|
|
Post by goz on Jul 23, 2018 21:09:51 GMT
I heard this and will just put it out there.
'I feel about abortion, the same way I feel about the three second rule that you make when you accidentally drop food on the ground and have to decide whether to pick it up and still eat it or throw it in the bin. I made the food, it is mine. If I pick it up and eat it before some harm is done, then it is acceptable for me to take that risk. It is purely my decision and I knowingly take that risk realising the responsibility for my own health and welfare is mine. The food is what it is and has no opinion, hence if it is still fresh and uncontaminated in my opinion, I have the total control as to whether to eat it or throw it in the bin. Someone else's opinion is pretty worthless as it is not their opinion that counts as to whether I pick up the food and eat it or throw it in the bin.'
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jul 23, 2018 21:30:02 GMT
I think someone who makes think statement does indeed care what another person's opinion is. Otherwise, they would either just do it or not concern themselves with a response if it never needs to happen.
|
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jul 23, 2018 21:32:41 GMT
Those who oppose reproductive choice rights would say that it's not comparable because the food is not human. They typically see the conceptus/embryo/fetus as a human being with inherent rights. The conceptus/embryo/fetus is unable to defend itself, so others have to speak on its behalf--something akin to 18th- & 19th-century slavery abolitionists speaking on behalf of enslaved people. Citizen abolitionists were able to file lawsuits on behalf of the enslaved and were able to run for political offices with the intent of outlawing slavery, things that the enslaved could not legally do themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 23, 2018 21:34:27 GMT
I think someone who makes think statement does indeed care what another person's opinion is. Otherwise, they would either just do it or not concern themselves with a response if it never needs to happen. What abut if such advice is given anyway, or worse, legislated and/or the ability to pick up the food is withdrawn meaning that the 'choice' is taken out of the dropee's hands? |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 23, 2018 21:39:13 GMT
Those who oppose reproductive choice rights would say that it's not comparable because the food is not human. They typically see the conceptus/embryo/fetus as a human being with inherent rights. The conceptus/embryo/fetus is unable to defend itself, so others have to speak on its behalf--something akin to 18th- & 19th-century slavery abolitionists speaking on behalf of enslaved people. Citizen abolitionists were able to file lawsuits on behalf of the enslaved and were able to run for political offices with the intent of outlawing slavery, things that the enslaved could not legally do themselves. Yes, that it seems is the crux of it, however what about the argument that it is 'my food' I made it, I don't even need to tell anyone about it, as it is no one else's business and if noone knows it is there and I pick it up quickly enough without anyone else seeing it, then I can do what I like with it. If I don't consider my 'food' human so why should they? |
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jul 23, 2018 22:04:15 GMT
Those who oppose reproductive choice rights would say that it's not comparable because the food is not human. They typically see the conceptus/embryo/fetus as a human being with inherent rights. The conceptus/embryo/fetus is unable to defend itself, so others have to speak on its behalf--something akin to 18th- & 19th-century slavery abolitionists speaking on behalf of enslaved people. Citizen abolitionists were able to file lawsuits on behalf of the enslaved and were able to run for political offices with the intent of outlawing slavery, things that the enslaved could not legally do themselves. Yes, that it seems is the crux of it, however what about the argument that it is 'my food' I made it, I don't even need to tell anyone about it, as it is no one else's business and if noone knows it is there and I pick it up quickly enough without anyone else seeing it, then I can do what I like with it. If I don't consider my 'food' human so why should they? I support reproductive choice rights because the embryo/fetus cannot exist outside of the woman's body and cannot get outside of the woman's body without some risk to her. It's her body, so it's her choice. The argument that a person can do whatever they want with the food because it's their food/they made it is unpersuasive here. A man is not morally free to kill his son just because he made his son. Nor can he physically abuse his son just because he made him. If John saves the life of Sean, he cannot subsequently torture Sean even though Sean owes his life to John. If you donate your kidney to someone else, thereby saving his or her life, he or she does not become morally obliged to do whatever you demand that they do no matter how physically or emotionally painful complying with your demand would be for them. If you adopt a puppy slated to be euthanized from the kennel, you cannot, morally, mistreat the puppy (or the dog when it is older) because you saved its life.
The fact that other people may not know that you are doing something immoral does not make the act any less immoral. And the fact that other people do not know that someone is in a room does not make that someone no longer be in the room. They're still there whether others know it or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 23, 2018 22:22:45 GMT
Yes, that it seems is the crux of it, however what about the argument that it is 'my food' I made it, I don't even need to tell anyone about it, as it is no one else's business and if noone knows it is there and I pick it up quickly enough without anyone else seeing it, then I can do what I like with it. If I don't consider my 'food' human so why should they? I support reproductive choice rights because the embryo/fetus cannot exist outside of the woman's body and cannot get outside of the woman's body without some risk to her. It's her body, so it's her choice. The argument that a person can do whatever they want with the food because it's their food/they made it is unpersuasive here. A man is not morally free to kill his son just because he made his son. Nor can he physically abuse his son just because he made him. If John saves the life of Sean, he cannot subsequently torture Sean even though Sean owes his life to John. If you donate your kidney to someone else, thereby saving his or her life, he or she does not become morally obliged to do whatever you demand that they do no matter how physically or emotionally painful complying with your demand would be for them. If you adopt a puppy slated to be euthanized from the kennel, you cannot, morally, mistreat the puppy (or the dog when it is older) because you saved its life.
The fact that other people may not know that you are doing something immoral does not make the act any less immoral. And the fact that other people do not know that someone is in a room does not make that someone no longer be in the room. They're still there whether others know it or not.
Great answer. You know I am playing Devil's Advocate here, right? What about the people who claim that it is NOT your food, it is our food as well, because WE claim that it is a 'human' and not really food, so we MUST take the responsibility of saving it because you think it is your food and you can dispose of it, so we want to take over the responsibility from you because this is what WE believe? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2018 22:29:04 GMT
I heard this and will just put it out there. 'I feel about abortion, the same way I feel about the three second rule that you make when you accidentally drop food on the ground and have to decide whether to pick it up and still eat it or throw it in the bin. I made the food, it is mine. If I pick it up and eat it before some harm is done, then it is acceptable for me to take that risk. It is purely my decision and I knowingly take that risk realising the responsibility for my own health and welfare is mine. The food is what it is and has no opinion, hence if it is still fresh and uncontaminated in my opinion, I have the total control as to whether to eat it or throw it in the bin. Someone else's opinion is pretty worthless as it is not their opinion that counts as to whether I pick up the food and eat it or throw it in the bin.' I think that it would be immoral NOT to have the abortion, but this analogy misses the enire reason that people are opposed to abortion, and there to be persuasive to many people. Nobody's actually opposed to abortion for reasons that pertain to womens' health, although sometimes pro-lifers do make some some feeble attempt to insinuate that the abortion would be more risky for the woman's health than to have the child. |
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jul 23, 2018 22:39:55 GMT
You know I am playing Devil's Advocate here, right? Well, blow me down. You mean all this time you haven't really been a fire-breathing biblethumper? |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 23, 2018 22:40:06 GMT
I heard this and will just put it out there. 'I feel about abortion, the same way I feel about the three second rule that you make when you accidentally drop food on the ground and have to decide whether to pick it up and still eat it or throw it in the bin. I made the food, it is mine. If I pick it up and eat it before some harm is done, then it is acceptable for me to take that risk. It is purely my decision and I knowingly take that risk realising the responsibility for my own health and welfare is mine. The food is what it is and has no opinion, hence if it is still fresh and uncontaminated in my opinion, I have the total control as to whether to eat it or throw it in the bin. Someone else's opinion is pretty worthless as it is not their opinion that counts as to whether I pick up the food and eat it or throw it in the bin.' I think that it would be immoral NOT to have the abortion, but this analogy misses the enire reason that people are opposed to abortion, and there to be persuasive to many people. Nobody's actually opposed to abortion for reasons that pertain to womens' health, although sometimes pro-lifers do make some some feeble attempt to insinuate that the abortion would be more risky for the woman's health than to have the child. Sorry, I am not getting your actual point here, other than your usual schtick that everyone should always have an abortion and then kill themselves! |
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jul 23, 2018 22:40:48 GMT
Nobody's actually opposed to abortion for reasons that pertain to womens' health Incorrect. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 23, 2018 22:45:06 GMT
You know I am playing Devil's Advocate here, right? Well, blow me down. You mean all this time you haven't really been a fire-breathing biblethumper? Sorry. I forgot to mention that I failed the Bible reading test for admittance to GodBotherersRuS despite some tutoring from Cool GJs and WinterSuicide! Should have sucked up to Cody more!   |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2018 1:38:53 GMT
Nobody's actually opposed to abortion for reasons that pertain to womens' health Incorrect. I've never come across that as being the main reason for people being opposed to abortion. Although I've probably come across people trying to insincerely refer to that as an additional reason why it shouldn't be allowed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2018 1:41:01 GMT
I think that it would be immoral NOT to have the abortion, but this analogy misses the enire reason that people are opposed to abortion, and there to be persuasive to many people. Nobody's actually opposed to abortion for reasons that pertain to womens' health, although sometimes pro-lifers do make some some feeble attempt to insinuate that the abortion would be more risky for the woman's health than to have the child. Sorry, I am not getting your actual point here, other than your usual schtick that everyone should always have an abortion and then kill themselves! The point is that this is another inane and pointless thread. The quote that you cited is a strawman argument anyway, because nobody opposes abortion mainly because they are concerned about risk to the woman. |
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jul 24, 2018 8:10:34 GMT
I heard this and will just put it out there. 'I feel about abortion, the same way I feel about the three second rule that you make when you accidentally drop food on the ground and have to decide whether to pick it up and still eat it or throw it in the bin. I made the food, it is mine. If I pick it up and eat it before some harm is done, then it is acceptable for me to take that risk. It is purely my decision and I knowingly take that risk realising the responsibility for my own health and welfare is mine. The food is what it is and has no opinion, hence if it is still fresh and uncontaminated in my opinion, I have the total control as to whether to eat it or throw it in the bin. Someone else's opinion is pretty worthless as it is not their opinion that counts as to whether I pick up the food and eat it or throw it in the bin.' Whoever made that analogy should be ashamed of themselves. |
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jul 24, 2018 18:53:54 GMT
I've never come across that as being the main reason for people being opposed to abortion. Although I've probably come across people trying to insincerely refer to that as an additional reason why it shouldn't be allowed. I misunderstood your post. I thought you were saying nobody supports abortion even if carrying the pregnancy to term could hurt the woman's health. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2018 19:05:36 GMT
I heard this and will just put it out there. 'I feel about abortion, the same way I feel about the three second rule that you make when you accidentally drop food on the ground and have to decide whether to pick it up and still eat it or throw it in the bin. I made the food, it is mine. If I pick it up and eat it before some harm is done, then it is acceptable for me to take that risk. It is purely my decision and I knowingly take that risk realising the responsibility for my own health and welfare is mine. The food is what it is and has no opinion, hence if it is still fresh and uncontaminated in my opinion, I have the total control as to whether to eat it or throw it in the bin. Someone else's opinion is pretty worthless as it is not their opinion that counts as to whether I pick up the food and eat it or throw it in the bin.' Whoever made that analogy should be ashamed of themselves. People generally aren't ashamed of themselves just because others think they should be. |
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jul 24, 2018 20:35:02 GMT
Whoever made that analogy should be ashamed of themselves. People generally aren't ashamed of themselves just because others think they should be. Yes it’s even more shameful than one of your analogies... |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 24, 2018 20:44:11 GMT
I heard this and will just put it out there. 'I feel about abortion, the same way I feel about the three second rule that you make when you accidentally drop food on the ground and have to decide whether to pick it up and still eat it or throw it in the bin. I made the food, it is mine. If I pick it up and eat it before some harm is done, then it is acceptable for me to take that risk. It is purely my decision and I knowingly take that risk realising the responsibility for my own health and welfare is mine. The food is what it is and has no opinion, hence if it is still fresh and uncontaminated in my opinion, I have the total control as to whether to eat it or throw it in the bin. Someone else's opinion is pretty worthless as it is not their opinion that counts as to whether I pick up the food and eat it or throw it in the bin.' Whoever made that analogy should be ashamed of themselves. Why? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2018 21:09:50 GMT
People generally aren't ashamed of themselves just because others think they should be. Yes it’s even more shameful than one of your analogies... The ones that you can never refute no matter how hard you try? Until you finally have an emotional outburst and run away? No, I'm quite happy with those. |
|
