Abortion

[Kylyssa]

So even if it warped her pelvis (a likely outcome), caused de-calcification of her bones and teeth(another highly probable event) and permanently emotionally damaged her (an even more likely outcome) - too bad, so sad?  The fetuses are more important than destroying a thinking, feeling child's life?  I think that the thinking feeling child who would be physically and emotionally damaged forever is more important than two fetuses with less ability to think and feel than a house pet.  You'd probably kill puppies all day if it saved a little girl from trauma and life-long physical damage - so why is a mentally unaware fetus any different?

[Nulono]

The right to life of one person outweighs the health of another person.

[Sophus]

The right to life of one person outweighs the health of another person.

Agreed. Only a fetus isn't a person.

[Nulono]

All humans are perople.

[Hitsumei]

All humans are perople.

Certainly not in the philosophical sense of a self-aware, or rational being they are not -- but perhaps in the colloquial obfuscatory sense of using the word as a synonym for a member of our species.

[Nulono]

So infanticide is okay?

[Sophus]

So infanticide is okay?

No. But a fetus is is not an infant.

[Hitsumei]

So infanticide is okay?

One can't have a reasonable exchange about the issue if all you plan to do is use emotive language, and define the subject to fit under contexts that are largely already considered wrong, without appreciation of the relevant variables that went into determining if those things are wrong.

If you just define "person" to mean anything with a homo sapien genome, and "baby" or "infant" to mean anything with a homo sapien genome pre-childhood development stage, then you can go ahead a start calling abortion baby murdering, and other things, but you have done nothing except align your language to allow it. You have not offered any substantive information, or ideas to intellectually, or morally consider. You're just using words, irrespective of their intelligible meanings, and in your own personal way.

I am going to define the spanking of children as a form of molestation. Do you think that spanking children in any situation is okay? And by extension endorse child molestation?

[curiosityandthecat]

I'm a perople, please don't kill me.  

[Nulono]

So infanticide is okay?

No. But a fetus is is not an infant.

But an infant is not sapient.

So infanticide is okay?

One can't have a reasonable exchange about the issue if all you plan to do is use emotive language, and define the subject to fit under contexts that are largely already considered wrong, without appreciation of the relevant variables that went into determining if those things are wrong.

If you just define "person" to mean anything with a homo sapien genome, and "baby" or "infant" to mean anything with a homo sapien genome pre-childhood development stage, then you can go ahead a start calling abortion baby murdering, and other things, but you have done nothing except align your language to allow it. You have not offered any substantive information, or ideas to intellectually, or morally consider. You're just using words, irrespective of their intelligible meanings, and in your own personal way.

I think you misunderstood me. I was responding to the claim that a person must be self-aware and rational, which newborns are not.

I am going to define the spanking of children as a form of molestation. Do you think that spanking children in any situation is okay? And by extension endorse child molestation?

OOOooohhh... Bad, bad, BAD analogy to make. The answer is no. Spanking a child is never okay, though I'd just classify it as simple child abuse (or just assault), not molestation.

[VanReal]

OOOooohhh... Bad, bad, BAD analogy to make. The answer is no. Spanking a child is never okay, though I'd just classify it as simple child abuse (or just assault), not molestation.

Spanking a child is not child abuse or assault just as an abortion is not killing a infant.  I think you are trying to live in a world of black and white, it simply is not.

[Nulono]

 We have run into the main difference in our world views. I am an egalitarian; I see all human beings as equal. You do not.

[Hitsumei]

I think you misunderstood me. I was responding to the claim that a person must be self-aware and rational, which newborns are not.

It isn't a claim, look it up in the dictionary, and look for the philosophical definition, or look it up in a philosophical encyclopedia. You're using a colloquial definition of the word, and then obfuscating it -- ignoring all of its other, and more formal meanings.  

OOOooohhh... Bad, bad, BAD analogy to make. The answer is no. Spanking a child is never okay, though I'd just classify it as simple child abuse (or just assault), not molestation.

It wasn't an analogy, it was a reductio ad absurdum -- but I mistakenly assumed that you were probably quite conservative, and thus probably supported spanking. The specific example is not important, and since you still dissented to the idea that it constituted child molestation, then my point should be made.

You need to make your case, and just redefining the terms being used is not making a case.

[Hitsumei]

:idea:  We have run into the main difference in our world views. I am an egalitarian; I see all human beings as equal. You do not.

You're merely redefining "person" to fit under the umbrella. Since egalitarianism is a social philosophy, I'm going to have to bet that it uses the philosophical definition of "person".

[Nulono]

Um, no. Since egalitarianism is a social philosophy, "person" refers to whatever one considers a person to be. Egalitarians can disagree on what constitutes a person.

Human rights apply to all humans.

You've still yet to answer my question as to whether infanticide is ethical.