(August 24, 2014 at 11:26 pm)answer-is-42 Wrote: Back to your arguement. If you read my arguement you would see that I began by stating that the pre-requistite for this arugement is that the fetus is a moral subject/agent/{whatever pompous term you want to put in here}/being.
If your argument begins by requiring an unjustified presupposition, it's not much of an argument. You might as well just go full on circular, cut out the obfuscation altogether, and simply assert that you think abortion is morally wrong because it's morally wrong. Adding in a shopping list of things you must believe to be true before the argument works as intended is dishonest until you start demonstrating why the initial conditions are, you know, true.
Quote: If you do not hold to that belief - as I have stated many times - then this arguement is null from the outset.
Then why would you use it?
![Thinking Thinking](https://atheistforums.org/images/smilies/thinking.gif)
No, seriously: if your position isn't convincing unless you already agree with it, what's the point of all this? Evidently it's not to sway anyone else over to your side, because the pro-choice peeps will see the holes in the position and you've already said you know that. If it's just to preach to the choir you'd get a much larger audience for that elsewhere, and I simply don't understand the attraction of that, so... what's the deal?
Quote: Whether you should or shouldn't have that belief is a seperate and interesting debate that I would like to have someday (maybe start a thread - that would be fun) but not within the context of this thread. PLEASE READ MY DAMN POSTS.
I'm pretty sure the justifications for your moral stance on abortion are pretty germane to a thread about the morality of abortion.
Quote:Finally "It means accepting that your actions have consequences, and attempting to minimize bad ones. To many, this means not allowing a child to be brought into the world with disadvantageous circumstances." Couple issues. This seems to justify the eradication of anyone who is in a disadvantageous circumstance.
Only if you think the fetus is already a person... which it isn't. If a fetus is aborted, nothing is lost. There's no person in potentia that loses a chance at existence. If you start killing people, well, they already exist, making their death a worsening of a bad situation, not an alleviation of one.
Quote: Morality as i see it is about what is right and wrong, not what maximizes good or bad outcomes.
How the hell do you think "right and wrong" are derived, if not from the outcomes of the actions we ascribe those labels to? You say you're not a theist, so what outside source can you possibly appeal to, here?
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!