(March 13, 2013 at 11:45 pm)catfish Wrote: Do you need me to fucking break down every word of your responses for you to understand???
You said: "Since rights are a social concept, they are not applicable to the fetus since it doesn't qualify as a human."
Well, morality is also a social concept so your own logic and words defeat you. You have zero logical reason to make a moral judgement on the termination of a fetus for any reason.
BTW, I'm starting to like the True Human™ Game® (trademark pending).
How can you fail so epically at understanding simple arguments?
First of all, I never agreed that morality is a social concept - especially since I've always argued that it is applicable at individual level.
Secondly, even if they both were social concepts they are still different concepts. Rights are given to individual humans to determine certain - not all, but certain - aspects of their lives in society. The fetus is not an individual human and is not a part of the society and therefore is not afforded any rights. It is completely removed from the the contexts where the concept of rights is applicable.
Morality is practiced by individual humans and is applicable to all their actions - even if the object of their actions is not a moral agent itself. So, even if the fetus is not an individual human or a moral agent, the very action of abortion is undertaken by an individual human and a moral agent and therefore it has a moral dimension to it. Therefore, the action itself, its reasons and its motivations are subject to moral judgment.
Do you understand this extremely simple logic?
