.
 
T

The Ancient_sl

shitlord
7,386
16
The anti-abortion tide is this country has proven not to be about stopping women who don't want to give up partying, it's about ending all abortions including those one women who's life are threatened and those victimized by rape. You've attributed the sentiments felt by most pro-choice advocates to those of pro-life.

It's an understandable mistake though, considering the tone of this board. You have plenty of people here arguing that abortions are a great thing, which is probably how you ended up arguing this position in the first place. Outside in the real world, the goalposts (as we like to say) are much further shifted.
 
Selix

Selix

Lord Nagafen Raider
2,149
4
chaos_sl said:
As far as the scale goes, I don't know, there are too many other factors for me to really say. To bring this back toabortion, I don't really think you find too many people who say a woman whose life is threatened by pregnancy shouldn't get anabortion. When you're talking about a woman whose weekend is threatened by a pregnancy, I think that is where you find the dispute.
Click to expand...
I agree with you but it should be noted that "why" a person has anabortionis something which you do not know. To take away the mothers right to control of her own body you need to make certain assumptions and justifications...

Like
1. Whatever reason a mother has it is not good enough unless it is reasons you have defined as xxxx (Where xxxx is things like danger to the mother or extreme defects in fetus or whatever you think is a justification)
2. The presumption here is that the agreed upon reasons of society are superior to anything else the mother comes up with as well as the right of control over her own person.
3. An example justification is "well if she didn't want to get pregnant then she shouldn't have had sex"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.