Something that may be the completely logical choice doesn't mean it's the right choice. You're getting into dangerous grounds when you say human life should be the simply the decision of whether it's logically sustainable through money and quality of life and nothing more. If you would agree that the sick and elderly should be killed off because they are too expensive and their quality of life isn't optimal, then that's really sad for you and we have nothing more to talk about it. If you don't believe that, however, I've only tried to show you how abortion is an emotional decision as MUCH as it is a logical one.
I have never tried to say that people who abort for reasons you have stated are wrong, but just that people who decide to keep their baby despite these factors are not wrong either. You seem to insist they are. It's just not that simple. People who have children despite certain factors that may be reasonable for them to abort simply have a different experience and it can be wholly positive lives, irrespective of their poverty.
And personal experiences can be very important. It's easy to say what people should do without putting a human face on it. Experiences help shape our not only beliefs and opinions but our knowledge. You can't look at things from a 100% logical angle and really get at the heart of the issue. I shared the stories of my sisters to help show that. You took it a step farther and suggested I should have been aborted. Funny, you never told EvF he should have been aborted when he shared that he's lived at the poverty level, too.
I do not think you're entirely wrong, Sae, in your stance on abortion. I just think you're ignoring a very real emotional and personal factor.
As far as food and babies go, I don't think it's the same. Yes, it's "speciest", to value human life over animals, but I don't think there's anything wrong with that. And as I said, I think abortion and animals rights are two separate issues looking at two separate criteria, and I have chosen not to go down that road in this argument because I don't think I need to.
I have never tried to say that people who abort for reasons you have stated are wrong, but just that people who decide to keep their baby despite these factors are not wrong either. You seem to insist they are. It's just not that simple. People who have children despite certain factors that may be reasonable for them to abort simply have a different experience and it can be wholly positive lives, irrespective of their poverty.
And personal experiences can be very important. It's easy to say what people should do without putting a human face on it. Experiences help shape our not only beliefs and opinions but our knowledge. You can't look at things from a 100% logical angle and really get at the heart of the issue. I shared the stories of my sisters to help show that. You took it a step farther and suggested I should have been aborted. Funny, you never told EvF he should have been aborted when he shared that he's lived at the poverty level, too.
I do not think you're entirely wrong, Sae, in your stance on abortion. I just think you're ignoring a very real emotional and personal factor.
As far as food and babies go, I don't think it's the same. Yes, it's "speciest", to value human life over animals, but I don't think there's anything wrong with that. And as I said, I think abortion and animals rights are two separate issues looking at two separate criteria, and I have chosen not to go down that road in this argument because I don't think I need to.
"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin
::Blogs:: Boston Atheism Examiner - Boston Atheists Blog | :
odcast:: Boston Atheists Report
::Blogs:: Boston Atheism Examiner - Boston Atheists Blog | :
odcast:: Boston Atheists Report
