I agree! I'm glad you caught that false analogy.
I've said for years that arguing for the "person-hood" of a developing human fetus is bad argumentation, especially for bible believing Christians.
(This is my reasoning as someone with a biblical worldview) I came to this conclusion after arguing for the being of God (called the divine nature) and the Persons who share in the being of God.
In Scripture there is one divine nature or being of God. There are three individual persons which share that divine nature.
Each of those individuals has a mind, will, and emotions. They are each able to individually exercise the attributes of the divine nature. Only one of them has a physical and developed body: Jesus Christ.
So the developed body is not what constitutes a person. It is the mind, will, and emotions that makes a person, which a fetus does not have.
However, the fetus is one of the earliest stages in the life of a human being. From a biblical stand point, it is the life of the being of the human that makes that life precious and valuable.
As Americans we (are supposed to) recognize that humans have certain inalienable rights, the first of which is "to life." So when a human life starts, it should be protected.
Don't say, "We don't know when human life starts," because that would mean you disagree with "modern science." http://abort73.com/abortion/medical_testimony/
You don't have to read the article, scroll about 3/4 through the page and see quotations from modern textbooks concerning when human life begins.
You say it's a woman's right to abort a baby, right? And you don't know if that baby is a person or not. That means it might be murder. But hey it's the woman's choice, even if it is murder.
Which means you don't really know if all those are babies being murdered. Which means meh it might be murder, but it's a person's right to murder anyway.
That makes a lot of sense; I always love a good analogy! (even when I don't agree with it, it does help me to get a sense for where you're coming from)
I read your reply to james3v6, and I noticed you agreed that human life begins at conception, but that you are uncertain as to when "personhood" begins. If there is uncertainty on that matter, then shouldn't caution lean towards the side of life?
And what would you say that point is? Personally, I must admit that I think being able to have a clear-cut point some time after conception would be very convenient and solve a lot of moral dilemmas, but I've yet to find one.
The ability to feel pain is a highly inconsistent and unreliable factor, seeing as we cannot know for certain a person's perception of pain (only their reaction to it), not to mention that many fully developed adults could be killed painlessly in their sleep.
The nervous system and brain start developing at a very early stage (with the spinal cord being identifiable only three weeks after conception https://www.justfacts.com/abortion.asp). Many people try to argue that the systems are not fully developed, but the important thing to note is that they have at least formed and are present (and that not even newborns or even older children have "fully developed" brains)
Viability is probably the least consistent factor there is, seeing as a child delivered from a full-term pregnancy would be not be viable if not for its mother's continued support after delivery. Not to mention that advancements in medical care and the quality of hospitals are constantly improving the survival rates for infants born earlier and earlier.
When it comes to debates like this, I think a distinction that is important to make is the difference between legal policy and morality. Certainly, legal policy should be based heavily on morality, but there are still a few differences between the two.
One critical difference is that morality can often be somewhat unclear. Even someone like me who believes in an objective standard of morality must admit that there are many cases that are almost impossible to judge one way or the other in a satisfactory manner. In contrast to that, legal policy has to be very explicit and clear-cut. While moral arguments could theoretically take into account "personhood", it is far more difficult to codify such a factor into law (whereas "life" and "human" are far more simple by comparison).
(and please don't take this to mean that I do not think that law should be able to handle nuanced cases. What I am trying to say is that law must be decisive and clear-cut in order to handle the nuanced cases that it will inevitably have to deal with)
Glad to find some common ground on the legality/morality issue. As for why I think that some moral issues are not entirely clear, the reason is because I believe humanity lacks a perfect sense of morality. I think that in any case, there is a definite moral right or wrong, but our own natural biases make it difficult to pinpoint those definite morals 100% of the time. It goes back to the adage of how "everyone is the main character of their own story"
I hadn't noticed that bit about racism (I had only read the part on prenatal development).
My thoughts on racism and evolution are that racism does not rely on evolution (it relies on pride and hate), but that it often uses any excuse it can find (with evolution being one of those excuses)
Your political opinions are some of the most viable, and level-headed I have ever heard. We get so many-- too many libtards on this site that say things such as "what you're doing is an ad hominem fallacy...", "evidence for evolution doesn't have to be present, it can be recorded priorly, just like...", and "Abortion has been declared a constitutional right; no lawmaker can..."; like, wtf are these libtards even talking about?! And they get so triggered when we respond with our facts, just like the ones you just stated; I mean, I have never, ever heard such an America-loving statement such as "Abort Hillary & Obama"; it's just so, so packed with evidence that the libtards wouldn't even understand what you're talking about! You-- you should be a Supreme Court Justice! Above all the candidates I have reviewed, I think you are the most qualified to be in our political system! "Abort Hillary & Obama".. I love it! Amen, brother! Abortion is murder! Say your statement with me: Abort Hillary and Obama! LOUDER!! ABORT HILLARY AND OBAMA!!
Caption this Meme
