RE: Abortion is morally wrong
June 23, 2014 at 9:50 pm
(This post was last modified: June 23, 2014 at 9:57 pm by Anomalocaris.)
(June 23, 2014 at 9:41 pm)Arthur123 Wrote: I stated my argument, to my knowledge no defeaters have knocked down my thesis. Therefore, it stands.
Cthulhu you do know what objective morality is right? All I'm basing my argument on is that it is morally wrong to kill an innocent human being
Again, it's not for you to decide, your patting yourself on the back notwithstanding.
(June 23, 2014 at 9:48 pm)Arthur123 Wrote: Julia, your quotes support my original thesis. A man women or child belonging to the species Homo sapien. Than it shows certain characteristics of how you might distinguish one epistemologically. In my argument, I've stated a genetically complete organism belonging to the species homo sapien is a sufficient condition for human rights. Your bolded definition once again confuse ontology with functionality.
Kindest regards,
If you don't believe objective morality exists than why were you earlier referencing women's bodily rights?
A zygote is not yet an organism.
A minimum requirement for an organism is homeostasis. A zygote can not perform it and requires its mother to do the basic job for it.
For the purpose of argument, even of zygote was capable of all requirements of a functioning organism, it does not follow that its existence is sufficient condition for it to be granted human rights. Human rights is an artificial concept conceived for the better ordering of a society of post-natal homosapiens. To claim an artificial concept as if it has an objective existence, and to assert somehow its powers reaches objectively extends beyond the purposes for which it was created, is obsurd to the extreme.
