|
|
Post by Cody™ on Feb 4, 2018 15:58:16 GMT
Pro-choicers watch the video and try to understand why your stance is a morally bankrupt one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Feb 4, 2018 16:36:14 GMT
His spiel just amounts to proclaiming (unconvincingly) that personhood begins at conception.
|
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Feb 4, 2018 18:20:38 GMT
His spiel just amounts to proclaiming (unconvincingly) that personhood begins at conception. Thanks. I don't really feel like watching an 8 minute video, linked by the OP who is too lazy to post a synopsis. Personhood does not begin at conception. It doesn't even begin at birth in my opinion. It begins when the being has a sense of self, and a sense of time, and plans and/or expectations for the future. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 4, 2018 18:24:43 GMT
Pro-choicers watch the video and try to understand why your stance is a morally bankrupt one. You know that morality is subjective, right? |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 4, 2018 18:25:46 GMT
It's typical Ben Shapiro, he is well spoken and beguiling but at the end of the day misinformation and not very well founded.
|
|
|
|
Post by kls on Feb 4, 2018 18:28:55 GMT
His spiel just amounts to proclaiming (unconvincingly) that personhood begins at conception. Thanks. I don't really feel like watching an 8 minute video, linked by the OP who is too lazy to post a synopsis. Personhood does not begin at conception. It doesn't even begin at birth in my opinion. It begins when the being has a sense of self, and a sense of time, and plans and/or expectations for the future. Would you say some of the most cognitively disabled never reach personhood? |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 4, 2018 18:29:05 GMT
I'm fine calling the entities in question "babies" from the moment of conception, by the way, and I'm fine saying that abortion is murder (where we'd be using a connotation for "murder" that doesn't hinge on legality). My moral stance in that case is that women should be allowed to choose to murder their own babies while the baby is still inside their womb.
The gist of this, by the way, is that it doesn't matter what we name anything. My stance has nothing to do with the words we're choosing to use. It's not that I'm against anything we're choosing to call murder just because of the word murder. Call anything whatever you like. My stance will be the same with whatever words we use.
Likewise, when racism and sexism and rape become sufficiently broadened semantically, I just say that some racism, sexism and rape isn't at all a bad thing. It becomes stuff we should allow, and sometimes something that we should even encourage. The words don't matter. The actions we're allowing and disallowing are what matter. Whatever we name them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2018 18:41:42 GMT
Interesting that you called it "The" abortion argument. As if there were only one.
And he really doesn't do a very good job of "dismantling" it at all. He basically just says that he disagrees with it and that we should use emotive language about the issue.
Not terribly impressive.
Hmm, nothing he said indicated that my stance is a morally bankrupt one.
Maybe you need to find a better quality of video?
Or you could even try making an argument yourself. Sometimes that works.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2018 18:46:53 GMT
I'm fine calling the entities in question "babies" from the moment of conception, by the way, and I'm fine saying that abortion is murder (where we'd be using a connotation for "murder" that doesn't hinge on legality). My moral stance in that case is that women should be allowed to choose to murder their own babies while the baby is still inside their womb. The gist of this, by the way, is that it doesn't matter what we name anything. My stance has nothing to do with the words we're choosing to use. It's not that I'm against anything we're choosing to call murder just because of the word murder. Call anything whatever you like. My stance will be the same with whatever words we use. Likewise, when racism and sexism and rape become sufficiently broadened semantically, I just say that some racism, sexism and rape isn't at all a bad thing. It becomes stuff we should allow, and sometimes something that we should even encourage. The words don't matter. The actions we're allowing and disallowing are what matter. Whatever we name them. Very well put. A large portion of the video amounts to "Let's use emotionally horrid terms to talk about this! Then I'm automatically right and you're automatically wrong!" It's idiotic. |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Feb 4, 2018 18:47:22 GMT
Personhood does not begin at conception. It doesn't even begin at birth in my opinion. It begins when the being has a sense of self, and a sense of time, and plans and/or expectations for the future. During this "pre-personhood" period after birth, does the infant have a right to life? |
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Feb 4, 2018 18:59:38 GMT
It's typical Ben Shapiro, he is well spoken and beguiling but at the end of the day misinformation and not very well founded. Mind elaborating? Which parts specifically were misinformation or unfounded exactly? |
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Feb 4, 2018 19:02:36 GMT
His spiel just amounts to proclaiming (unconvincingly) that personhood begins at conception.
Personhood does not begin at conception. It doesn't even begin at birth in my opinion. It begins when the being has a sense of self, and a sense of time, and plans and/or expectations for the future. Absolute rubbish. Nothing but your baseless opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by kls on Feb 4, 2018 19:03:19 GMT
It's typical Ben Shapiro, he is well spoken and beguiling but at the end of the day misinformation and not very well founded. Mind elaborating? Which parts specifically were misinformation or unfounded exactly? That most babies would survive being born at 24 weeks is one that comes to mind. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 4, 2018 19:07:02 GMT
Personhood does not begin at conception. It doesn't even begin at birth in my opinion. It begins when the being has a sense of self, and a sense of time, and plans and/or expectations for the future. Absolute rubbish. Nothing but your baseless opinion. Again, this would just be arguing over whether we're going to name one thing or another by a particular sound. All he'd have to say is, "Fine. Let's call something else 'personhood.' In that case, my stance has nothing to do with personhood wholesale. It has to do with the stage of personhood when one begins to have a sense of self, a sense of time, and plans and/or expectations for the future." Some people will unfortunately be swayed by shifting word usage so that it covers a broader range of stuff. But many people will realize that what's at stake isn't what we name things. |
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Feb 4, 2018 19:09:54 GMT
Mind elaborating? Which parts specifically were misinformation or unfounded exactly? That most babies would survive being born at 24 weeks is one that comes to mind. |
|
|
|
Post by yezziqa on Feb 4, 2018 19:12:33 GMT
I just needed to se less than a minute to see him make a fool of himself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 4, 2018 19:13:35 GMT
The demarcation criterion for my abortion stance is whether one individual is wholly contained inside of another or not. If one individual is wholly contained inside another, I advocate leaving decisions of life or death up to the "container" individual. Once part of an individual is not contained inside of another, then I'd say they no longer have that option.
|
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 4, 2018 19:14:30 GMT
It's typical Ben Shapiro, he is well spoken and beguiling but at the end of the day misinformation and not very well founded. Mind elaborating? Which parts specifically were misinformation or unfounded exactly? It started when he implied that because Olivia Wilde was making this statement a day before her birth, that she was only just thinking of abortion the day before her birth and was advocating abortion at that stage, he then went on with a whole lot of images he claimed were from late-term abortions as a shock tactic and finally (when I stopped watching) he accused an abortion doctor of being a prolific serial killer. As always Ben has a beguiling way of making statements, but they tend to be just his opinion presented as fact. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 4, 2018 19:15:11 GMT
The demarcation criterion for my abortion stance is whether one individual is wholly contained inside of another or not. If one individual is wholly contained inside another, I advocate leaving decisions of life or death up to the "container" individual. Once part of an individual is not contained inside of another, then I'd say they no longer have that option. So you would advocate abortion right up until birth? |
|
|
|
Post by yezziqa on Feb 4, 2018 19:18:09 GMT
Mind elaborating? Which parts specifically were misinformation or unfounded exactly? That most babies would survive being born at 24 weeks is one that comes to mind. Not most, more. And is it ethicaly right to "save" them? " Ju tidigare barnet sedan föds desto sämre är chanserna att överleva, men hela 82 procent överlever i vecka 25, 67 procent i vecka 24 och drygt 50 procent av de som föds i vecka 23 klarar sig." "The earlier the child is born, the less chance of surviving, but 82% of those born in week 25 survives, 67% in week 24 and 50% in week 23" ki.se/forskning/fran-overlevnad-till-en-vision-om-livslang-halsaThen you need to ask yourself the question on what kind of life they get, many of them with severe health issues. |
|
