[C_G]

How can you justify your own life when you are someone that you don't want to be?

[When you see it...]

(Original post by C_G)
How can you justify your own life when you are someone that you don't want to be?

Have I missed something? What are you on about?

[Adequate Idiot]

(Original post by Invictus_88)
Unless you can demonstrate that aborted foetuses 'have no hope of ever opening their eyes', it's really beneath my dignity to issue a sensible response.

Im not claiming that all abortions that happen are because the foetus will develop into a human being that 'cant see' (because somehow you seem to think I want to eradicate blind people), or a human without higher brain functions, am just throwing the point out there, also, it is neither helpful nor constructive in a debate to simply refuse to reply, eve if it below your 'dignity'

[The_Last_Melon]

I used to be pro-choice, then someone said to me: "Well you would believe that wouldn't you: you weren't aborted". That one sentence changed my whole view on the subject.

[SmileAway]

I don't even understand how anyone can support abortion...just how?

[Invictus_88]

(Original post by Adequate Idiot)
Im not claiming that all abortions that happen are because the foetus will develop into a human being that 'cant see' (because somehow you seem to think I want to eradicate blind people), or a human without higher brain functions, am just throwing the point out there, also, it is neither helpful nor constructive in a debate to simply refuse to reply, eve if it below your 'dignity'

The point you 'threw out there' was not relevant, and did not apply to this matter for the reasons I have given earlier.

[Adequate Idiot]

(Original post by Invictus_88)
The point you 'threw out there' was not relevant, and did not apply to this matter for the reasons I have given earlier.

You didnt give any 'reasons' before hand. In fact, you were arrogant enough to suggest it was below your dignity to respond. Fair enough, if you had said 'I wont respond because' that would have been fine, but to simply say it is below your dignity is unfair and does not help the debate. If you truly believe my 'thrown out' point to be irrelevant, why did you respond at all? Why not simply ignore. Surely the 'irrelevant' point was also beneath your dignity?

[When you see it...]

(Original post by The_Last_Melon)
I used to be pro-choice, then someone said to me: "Well you would believe that wouldn't you: you weren't aborted". That one sentence changed my whole view on the subject.

Tell that to the people who commented earlier on in this thread saying things like "I don't get the logo - how is that significant?"
I suspect they were just being pedantic or flaming.

[~MiserableLogic~]

I have drafted two arguments against pro-choice especially the concept of personhood. (1) We use the concept 'personhood' to distinguish between a foetus being a 'person' or not and if not, then abortion is permissible. However, animals are sometimes characterised as 'persons' due to possible self-awareness, personality and cognitive functioning. If it is permissible to kill animals, which could be 'persons', but also permissible to kill a foetus due to them not being a 'person' then we reach a contradiction; it is both right to kill 'persons' (animals) and not right to kill 'persons' (a more developed foetus/baby). I recognise several flaws in my argument: the use of analogy may be a false one due to it being an interspecific relation and someone who is a vegan or vegetarian would not agree to animals being killed.

[~MiserableLogic~]

This leads on to my second argument which may undermine my first but personhood too. (2) If personhood is a subjective concept and we cannot accurately define what a 'person' is, then how can we assess whether a foetus is a 'person' or not? For instance, in the sphere of intelligence it seems that we cannot accurately define it yet we are so arrogant in our perceived apprehension of this concept that we crafted IQ testing. But we cannot possibly know whether this measures intelligence because of our lack of understanding regarding what intelligence is and the same applies to personhood; how can we know what constitutes a 'person', and therefore, how can we discriminate between foetuses on the grounds of them being a 'person' or not?

[~MiserableLogic~]

BUMP

[When you see it...]

(Original post by ~MiserableLogic~)
I have drafted two arguments against pro-choice especially the concept of personhood. (1) We use the concept 'personhood' to distinguish between a foetus being a 'person' or not and if not, then abortion is permissible. However, animals are sometimes characterised as 'persons' due to possible self-awareness, personality and cognitive functioning. If it is permissible to kill animals, which could be 'persons', but also permissible to kill a foetus due to them not being a 'person' then we reach a contradiction; it is both right to kill 'persons' (animals) and not right to kill 'persons' (a more developed foetus/baby). I recognise several flaws in my argument: the use of analogy may be a false one due to it being an interspecific relation and someone who is a vegan or vegetarian would not agree to animals being killed.

(Original post by ~MiserableLogic~)
This leads on to my second argument which may undermine my first but personhood too. (2) If personhood is a subjective concept and we cannot accurately define what a 'person' is, then how can we assess whether a foetus is a 'person' or not? For instance, in the sphere of intelligence it seems that we cannot accurately define it yet we are so arrogant in our perceived apprehension of this concept that we crafted IQ testing. But we cannot possibly know whether this measures intelligence because of our lack of understanding regarding what intelligence is and the same applies to personhood; how can we know what constitutes a 'person', and therefore, how can we discriminate between foetuses on the grounds of them being a 'person' or not?

I don't see how 'personhood' really means anything. It's just a word and I can't really tell what your argument is. What are you actually saying?

[Iron Lady]

(Original post by Bellissima)
why would you make a soc on this? what's the point other than to preach to others?

i mean who actually bonds over their feelings on abortion?

People who are like-minded