Does a fetus have rights

Discussion in 'Abortion' started by Matt22yuc, Dec 6, 2018.

  1. Matt22yuc

    Matt22yuc Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    It would except the fetus is not a person.
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2018
    FoxHastings likes this.
  2. Puppy

    Puppy Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2018
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    18
    You said, "cause harm onto others". You did not say, "cause harm onto other persons".
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2018
  3. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Clearly you do not, because you evade the clear implications of what you're saying.
    Of course that's not what you're saying, because it's the truth about the intellectual bankruptcy of your argument.
    You presume way too much...
    ...but regardless, this is the sort of irrationality that can be expected of anyone wedded to the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of moral subjectivism.
     
  4. Puppy

    Puppy Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2018
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I find it both childish as well as amusing that you insist that you know what I say better than I do.
    I am not "evading". I just don't see how any of it is important. It would probably derail this thread, too.

    If you had asked me a bit more politely, I would have gladly taken the time to explain to you what I meant. But if you insist on acting like a rabid dog, then no.
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2018
  5. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113

    :) OK, if it makes you happy..."cause harm onto other persons'.,...and a fetus isn't a person no matter how many silly infantile word games you play...
     
    Matt22yuc likes this.
  6. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Excuses, excuses.....:)
     
  7. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I couldn't care less, trust me.
    Dunno who the hell you think you're kidding, pilgrim.
    More accurately, you'd rather not see the importance.
    If what you meant is what you said, the only way you're going to explain it is by retracting part of it, or by lying.
    :roflol:

    Just one thenthitive little thnowflake, aintcha? :smile:
     
  8. Matt22yuc

    Matt22yuc Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    What else would I mean by “others”?
     
    FoxHastings likes this.
  9. Puppy

    Puppy Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2018
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Why do you ask me what you meant? Only you know that. So why don't YOU tell me what you truly meant. The way I see it, "others" includes fetuses.

    What do you think "others" refers to?
     
  10. Matt22yuc

    Matt22yuc Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    I’m referring to persons. I don’t regard a fetus as a person as you do. Hence our disagreement on the issue.
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2018
    FoxHastings likes this.
  11. Puppy

    Puppy Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2018
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    18
    So when you say "others", you are really referring to persons only? And since animals aren't persons, does this mean that people can do nasty things to them and it would be fine with you?
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2018
  12. Matt22yuc

    Matt22yuc Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    No but I’m not talking about animals. I was originally addressing the claim that people do not have rights to their own bodies. I could give my whole explanation on my ethics but that isn’t what I was addressing or the topic. You keep trying to find a gotcha but they’re not relevant to what’s being discussed.
     
    FoxHastings likes this.
  13. Puppy

    Puppy Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2018
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I didn't say you are talking about animals. I am just wondering about your moral principle, mainly that in a free society, people can do anything as long as they don't harm others, oops, I meant other persons. According to this principle of yours, animals aren't included. So the corollary is that people can harm animals and this would be allowed under your principle. Also, I am sorry to hear that you think I am trying to "find a gotcha" (I am not even entirely sure what "gotcha" really is). You think anyone who ever disagrees with you is out to "get" you. It must be a very unpleasant feeling.
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2018
  14. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Animals are NOT the topic.
     
  15. Puppy

    Puppy Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2018
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I am not saying we should protect animals. I am just pointing out that his principle is not very good.
     
  16. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I didn't say you did, I posted "Animals are NOT the topic.".....what were you reading?





    Yes, it is and has NOTHING to do with animals...animals are NOT humans...
     
  17. Matt22yuc

    Matt22yuc Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    Alright here you go. (And I did slightly phrase my position incorrectly so I’m not changing my position just taking more careful care in my wording since you keep positing these objections.)

    - My ethical standard is that which is immoral or moral can be determined by understanding how actions affect the well being of other conscious beings. For example that which is immoral is needlessly causing pain or suffering onto another conscious being.
    -There is a continuum of consciousness in all of life. A conscious beings ability to experience pain and suffering is different among life.
    -This is relevant to a fetus because it doesn’t have the capability to experience pain and suffering on the same level as the mother, therefore the mothers interests take precedence over the fetus.
    - The rights of a person to they’re own body is a separate issue. We have the right to our own bodies so long as we do not restrict the rights of other conscious beings rights to their own. (This is how I phrased my position before but then I changed it when I responded to you which is my own fault.)
    -In order to maximize the freedom of people (and animals) to live peacefully and to maximize their well being, my position stated above is how we do that.
    -I’ll presume your objection will be that the fetus well being is being harmed in an abortion. While the fetus does have some lower level of conscious similar to some animals, it’s reliance upon the mother for life is the important issue. Her well being of having freedom of her own body will take precedence over the fetus because it is reliant upon her for life.
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2018
  18. edna kawabata

    edna kawabata Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,474
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What am I presuming? That your god was genderless? That you believe in righteous genocide? That believing in a genocide that can be moral is the definition of moral subjectivism in the extreme?
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2018
  19. edna kawabata

    edna kawabata Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,474
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Most suicides are an irrational act. Most have a treatable condition or the cause is situational which can be changed. It would be unethical not to stop a suicide if the sufferer was trying to commit an act she would not do if she were rational. There are a few rational reasons for suicide but more rare as in terminal illness.
     
  20. Matt22yuc

    Matt22yuc Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    It’s just your opinion that suicide is irrational. To suicidal people it may be rational. Why is it objectively irrational?

    Regardless we are all free to be as irrational as we want. If someone is acting irrationally so as to not benefit themselves and doesn’t directly affect someone else then they have that right. It’s not unethical to stop them from their own free choice.
     
    FoxHastings likes this.
  21. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113


    How do you know ?



    How do you know?



    But the reason is not yours.
     
  22. Matt22yuc

    Matt22yuc Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    In fact I think your post is irrational. Posting irrational things online is neither good for your or other people’s mental health. Therefore we will enact a law where we will confiscate all your access to the internet and prevent you from acquiring anymore. You will also either face minor jail time or a fine for wasting the police’s resources attempting to help you. Then you will be forced to see a psychiatrist that will prescribe you medication against your will to better make you more rational.

    See the problem?
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2018
  23. edna kawabata

    edna kawabata Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,474
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you think it ethical to allow an irrational or delusional person to harm themselves. I think the rest of the world disagrees thankfully.
     
  24. Matt22yuc

    Matt22yuc Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    I could care less what the rest of the world thinks. I don’t presume I know what is a better way of life than others. I noticed how you failed to explain that suicide is objectively irrational.
     
  25. edna kawabata

    edna kawabata Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,474
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As a rule of thumb the general consensus is usually the right answer.
    Now you want to learn about suicide.
    The most common reasons are:
    Depression which is treatable and if the person was thinking rationally she would choose treatment over death.
    Psychosis, a distorted view of reality, also treatable.
    Impulse, a fit of anger, shame, regret, etc. that is transient. That given time the person would not choose the act and be more rational.
    Cry for help is situational. The person can see no future relief from a situation. A failure to look at problems rationally rather than emotionally.
    Accidental
    Philosophical, that is a logical reason to end ones life. One not due to the reasons above. Usually the choice of the terminally ill.
     

Share This Page