(June 20, 2014 at 7:19 pm)Arthur123 Wrote: .....Can you site any examples besides a human corpse? I think this example is an ineffective argument because it is incoherent. A corspse is a *dead* human being. You cant kill something that is already dead. In the case of fetuses, the nature of it being alive is assumed. As for narrow arguments, I am using Modus ponens as my argument structure. Simply, if P, Q. P ergo Q. If fetuses are human beings than abortion is wrong. Fetuses are human beings therefore abortion is wrong.
Citing the example of a corpse is to try to make a point that just because something is a human being doesn't mean it has rights. It fails of course because we are discussing if human beings have a right to life. Such a discussing implicitly assumes we are talking about living human beings. For folks like Esquilax.....sometimes you do have to spell out the implicit assumptions.
Since we are talking about corpses now Arthur, let me ask you this question. Is it morally wrong to destroy a corpse which is being preserved in the hope of bringing it back to life at a later date? Should all those corpses cryonically preserved(frozen) be granted moral protection? Sure there is no chance they could be revived and treated today but there is some small chance that they could be revived and treated in the future. I would say cryonically preserved corpses should be granted some moral protection.