|
Re: the abortion bit of this thread:
All I can think as I read this is the following:
"Prove it."
Until such time, we're arguing values. As such, it always comes down to value of the (as far as the scientific community can agree) hypothetical potential "human" life ascribed to a fetus, vs. the value to the woman who doesn't want to be a mother, for whatever reasons she doesn't want to carry the fetus to term. It can be shown that a fetus is a living thing, just like cauliflower and organs and many other things...what can't be shown is that it s a separate human life form. If you can prove this, beyond a shadow of doubt, please share because you will change my view on the matter.
Assuming you can't prove this, we're left in a situation where we're arguing over possession of a living entity which at the very least has the potential for human life after birth. The question then becomes, via will's thread OP...who does that potential life form belong to? Man, or woman? In my opinion, it's not perfect, but the preponderance of the evidence would suggest the woman has most at risk in the pregnancy and birth process, so she gets to make the decision. It's not perfect. Maybe "Dad" bought a cute little outfit for his new little treasure to wear. All I can say is "tough shit." I wouldn't like it if I were in that situation, but there are a ton of things I wouldn't like if my wishes didn't line up with those of my girlfriend / wife-to-be / wife. I'm not convinced that a fetus has a soul, and that seems to be crux of the matter, ergo foolthemall's stalemate. Everything after this is pure semantics and personal ethics. When ethics clash in personal relationships...fundamental ethics....look out for squalls.
__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style
|