Spam Talks Philosophy 2nd Edition

[The Australian]

>he found a flaw in my logic
>must discredit him

He must.

[KnightShade]

So you're saying that a human that isn't as developed as a fully grown human in some cases may not be considered human? Or may not have the same value of life?

No, I said I'm not taking a side in this as I have no strong convictions either way. I said that if someone considers an embryo to technically be human they don't neccesarily place the same moral value on the embryo's life as they do on a human's life.

[Myyt]

No, I said I'm not taking a side in this as I have no strong convictions either way. I said that if someone considers an embryo to technically be human they don't neccesarily place the same moral value on the embryo's life as they do on a human's life.

It's a human embryo though. You can't say an "embryo" without saying a human embryo... and by extension it is human life.

[The Australian]

It's a human embryo though. You can't say an "embryo" without saying a human embryo... and by extension it is human life.

But is an embryo self-aware? Can it communicate with you?

[Hellis]

And not everyone has the Human immedietly means "murder"
It's the same way with death penalty.

[Myyt]

But is an embryo self-aware? Can it communicate with you?

But is it still human life? Does it have the potential to become self aware and communicate? Let me ask YOU something. Are newborn babies self aware? Can they communicate with you? Can children who are 1-3 years old communicate with you? Are they self aware? Should they be aborted too because it's so early in their life span that they are socially invalid?

- - - Updated - - -

And not everyone has the Human immedietly means "murder"
It's the same way with death penalty.

Death penalty is different. It's in place because there are people who have proven themselves as detrimental to society by the murder of others. I personally don't even agree with the death penalty, I believe every has the right to live no matter what. But I can understand where the other side of the argument is coming from. A human fetus has not had a chance to prove itself as a detriment or benefit to society, so should we rob him/her of his/her chance to become a benefit? And on the flip side, should they be killed just because there's a possibility that they could be a detriment?

[TripMyHop]

Seriously? Why don't we just hook ourselves up to capsules that inject us with necessary nutrients and calories then? Ever think that maybe a woman would WANT to go through the "hell" of pregnancy?

- - - Updated - - -

And even if we create a HUMAN embryo, not a dog embryo not a pig embryo not a cow embryo, something which is always referred to as a HUMAN embryo which means that in essence, both sides of the argument are conceding that it is in fact HUMAN in some right which means that the cessation of said life would be considered the cessation of HUMAN life which would constitute murder in the most basic sense.

Don't get all emotional over this. When I said hell, I was referring to the physical cost of pregnancy. It is very high, regardless of choosing whether to go through with it.

[Myyt]

Don't get all emotional over this. When I said hell, I was referring to the physical cost of pregnancy. It is very high, regardless of choosing whether to go through with it.

I'm explaining logic without accusing or belittling. I hardly count that as emotional. And I understand that you were referring to the physical toll of pregnancy, but I doubt that no matter how far technology advances it will be considered "barbaric" for a woman to undergo the natural process of gestation.

[TripMyHop]

I'm (apparently) your British twin, after all. It wouldn't be a tragic story of long-lost siblings if I lived in the same timezone.



To be fair, I think Myyt has a point. Quite a few women, and girls of my own age too, have said they look forward to pregnancy and motherhood. Perhaps they're more thinking about the aftermath, having a child, rather than the pregnancy itself, but I believe a lot of women would value the emotional connection of your child developing and growing within them.

He would have a point if I had said they didn't. lol

- - - Updated - - -

I'm explaining logic without accusing or belittling. I hardly count that as emotional.

Your response to me was very emotional, considering I never said whether woman want to go through with it or not. You have to be able to divorce yourself somewhat from emotion to discuss a topic like this, if you want to learn or admit new ideas. It's very tough, but it doesn't have to be charged with your self-righteous indignation.

[Hellis]

I personally, do not consider a fetus an actual human being up untill a few weeks in atleast and would not say it has rights. The one who has rights is the pregnant woman, the right to choose whether or not to abort. As for the test tube thesis, to me, aborting one after the time and effort that it takes feels like you are simply wasting resources. I do not put "life" in the same category as thinking, sentient creature with rights. As for your VAST majority. My mother had three kids, she loves us all. But she said that she wished one could do it without the physcial toll it takes on the body. Not to mention 1 out 5 women I believe suffer depressions shortly after giving birth. There are so many factors in this, that the entire situation cannot be put into simply "right or wrong."

Calling abortion Murder is a personal choice that happens because a person clings to a (according to me) outdated view on life and gross overstepping of female rights.