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.
Look, we get your a religious moral absolutist. That's your thing. You see no difference between an embryo and a child, a child and an adult, or an old man. If you had enough to keep only one of two children alive, you'd let both die because you wouldn't dare be a "consequentialist" --- it's a moral absolute wrong to let one die, and one to live.
Just don't get mad when nobody wants to play in the sandbox with you because your points of view are spectacular examples of absurdity, and because you refuse to even engage in philosophical discussion for philosphy's sake.
Sorry, you don't get to say "newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons" and then pretend it is only abstract and academic and philosophical with no practical, real-world consequences.
If the statement is true, that means something in the real world. You are being fundamentally dishonest if you deny this.
Thanks for being the first pro-choicer to "take a stab" at this (pun intended).
I have no problems digging the proverbial blade into false dilemmas and twisting it inside the festering wound.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim
Also, I'm very happy to learn that you are pro-life for all babies who are past 24-26 weeks gestation!!! See, I knew we could find some common ground!!!
Only because it's a logical conclusion that if the child is capable of supporting its body outside of the womb, that some protection be given - except in certain situations such as the health and safety of the mother.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim
Please join me in supporting a ban on all abortions after 24-26 weeks!!!
Absolutely not. I have no intention of banning any and all abortions after 24-26 weeks - or supporting any sort of law to the extent.
Quote:
Nevertheless, the viability argument seems very arbitrary to me. My son was just born at 35 weeks, and he could not have survived on his own. He was born with pulmonary hypertension and required 11 days of hospitalization.
Research into anencephaly and you'll understand the point I was making.
Quote:
In your view, then, would we have been justified in killing him if we didn't want him? Serious question. Please don't dodge it. Thanks in advance.
If it was certain that he would die, yes.
But seeing as how he has survived through it, I take it that his condition did not mean certain death.
Quote:
We're all "going to die no matter what". And we're all going to suffer in life. Do you mean to say that anyone who has what you consider a "poor quality of life", or who is likely to die of his condition, is fair game for being euthanized? Or do you only apply this to babies?
I actually apply the concept to all persons including myself.
I never want to be kept alive by machines alone if there was no chance of recovery to a life of decent quality. I would rather have a short life of high quality than to live for years as a vegetable or comatose state.
Quote:
If you only apply this criteria to babies, I'd like to know where you have drawn "a set line of when a person is not euthanizable". 2 years old? 6 years old? 35 years old? Where do you draw the line and why? Can you say "slippery slope"?
I don't apply it to only babies. The concept applies to all persons of all ages.
Quality over quantity.
I mean really, who would actually want to live for years in a half-dead state unable to actually enjoy life?
Sorry, you don't get to say "newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons" and then pretend it is only abstract and academic and philosophical with no practical, real-world consequences.
If the statement is true, that means something in the real world. You are being fundamentally dishonest if you deny this.
Be a man of your word and hush now on this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim
This is so utterly pathetic, sickening, and morally depraved as to need no further comment from me.
And by the way, dialogue is at the heart of Catholic evangelism. You might think about this before starting your next thread.
Thanks for being the first pro-choicer to "take a stab" at this (pun intended).
Also, I'm very happy to learn that you are pro-life for all babies who are past 24-26 weeks gestation!!! See, I knew we could find some common ground!!! Please join me in supporting a ban on all abortions after 24-26 weeks!!!
Nevertheless, the viability argument seems very arbitrary to me. My son was just born at 35 weeks, and he could not have survived on his own. He was born with pulmonary hypertension and required 11 days of hospitalization.
In your view, then, would we have been justified in killing him if we didn't want him? Serious question. Please don't dodge it. Thanks in advance.
We're all "going to die no matter what". And we're all going to suffer in life. Do you mean to say that anyone who has what you consider a "poor quality of life", or who is likely to die of his condition, is fair game for being euthanized? Or do you only apply this to babies?
If you only apply this criteria to babies, I'd like to know where you have drawn "a set line of when a person is not euthanizable". 2 years old? 6 years old? 35 years old?
Where do you draw the line and why? Can you say "slippery slope"?
If someone is going to die no matter what, then no matter what age we are at there should be the option of euthanasia.
Only because it's a logical conclusion that if the child is capable of supporting its body outside of the womb, that some protection be given - except in certain situations such as the health and safety of the mother.
This makes no sense. After 22 weeks or thereabouts you don't know whether a child is capable of living outside the womb until the child is actually outside the womb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gallowsCalibrator
Absolutely not. I have no intention of banning any and all abortions after 24-26 weeks - or supporting any sort of law to the extent.
What? You just said that 24-25 weeks was the line after which "a fetus is not abort-able". What does "not abort-able" mean if you think it's OK to abort it? It's plain that you've only thought seriously about this topic for maybe five minutes total.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gallowsCalibrator
If it was certain that he would die, yes.
It is very seldom "certain" that a child will die without treatment until he is actually treated. What is certain is that 50% of babies born with my son's condition die without treatment. You're telling me that if the doctors determined that it was certain that a particular baby would die without treatment, the parents would be morally justified in killing him if they didn't want him?
Nevermind. You're all over the map on this. It's clear that you don't have a coherent position, haven't thought any of this through, and are just making up answers as you go.
Thanks for trying though. I have to go get some work done for a change. Cheers.
This makes no sense. After 22 weeks or thereabouts you don't know whether a child is capable of living outside the womb until the child is actually outside the womb.
Actually, you can typically tell when a fetus is viable.
Quote:
It is very seldom "certain" that a child will die without treatment until he is actually treated.
..Which goes to show that you didn't read her example.
Quote:
You're telling me that if the doctors determined that it was certain that a particular baby would die without treatment, the parents would be morally justified in killing him if they didn't want him?
Not what she said at all.
What she said was
"If the child was going to die no matter what, then a merciful death is humane"
The same applies across the board to -any- terminal illness.
\
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.
