(June 9, 2021 at 8:09 pm)brewer Wrote:(June 9, 2021 at 7:26 pm)Belacqua Wrote: No one is arguing that something dead, or something incompatible with human life deserves human rights. If you think they are you haven't understood the arguments here.
Again, the original position was unborn human rights at conception.
The original position has to do with the actualization of potential. Things which have no potential are not included in the argument.