What if a modern liberal walked in on the tail end of a debate...

between a 1930s Nazi and someone else about what to do about the Jewish Problem.

The liberal walked in at the tail end, and all he heard was the argument from the Nazi, "But there is no proof to show that those "things" are even truly human!"

Don't you think the liberal might assume the debate was about abortion and jump right in supporting the Nazi?

All murderers attempt to dehumanize their victims.

Someone explain to me how the "question of personhood" argument to justify allowing abortions is anything other than a "no true scotsman" fallacy, the same as was rendered by Nazis to justify the Holocaust.

Also, feel free to post other arguments which you feel render abortion unpunishable by law, or condone abortion, etc.

 

So in your mind, a Jew is "the same thing" as a fertilized egg?

And YOU claim that others "dehumanize". Whoa boy.

 

At some point it is no longer a fertilized egg, but a thinking human being. Are you willing to admit that?

 

Yeah. Adult Jews are just like foetuses.

 

At some point... after birth...

 

Seriously, Duran? I expect much more from you.

Foot is to toe as hand is to finger.

Does this imply that toes are the same as fingers?

Conveniently forgetting how to interpret analogies when your views are under attack is no argument.

 

At some point, after converting to Christianity, Jews also become human.

The analogy is still solid and you and Gorn have only confirmed it.

Gorn implies that simply comparing someone to a fetus is an insult. Anti-Semites feel the same way and call people "a Jew" as an insult.

You guys are confirming my analogy, even as you pretend not to know what an anaology is. Very amusing.

 

The government should stay out of a woman's uterus. It has no business intruding. society does not own any part of an individual.
A decision to have an abortion should be entirely up to the woman with input from her doctors, family and religious figures.

The arguments about when life begins, is strictly philosophical.

I take a pragmatic view that life begins the moment a fetus can survive outside the womb.
But regardless of that, I think it is illogical to place the potential of life above a fully realized human life.

So, I have absolutely no problem with not punishing women who choose to have an abortion.

Its a pretty lame attempt to link the nazi holocaust with abortion.
It has absolutely no relevance whatsoever other than to cater to your own associations.

 

I'd think the conservative was making a big



I don't no any liberals how claim a embryo is not human. Maybe some do. I sure don't.

 

Maybe you should try being a eurypterid.

 

That is why we have godwins law

 

It has relevance because you use the same "no true human" fallacy that all murderers use to justify their actions. How is it any different for you to claim a fetus is not a human? We can't say for sure, but when have we ever erred on the side of the murderers and not the potential victims? Only on abortion.

The government can't control a woman's uterus? Then why can they control my fingers? Normally the government doesn't care to control a uterus or my fingers. But in the case where I use my finger to pull the trigger on a gun, they do care, and have every right to intervene. We do intervene, in our society, when people use their own bodies to harm another. Even though it's their own body.

 

You guys feel free to jump right in the debate. Side commentary isn't helping move this discussion forward.

 

Many certaintly do. Swensson presented the "no true human" argument in the thread "Can a liberal be a Christian (title paraphrased). So your assertion that this is a strawman argument is false.

I also invited you to present any other argument to support abortion, so your assertion is both false and disingenuous.

 

Maybe you'd be better quote an actual post saying that if you have a point to make.

Claiming that a human embryo isn't human is ludicrious, and I don't know any pro-choice people who would make that claim.

 

That would be quite a relief. Unfortunately, the personhood argument is, in my opinion, the most difficult to tend to as a pro-lifer. I was being generous by presenting it as the basis for my counter.

As I said in the OP, feel free to post any other arguments you have which favor the legality of abortion.

 

I've stated my views on abortion many times in many threads. I don't see any point at regurgitating it again. You can look them up if you are that interested.

 

I would think that if you took the time to hunt down the scarecrow pic, then you also have time to present your argument favoring your views.

 

Oh no, it's gets much more involved than that. Maybe some other time.

 

Pretty much exactly.

It would be like if I labeled the anti-abortion crowd to being similar to the Nazi's because Nazi's medical procedures on Jews without their concent- i.e. the government controlling what a woman does with her body.

I reject both analogies.

This is one of the arguments that makes me hate debates about abortion. When you start the argument with A woman having the right to choose an abortion is like Nazi's murdering Jews rational conversation pretty much stops.

 

Of course. We all know that point to be birth.

 

I will review your posts on the subject when I am back at my desktop. The search feature is difficult to manage on my phone.

 

He might, if he was stupid. Personally I'd probably ask what they were talking about.

Pet animals aren't humans - but we don't just allow people to kill or hurt them for no reason. So i agree that 'personhood' isnt a very good argument.

But nobody as far as I know feels any compunctions about killing plants or vegetables. They have no feelings. It is impossible to inflict suffering on a tomato, an orange, or an unborn child in its early stages. That, to me, is all you need to know.

 

I was going to provide a link for you, but it looks like my posts and thread were lost when then did the server migration. It's really annoying to have lost a bunch of research and effort for this reason.

 

What other analogy can feasibly be presented to describe the process of justifying a killing by calling the victim "nonhuman"?

I never said that women seeking abortions are like Nazis.

I said the personhood argument is exactly the same as any argument presented by a murderer to dehumanize his victim.

If this is a way out of the discussion for you, I don't blame you for taking it. Perhaps there is a pro-choicer here with the intellectual honesty to recognize and admit that, at the very least, the two "no true human" arguments are similar enough that it is worth stepping up to the plate and distinguishing between them.

I can't find a difference.

And I suspect that if any of you could, it would have been posted by now, instead of the side commentary and inexplicable denials that the "no true human" argument is even used by liberals.