So about that abortion thing..

[-Jrabbit]

It would only be funny if it was true.
And I kind of wish it was.

[Guynemer]

Oh, it is quite funny, and much more entertaining than the rest of the thread.

Speaking of: PAGE SIX!

[Felch]

Why exactly should anyone care about a human organism that lacks a functional nervous system? It's a philosophical zombie.

Philosophical zombies are hypothetical beings. Human embryos are not hypothetical. They have been observed. Whether they are smart or not has nothing to do with a person's human rights, unless you want to roll back the clock to early 20th century America with its eugenics programs, forced sterilizations of retards, and all that nastiness.

A human organism is only worth caring about if it has a 'soul'.

Where's your soul? How can I tell if people have or don't have souls? If souls are insubstantial and invisible, why would you base your moral or legal code on something that can not be shown to exist? If you only believe in souls because religion tells you to, then why should we base our laws on your religion?

[DinoDoc]

Speaking of: PAGE SIX!

Bigger fan of PAGE THREE

[Guynemer]

You, sirrah, while both a scholar and a gentleman, are missing the point.

I'm trying to get people to stop looking/posting in this thread.

[DinoDoc]

You, sirrah, while both a scholar and a gentleman, are missing the point.

OK I found a PAGE SIX worthy image:

[giblets]

Philosophical zombies are hypothetical beings. Human embryos are not hypothetical. They have been observed. Whether they are smart or not has nothing to do with a person's human rights, unless you want to roll back the clock to early 20th century America with its eugenics programs, forced sterilizations of retards, and all that nastiness.



Where's your soul? How can I tell if people have or don't have souls? If souls are insubstantial and invisible, why would you base your moral or legal code on something that can not be shown to exist? If you only believe in souls because religion tells you to, then why should we base our laws on your religion?

Where are human rights? How can I tell what these insubstantial, invisible human rights are? If you only believe in human rights because religion tells you to, then should we base our laws on your religion? I'm not seeing how the concept that a fetus is entitled to 'human rights' is any more provable than the concept of a soul.

Consciousness is distinct from intelligence. I don't think a stupid adult human experiences qualia to any less degree than a smart one does. However, I am very confident that a first trimester fetus does not experience any qualia and is no more a person than a human egg is. I don't see how the preservation of an unsentient structure of human cells outweighs the rights of a fully sentient woman.

[Elok]

Elok, stop being a dick.

What, I was being a dick in an abortion thread? OMG, that's worse than the time I got drunk at a bar.

[Elok]

It would only be funny if it was true.
And I kind of wish it was.

You know you Googled it.

[Krill]

The interesting point about the personhood timing is exactly how you then classify exactly what crimes the mother can commit against the foetus. Is a miscarriage murder? Manslaughter? What if she intentially tries to self abort? Using a coat hanger? Attempts suicide or puts herself into a position where her life is at risk unless the foetus is aborted (drug OD etc)? Self harm to herself, does that count as assault on the foetus? The fact that a doctor takes part in an abortion procedure can be viewed as protecting the womans health, not just as enabling the abortion itself. I'm pretty sure Imran and I discussed this in the last abortion thread.

Whichever way you cut it the mother comes first, and the more people fight against giving women control over their own bodies the more danger the foetuses are going to be put. Abortion with a cut off at 24 weeks (late term abortions after this only legal when risk to mothers life etc) is pretty much a reasonable compromise.

I just pity the women in the world that can't have this.

[Thorn]

Oh, it is quite funny, and much more entertaining than the rest of the thread.

Speaking of: PAGE SIX!

This is disturbing to me.

[Felch]

Where are human rights? How can I tell what these insubstantial, invisible human rights are? If you only believe in human rights because religion tells you to, then should we base our laws on your religion? I'm not seeing how the concept that a fetus is entitled to 'human rights' is any more provable than the concept of a soul.

Reasonable people can disagree on the nature of the soul, but we should at least accept the premise of human rights. If you sincerely do not believe that human rights exist, then you are a horrible person.

Consciousness is distinct from intelligence. I don't think a stupid adult human experiences qualia to any less degree than a smart one does. However, I am very confident that a first trimester fetus does not experience any qualia and is no more a person than a human egg is. I don't see how the preservation of an unsentient structure of human cells outweighs the rights of a fully sentient woman.

We get it, you don't believe in human rights.

[Thorn]

I believe and encourage abortion, pro-abortion!!!!

[notyoueither]

You, sirrah, while both a scholar and a gentleman, are missing the point.

I'm trying to get people to stop looking/posting in this thread.

Why would it bother you so much that people disagree about and discuss a major issue?

[Thorn]

Why would it bother you so much that people disagree about and discuss a major issue?

How the **** is this a major issue, talk about the economic collapse of europe or something....?!