- Joined
- Jul 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,437
- Reaction score
- 1,950
- Location
- Confirmation Bias Land
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
I didn't make this thread into a poll, because any well-thought-out answer would be much more nuanced than a yes or no.
Nor did I say, "do the unborn have a right to [x]?" because legality has nothing to do with this issue. It's strictly a philosophical question.
So what is your position and why?
I didn't make this thread into a poll, because any well-thought-out answer would be much more nuanced than a yes or no.
Nor did I say, "do the unborn have a right to [x]?" because legality has nothing to do with this issue. It's strictly a philosophical question.
So what is your position and why?
I didn't make this thread into a poll, because any well-thought-out answer would be much more nuanced than a yes or no.
Nor did I say, "do the unborn have a right to [x]?" because legality has nothing to do with this issue. It's strictly a philosophical question.
So what is your position and why?
I didn't make this thread into a poll, because any well-thought-out answer would be much more nuanced than a yes or no.
Nor did I say, "do the unborn have a right to [x]?" because legality has nothing to do with this issue. It's strictly a philosophical question.
So what is your position and why?
I didn't make this thread into a poll, because any well-thought-out answer would be much more nuanced than a yes or no.
Nor did I say, "do the unborn have a right to [x]?" because legality has nothing to do with this issue. It's strictly a philosophical question.
So what is your position and why?
Youll have to be more specific and tell me how you are defining "right to self determination" without any answer I give you is based of a GUESS of what you mean or my opinion of what self determination so my answer could be wrong.
As almost everyone mentioned before, an unborn potential person is not likely to understand the concept of self-determination. However, just for discussion's sake, I would contend that it's safe to assume that the overwhelming majority of the unborn - if they were able to voice an opinion - would choose to live rather than to have their lives terminated. The question is whether and when such a choice should ever outweigh the mother's decision.
If that doesn't help, feel free to ask me any follow up questions.
Should we give cows, chickens,plants. and all other living creatures we exploit that same right of "self determination"?
Well... it's sort of hard for something with no brain to determine much of anything. I've always found it curious how people go on about denying the embryo the choice to live, but never about how it might choose not to live to be born to, for example, an abusive, crack-addicted household in a slum. It isn't as though lots of people who do have the power of self-determination don't decide, ultimately, that they'd rather not live, for a wide variety of reasons.
But anyway... philosophically, no, they have no right to anything whatsoever, not just legally, but in a purely philosophical and ethical framework.
Why is very simple. They are harming the body of another, and there is no way to end that harm immediately except the remove them. As the harmed party, the woman always maintains absolute domain over that decision.
As almost everyone mentioned before, an unborn potential person is not likely to understand the concept of self-determination. However, just for discussion's sake, I would contend that it's safe to assume that the overwhelming majority of the unborn - if they were able to voice an opinion - would choose to live rather than to have their lives terminated. The question is whether and when such a choice should ever outweigh the mother's decision.
If that doesn't help, feel free to ask me any follow up questions.
Only if you believe it makes sense to equate humans and potential humans to cows, chickens, and plants.
As almost everyone mentioned before, an unborn potential person is not likely to understand the concept of self-determination. However, just for discussion's sake, I would contend that it's safe to assume that the overwhelming majority of the unborn - if they were able to voice an opinion - would choose to live rather than to have their lives terminated. The question is whether and when such a choice should ever outweigh the mother's decision.
If that doesn't help, feel free to ask me any follow up questions.
As almost everyone mentioned before, an unborn potential person is not likely to understand the concept of self-determination. However, just for discussion's sake, I would contend that it's safe to assume that the overwhelming majority of the unborn - if they were able to voice an opinion - would choose to live rather than to have their lives terminated. The question is whether and when such a choice should ever outweigh the mother's decision.
If that doesn't help, feel free to ask me any follow up questions.
Really? Can it have self determination at 1 day old? 1 month? Fascinating!It can have self determination when it is not living inside and attached to someone's body, thereby putting that body at risk for health problems and even death, stretching it all out of proportion and causing it great pain and discomfort, both in gestation and childbirth.
Really? Can it have self determination at 1 day old? 1 month? Fascinating!
Should we give cows, chickens,plants. and all other living creatures we exploit that same right of "self determination"?
That's a bit vague. Are you claiming that all pregnancies do permanent harm to women's bodies?
Actually, it does.curious, why the additional qualifier of "permanent" to harm? Do you feel that matters?
secondly just as a general statement EVERY SINGLE PREGNANCY is a risk of health and life, some VERY small, some VERY large and everythign in between. Some of the harm is blatantly obvious and predictable, some is unpredictable and never seen until the harm or death happens. But every single one is a factual risk of health and life.
WTF?I didn't make this thread into a poll, because any well-thought-out answer would be much more nuanced than a yes or no.
Nor did I say, "do the unborn have a right to [x]?" because legality has nothing to do with this issue. It's strictly a philosophical question.
So what is your position and why?
WTF?
Of course they have the right and they do exercise it.
1.)Actually, it does.
2.)That's why the odds have to be weighed in context. No doctor would automatically tell any pregnant woman that she is placing herself in a life-threatening situation because of her pregnancy.
3.) They know how to weigh the medical risks (which goes back to the other point in this post).
Ummm...I don't think most people would equate a human to a cow, chicken or plant.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?