NationStates

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Necroghastia wrote:swaggie so what's the problem lol

Killing a fetus isn’t self defense because a fetus isn’t attacking anyone, it’s the purest form of innocence there is

That example I gave from Paraguay is perfectly ok to you then? That girl could have permanent injury and complications still but apparently the fetus matters more than the woman.

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Necroghastia wrote:swaggie so what's the problem lol

Killing a fetus isn’t self defense because a fetus isn’t attacking anyone, it’s the purest form of innocence there is

So? Does it have to be attacking anyone? A splinter gets in your finger through no fault of its own but like, if you don't want that shit in there bc it causes your body Problems well my guy it's your right to get it out lol

Necroghastia wrote:

Kexholm Karelia wrote:Killing a fetus isn’t self defense because a fetus isn’t attacking anyone, it’s the purest form of innocence there is

So? Does it have to be attacking anyone? A splinter gets in your finger through no fault of its own but like, if you don't want that shit in there bc it causes your body Problems well my guy it's your right to get it out lol

A splinter isn’t a living thing, a fetus is

Celritannia wrote:

Kexholm Karelia wrote:Killing a fetus isn’t self defense because a fetus isn’t attacking anyone, it’s the purest form of innocence there is

So the mother's life is no longer a concern.
Nice of you to think a born human being is second class to something growing inside her.

The mother’s life is a concern, the issue is a large number of abortions happen when there is no valid threat to the mother’s life, and while thankfully a few of these victims survive, most are killed

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Necroghastia wrote:So? Does it have to be attacking anyone? A splinter gets in your finger through no fault of its own but like, if you don't want that shit in there bc it causes your body Problems well my guy it's your right to get it out lol

A splinter isn’t a living thing, a fetus is

Since when were plants not alive lol

Celritannia wrote:
So the mother's life is no longer a concern.
Nice of you to think a born human being is second class to something growing inside her.

The mother’s life is a concern, the issue is a large number of abortions happen when there is no valid threat to the mother’s life, and while thankfully a few of these victims survive, most are killed

Who are you to be the arbiter of "valid threat[s] to the mother's life?"

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Echo Chamber Thought Police wrote:We kill and eat plants and animals all the time... many of which are far more developed and sentient than early fetuses.

Abortion is not murder. It isn't a good thing, but it's not murder.

I believe humans have a moral duty not to kill other humans without good reason (war, self defense, etc.), but equating that to animals isn’t the same because animals are part of the food chain as a human’s diet

They don't have to be. Surely, if they're alive and can feel pain, and we don't have to kill them, we shouldn't ever do so, right?

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Necroghastia wrote:So? Does it have to be attacking anyone? A splinter gets in your finger through no fault of its own but like, if you don't want that shit in there bc it causes your body Problems well my guy it's your right to get it out lol

A splinter isn’t a living thing, a fetus is

Celritannia wrote:
So the mother's life is no longer a concern.
Nice of you to think a born human being is second class to something growing inside her.

The mother’s life is a concern, the issue is a large number of abortions happen when there is no valid threat to the mother’s life, and while thankfully a few of these victims survive, most are killed

Therefore the example I gave from Paraguay is perfectly ok to you?

Necroghastia wrote:

Kexholm Karelia wrote:A splinter isn’t a living thing, a fetus is

Since when were plants not alive lol

A splinter isn’t a living thing in the same sense a dead body isn’t a living thing. A splinter on its own cannot copy and reproduce its own DNA and undergo cell mitosis the way a fetus does.

Necroghastia wrote:Who are you to be the arbiter of "valid threat[s] to the mother's life?"

Not sure what you mean by this, please elaborate

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Necroghastia wrote:Since when were plants not alive lol

A splinter isn’t a living thing in the same sense a dead body isn’t a living thing. A splinter on its own cannot copy and reproduce its own DNA and undergo cell mitosis the way a fetus does.

Maybe a tapeworm is a better analogy.

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Necroghastia wrote:swaggie so what's the problem lol

Killing a fetus isn’t self defense because a fetus isn’t attacking anyone, it’s the purest form of innocence there is

Innocence here is immaterial. A while ago the example was used where someone else may be innocent: someone who has certain severe mental health problems who was violating someone's bodily sovereignty. The person is "innocent", in that there is no mens rea, as they do not have the capacity to know what they are doing, and yet despite that innocence we don't say to the victim: "you are just gonna have to lie back and take it, because you can't take action against someone that is innocent."

Senkaku wrote:

Kexholm Karelia wrote:A splinter isn’t a living thing in the same sense a dead body isn’t a living thing. A splinter on its own cannot copy and reproduce its own DNA and undergo cell mitosis the way a fetus does.

Maybe a tapeworm is a better analogy.

A tapeworm isn’t human. I place inherent value on human life more than other forms of life

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Senkaku wrote:Maybe a tapeworm is a better analogy.

A tapeworm isn’t human. I place inherent value on human life more than other forms of life

even if that means a a child is forced to give birth and face permanent health issues as a result?

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Senkaku wrote:Maybe a tapeworm is a better analogy.

A tapeworm isn’t human. I place inherent value on human life more than other forms of life

Fine, but we're just making an analogy. A tapeworm is a living thing that sustains itself off its host's body, certainly a better analogue for a fetus than a splinter. It's still something that's in your body, not necessarily wanted, living off you, and possibly causing major health problems.

San Lumen wrote:

Kexholm Karelia wrote:A tapeworm isn’t human. I place inherent value on human life more than other forms of life

even if that means a a child is forced to give birth and face permanent health issues as a result?

Reductio ad absurdum

I mean if you want to get strict with the taxonomy the fetus is a parasite.

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:even if that means a a child is forced to give birth and face permanent health issues as a result?

Reductio ad absurdum

It isn't, though. If you take an absolutist stance on abortion, that will have real world implications for some number of child rape victims or women with underlying health conditions. You might not want to face those realities, or you might think that's a tradeoff worth making, but it's not absurd to point them out.

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Senkaku wrote:Maybe a tapeworm is a better analogy.

A tapeworm isn’t human. I place inherent value on human life more than other forms of life

k but why aren't the things they do comparable

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:even if that means a a child is forced to give birth and face permanent health issues as a result?

Reductio ad absurdum

It isn't absurd at all, as abortion bans do result in children being forced to carry to term.

Vassenor wrote:I mean if you want to get strict with the taxonomy the fetus is a parasite.

Not at all, a fetus is a premature human, just like how a joey is a premature kangaroo, yet both the fetus and the joey are alive

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Necroghastia wrote:Since when were plants not alive lol

A splinter isn’t a living thing in the same sense a dead body isn’t a living thing. A splinter on its own cannot copy and reproduce its own DNA and undergo cell mitosis the way a fetus does.

neither can a fetus out of a womb so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Necroghastia wrote:Who are you to be the arbiter of "valid threat[s] to the mother's life?"

Not sure what you mean by this, please elaborate

you said "a large number of abortions happen when there is no valid threat to the mother’s life"
who are you to decide that there is no valid threat? all pregnancies can potentially be life threatening, and certainly all are life-altering.

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Vassenor wrote:I mean if you want to get strict with the taxonomy the fetus is a parasite.

Not at all, a fetus is a premature human, just like how a joey is a premature kangaroo, yet both the fetus and the joey are alive

Parasites are alive too.

Vassenor wrote:I mean if you want to get strict with the taxonomy the fetus is a parasite.

No they aren't, they have some relevant behavioral similarities that are worth discussing, but they do not actually fit the definition of parasite

Senkaku wrote:

Kexholm Karelia wrote:Reductio ad absurdum

It isn't, though. If you take an absolutist stance on abortion, that will have real world implications for some number of child rape victims or women with underlying health conditions. You might not want to face those realities, or you might think that's a tradeoff worth making, but it's not absurd to point them out.

Let’s look at statistics, only 6-8% of pregnancies are considered "high risk," this is a small minority of pregnancies, but looking at abortions specifically, 13% of abortions in the survey were done for medical necessity, interestingly enough in that same survey, the majority of respondent’s reason was "Having a baby would dramatically change my life."

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:even if that means a a child is forced to give birth and face permanent health issues as a result?

Reductio ad absurdum

Except it’s not. Such a thing has happened?

Vassenor wrote:I mean if you want to get strict with the taxonomy the fetus is a parasite.

They do not actually meet the definition of parasite. Even if we were to compare pregnancies to symbiotic relationships it would be closer to commensalism as opposed to parasitism.

Kexholm Karelia wrote:

Senkaku wrote:It isn't, though. If you take an absolutist stance on abortion, that will have real world implications for some number of child rape victims or women with underlying health conditions. You might not want to face those realities, or you might think that's a tradeoff worth making, but it's not absurd to point them out.

Let’s look at statistics, only 6-8% of pregnancies are considered "high risk," this is a small minority of pregnancies, but looking at abortions specifically,

Okay, fine, it's a small minority. Doesn't change anything I said. Are you willing to trade their lives for their fetuses'? In cases where they're both going to die if an abortion isn't performed, are you willing to lose two lives instead of one (or more, if twins or triplets are involved)? Because that 6-8% is the blood price you'd have to pay to achieve your vision. Is that something you can accept? Can you understand why some people are unwilling to accept that?

13% of abortions in the survey were done for medical necessity, interestingly enough in that same survey, the majority of respondent’s reason was "Having a baby would dramatically change my life."

Why should you be allowed to make people's decisions about having a family for them?