Whew, I sure am glad the law is around to define morality for us. I hates gettin' all confused-like and what not!
I was not even trying to get into the pro-choice/life arguement. I was simply just stating the definition of an individual from a law perspective, it had nothing to do with you guys morality debate.
I don't think you are, I think you have value. Value is important. Your motivations depend upon it. You just confused two different things. I asked you to assign value to humans not the reproductive process. Every sperm is sacred? Not at all. Sperm has value, but not the same as other body parts. Reproduction in every species has a value. But if you can't assign a value to the species you cannot assign a value to the propogation of the species. So what is your value, seriously?
There's the gray area though. "Accepting" abortion and supporting contraceptive education as a means of limiting it is different than having no moral qualms about someone having 15 of them. The only problem I have with the pro-life crowd (besides the rabid religiosity) is their aim to change the law to make it illegal to obtain an abortion. Several countries have curbed abortion rates not by making the procedure illegal, but by creating awareness and being frank and straightforward about sex. This is the direction America needs to go in, although the Religious Right seems to have none of it. The two issues (abortion / animal rights) are intrinsically different, though I guess I can try to make a parallel. I abstain from meat first and foremost because I think killing a being (who will do everything in its power to avoid being killed) because "it tastes good" - is wrong. To me, that's just not a good enough reason. You do not physically suffer if animals aren't killed so you can eat meat. You can't draw that black and white parallel with abortion. Now, if you were stuck on a desert island, starving to death, with nothing to eat, and there were chickens or pigs or rabbits available...then it has become necessary for you to do whatever is in your power to stay alive. But even as a steadfast vegetarian, I'm not going to work to make eating meat against the law. There are situations that call for lines to be crossed in every facet of life. Morality starts to become very subjective. Reducing suffering, IMO, is a noble goal, and one that I try to live. But I can look around and see that everything means something different to everyone. I'm not going to shame people or try to label them as criminals for doing what they feel they need to do. There are a lot of people who do feel that way, and I am against them obtaining greater power.
I agree with you on the case of rape, but not when the mother's life is in danger. I don't think it's inconsistent to be against abortion, but to say it is ok when it will save a woman's life. There is a big difference between saying a woman can't have an abortion when it would inconvenience her to have a child and saying she can't have one when it would kill her to do so.
Brings back my memories of the cow-law class. Our professor would poke everybody in the class asking "Is Roe v. Wade" the law of land and challenge anybody dare to say it is. The debate on abortion was the highlight my first year.
Wasn't this voted in not too long ago as a way to prosecute abusers of pregnant women, and as a backdoor grounds by pro-lifers to try to overturn Roe? This totally destroys what little game I have. I always try to pull some variation on "The Flea": "No, no, baby, this means nothing; come on, it's totally harmless..." [Looks deeply into the mirror. Doesn't like what he sees. A single tear.] I think human value is dependent on that which separates us from lower animals: namely, reason, a capacity for abstraction, art. I see none of that capacity in a fetus. If Cargill figured out a way tomorrow to genetically breed cows born without brains / spinal cords (as happens occasionally in nature), and kept them on life support until the bodies/meat were slaughtered, would that meat be kosher to vegetarians? If you remove the sentience/will-to-life from the equation, is that acceptable? Or are the nerve endings that will be cut, even disconnected from firing to some central sentient being as they are, enough for a moral objection? I ask, because I think there is a parallel in my valuation of animal life (largely, mammals raised as food stocks), and of human life in this discussion, specifically human life at its very earliest stages. I don't see much difference between the two; I hold neither sacred. I do see value in human life, human cognition, from very early in childhood: around the time of (loosely defined) individual thought / speech / self-awareness. To beat (though not necessarily eat) a dead horse, Mozart started composing at, what, five? (Though, I was reared as a meat-eater because of the traditions of my parents. Perhaps, I merely argue from tradition. Had I been born to vegetarians, maybe I would see the parallel similarly, but argue for the pro-life way instead?)
3/5 - the point of the statement is this . . . the 1st step to violating someone is to dehumanize them. therefore devaluing it. It has been done time and again. Native Americans, Jews, Black Folx, fetuses, etc I do ascribe a greater value on human life than animal life. I guess I would say Sentience. If I could talk to a cow . . I would never eat one again. I have never eaten nor plan to eat a dolphin. In fact there are few animals I do eat. I don't beleive in animal cruelty. I do beleive in the circle of life . . . Life Eats Life. Pro-Infanticide? Really? that is crazy to me. Question: Those that would ascribe equal value to a cow and human, why is broccoli [which is alive] considered a lesser valued life? While you may call me a Specie-ist . . . why is plant life, microorganic life, etc not considered to be on par with human life? Life is life . . is it not? Rocket River
Abortion Math Mother's inconveince/choice >> Fetus's Life, father's choice Three People involved . . one gets a 'choice' Not even democratic Question: If you are pro-choice . . . shouldn't you be anti-Blood Testing Drunk Drivers against their will? I mean, should they not have control over their bodies too? Rocket River
Awesome slip, there. Plants have no central nervous systems, therefore they cannot feel pain, therefore they do not suffer when stir-fried and eaten. Moral crisis = averted.
or as far as human knowledge knows. We still don't know everything. If you find out they have those systems. . but they are just different. Will you stop eating them? Rocket River
Interesting article. I know it could be used as a jumping point, but lobsters are giant sea insects. I could imagine a can of raid could be blindingly "painful" to a cockroach like a person in a vat of acid. That is if you believe insects hold those particular traits. Then again, how do you think vegetables are relatively cheap? Tons of fertilizer maybe. But also a good amount of pesticides.
In a situation where a woman will not live through the child birth who do you chose? The unborn life or the mother? If all life is truly equal then why is it that the unborn is always the one chosen to die? I'm not saying I disagree with choosing the mother (since I don't consider the unborn a human life) but it proves my point that even most pro-lifers don't truly believe the life of the unborn is equal to that of a adult human being. There's a sliding scale of life value that most people in the abortion discussion use...on both sides of the argument. There are people on one side, like me, who don't consider the unborn to be a human life. On the other side you have people who probably really do believe that all life is equal and would have a tough time choosing which life to spare. Most people, however, fall in the middle for personal reasons that they either don't realize or refuse to acknowledge.
At the very least I think most folx can agree . . .fetuses = Potential Life In the case of the mother's health Actual Life > Potential Life > inconvience Rocket River
In humans, he's the dude packing the Y chromosome. Also, he's kind of integral to the reproduction process. Where does this lead? Yeah, I really miss Wallace. I do. But, unlike lobsters, cockroaches are not delicious. And, for the purposes of this discussion, I think: the human fetus <= a typical cockroach (even the six known diseases kind).
