Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Great question OP. I tend to think of it as more a philiosphical one than political.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper in Dallas
If you believe a fetus is a person then you cannot morally support abortion.
If on the other hand you believe a fetus is not a person then yes you can support abortion and be a moral person.
Casper
I don't think a fetus a person. It's a fetus. An egg isn't a bird.
I don't support the taking of life. At the same time if someone burst thru my door and attacked me I have no compunction about taking their life, I think. (I would be traumatized.)
I think certain things are permissible under certain conditions but we aren't always the best judge of what those conditions are.
Burdell responded to "Freedom of choice for whom?" with "Human beings capable of making a choice."
It follows that humans beings NOT capable of making a choice (such as the unborn, such as some disabled, such as some mentally disturbed) should not be offered said choice.
Not sure how this is difficult to understand. Unless you haven't covered deductive reasoning in your high school classes, yet.
Sorry, but deductive reasoning does NOT lead me to read into his post what you previously stated. Yes, if someone is not capable of making a choice, then that choice should not be offered to them. But, just because someone needs a caretaker to make most of their choices for them, does not mean "they should be killed", which is what you claimed before.
And, BTW, take a look at my profile before you presume to 'assist' me in logical thinking.
Your rights don't apply until you have a birth certificate.
Fetuses don't contribute to the population count.
Fetuses are not people.
Wow.
And with that, I bow out.
You've just answered your own "am I moral?" question, and that's even taking into account what I kindly said before, about morality being subjective. Good luck to you.
Your rights don't apply until you have a birth certificate.
Note to self: Remember to fulfill my dream of wanting to kill a third world savage justifiably by finding some remote Pacific Island that doesn't make much of a concerted effort to formalize birth reporting records and kill some of the island savages who don't have a birth certificate, since they have no rights as human beings, lacking the correct piece of paper which was mentioned prior as a necessary requisite of rights.
Legal positivism, for the win. This is good news indeed.
Last edited by FreedomThroughAnarchism; 03-14-2011 at 09:37 PM..
I agree. You can't support the taking of life and be moral.
Then do you think being pro-life automatically make someone moral?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(I would be traumatized.)