Opinion Hypothetical question for the anti-abortionists

Snackbar said:
This is the ultimate gotcha, well played TS, well played indeed.
Click to expand...

Lol, no, it’s not.

I call the fire department. I’m not a fucking firefighter.
 
Aliens are among us. Truly incredible.
 
All i see by those who are - i assume - against abortion, is a moving of the goal posts or making up straw men.

I fail to see how TS is supposed to be wrong when he says that, in order to be morally consistent, someone who is against abortion, must then also decide in favor of the 1,000 fertilized eggs instead of the 1 year old baby.
 
K1levelgrappler said:
Replace one year old baby with 10 year old rape victim and guaranteed chuds are going for the eggs every goddamn time
Click to expand...
No chance.. I'm saving the damaged 10 year old... That's a future stripper / pornstar right there.......

Too much?
 
But to answer the TS..

What colour is the baby and the fertilized eggs lol

If we could hear the 1000 little screams of the ferts we'd all pick the testtubers
 
skold said:
Then a fertilised egg isn't equivalent to human life. TS wins
Click to expand...
@Oddmonster
It's a dumb comparison that just tries to use a scale as a means of denying the others value. The idea that different lives have different values isn't really a debate. What if it was a choice between a 1 year old baby and a 80 year old in a coma? Is the 80 year old "not a life" if you don't pick them?

What if it was a choice between pressing a button to save 100 random people from death, or just saving your own child? The fact that someone might value one over the other isn't an indication that the other one isn't valuable.
 
Bob Gray said:
@Oddmonster
It's a dumb comparison that just tries to use a scale as a means of denying the others value. The idea that different lives have different values isn't really a debate. What if it was a choice between a 1 year old baby and a 80 year old in a coma? Is the 80 year old "not a life" if you don't pick them?

What if it was a choice between pressing a button to save 100 random people from death, or just saving your own child? The fact that someone might value one over the other isn't an indication that the other one isn't valuable.
Click to expand...

If you were to be logically consistent with why you'd choose a 1 year old over the 80 year old, you'd have to then choose a fertilized egg (let alone a hundred) over the 1 year old as well.

But inately we all know a fertilized egg is not a human life, and therefore the choice is easy.

Also, why are we still pretending that this has anything to do with morality, when we all know it's about forcing the woman to "suffer the consequences" of "degeneracy" that is sex outside if marriage. Like, can we stop this stupid dance and call it what it is?
 
skold said:
If you were to be logically consistent with why you'd choose a 1 year old over the 80 year old, you'd have to then choose a fertilized egg (let alone a hundred) over the 1 year old as well.

But inately we all know a fertilized egg is not a human life, and therefore the choice is easy.

Also, why are we still pretending that this has anything to do with morality, when we all know it's about forcing the woman to "suffer the consequences" of "degeneracy" that is sex outside if marriage. Like, can we stop this stupid dance and call it what it is?
Click to expand...

There isn't a logical inconsistency. My examples were showing that two things (or amounts) could be life, yet also one would have a greater inherent value for any number of reasons. Maybe there some culture that existed at some point that would have saved an elder before a baby because of the knowledge they brought the tribe. Who knows? The point is, this "gotcha" doesn't exist because life can have different values for different reasons.

Like I used for my example, what if a mother had to choose between their one year old baby and 1,000 random human beings? Or 10,000? What if it was a mother's single fertilized egg and she had to choose between it and 1,000 people? What if you had to choose between fertilized eggs or a convicted pedophile?

We can go on and on, but the point I'm making won't be refuted. Life can have different values to different people for different reasons. But that isn't an argument the life they value the least isn't a life.
 
Bob Gray said:
There isn't a logical inconsistency. My examples were showing that two things (or amounts) could be life, yet also one would have a greater inherent value for any number of reasons. Maybe there some culture that existed at some point that would have saved an elder before a baby because of the knowledge they brought the tribe. Who knows? The point is, this "gotcha" doesn't exist because life can have different values for different reasons.

Like I used for my example, what if a mother had to choose between their one year old baby and 1,000 random human beings? Or 10,000? What if it was a mother's single fertilized egg and she had to choose between it and 1,000 people? What if you had to choose between fertilized eggs or a convicted pedophile?

We can go on and on, but the point I'm making won't be refuted. Life can have different values to different people for different reasons. But that isn't an argument the life they value the least isn't a life.
Click to expand...

Your example adds an important variable: relationship. If the choice was between a random baby you didn't know vs 1000 random human beings you didn't know, you'd be an absolute monster if you didn't pick the 1000 humans every single time.

Likewise if anti abortionists wish to pretend a fertilized egg is an equivalent of a human being, they have to choose the multiple fertilized eggs vs a single child to be consistent with their "pro life" stance.
 
skold said:
Your example adds an important variable: relationship. If the choice was between a random baby you didn't know vs 1000 random human beings you didn't know, you'd be an absolute monster if you didn't pick the 1000 humans every single time.

Likewise if anti abortionists wish to pretend a fertilized egg is an equivalent of a human being, they have to choose the multiple fertilized eggs vs a single child to be consistent with their "pro life" stance.
Click to expand...

Like I said, differnt values for different reasons. It doesnt mean the ones you value the least possess no value.

Look, this is a tired trap thats been used time and time again. Its trying to argue that you're either consistent across the board, or your beliefs are wrong. But if the pro-choice crowd wants to open themselves up to the same metric, theyd be just as hypocritical. For example, Im pro-choice, but at the same time I have absolutely no problem with the notion of someone being convicted of manslaughter or even murder if they attack a pregnant woman and the fetus dies. Tack on 20 years and Im perfectly fine with it. I think the majority of pro-choice people are as well. But this is an obvious inconsistency. If its not a life, without any rights, how can you be convicted of manslaughter or murder? You know what? I dont even care.

Another example. If a single diploid cell were discovered deep in the mountains of Mars, what would this mean? It would be the single biggest scientific discovery in the history of humankind. Why? Because it would be life on mars. However, if you take the exact same diploid cell and put it in a womans uterus, suddenly its merely a "clump of cells". This is an obvious lack of consistency. That doesnt invalidate a pro-choice persons belief that abortion isnt murder.

One of the problems with abortion is theres never an easy answer. It's messy theres no clear right or wrong answer. Even with the fertilized egg hypothetical, theres different ways to interpret it. Is it 1000 eggs in a freezer, that have the potential to grow into a baby and a adult human being? Or are they eggs in an incubator, all of which are on a path of gestating into a fully formed adult human being sans any complications? These are two very different scenarios.
 
The baby of course. How is this even a question?

How about this...

There's a madman on a cliffside holding two large sacks. He has a baby named Billy in one sack and 1000 embryos in the other sack. He says, "I'm going to drop ONE of these off the cliff unless you take it out of my hand. You only get to choose ONE to save, and the other is GONE!"

My question is...

What do you think Billy's favorite flavor of ice cream will be when he turns 5?
 
Lowmanproblems said:
<6>
Click to expand...
Numbers don't lie, but they sure as hell can mislead. The dumbass is willingly ignoring geographical and time boundaries, nevermind goals and objectives.
- this Captain Obvious moment brought to you by a recent "but look at the statistics" conversation.

But what can you expect from someone who doesn't think there should be any acceptable reason to get an abortion? Binary people are literally extremists. And this retard is one.
 
Ironnik94 said:
All i see by those who are - i assume - against abortion, is a moving of the goal posts or making up straw men.

I fail to see how TS is supposed to be wrong when he says that, in order to be morally consistent, someone who is against abortion, must then also decide in favor of the 1,000 fertilized eggs instead of the 1 year old baby.
Click to expand...

No because you weigh the moral obligation.

The baby is more advanced and you make the choice. Even though the eggs are a form of life they don't carry the weight of life of the baby.

The same as ending the life of the baby to save the life of the mother. You choose which life carries more weight and the risks.

Abortion and the ending of the babies life is a nessary evil in some cases. Not something to be celebrated but something to be sad that it was needed.
 
Imagine being a new receptionist at an abortion clinic because you needed rent money, and then realizing you were getting hungry while people were lining up to get their baby killed lol gross life. Gotta feel like working in a slaughter house.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Goonerview
Social South Korean Birthrate: Pet strollers surpass baby strollers
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
2K
STRYDG
STRYDG

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,887
Messages
55,452,428
Members
174,783
Latest member
notnormal

Share this page

Back
Top