Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pig
fta: I can somewhat understand your position. I didn't mean confusion for you personally, but in the general sense as a population. The issue is far from settled as a society. Therefore, as I said, I default to the rights of the person I can definitely confirm is, in fact, a person. I don't think there is much confusion as to whether the pregnant woman is a fully-realized human, outside of questions of spiritual and philosophical enlightenment.
|
Yeah, not much more to say here, but a few redundant notes.
You can only definitely confirm that the woman is a person because the law determines what a person is. A century and a half ago - and this is
only brought up to make this one point - you wouldn't have such an easy time making that confirmation.
I understand that you meant general confusion. I only mean that using this confusion to determine a default abortion position seems like a crapshoot to me. Or even an invocation of the laziest aspect of conservatism - don't rock the boatism. Bad analogy: "There's too much confusion about metaphysical things - whether there's a God, which values are best, whether evil exists - so I'll just stick with what's empirically measurable." Great choice, now you've got a bunch of historical moralities at best and no justification for following any of them. "...oops, well I'll just kill some time on this Law & Order marathon then."
Wow, that's even worse than I envisioned. Sorry. Ignore that last bit.