sturg33
I
the framing of the OP is that adopting is let ethical than killing. You are free to simply say that is incredibly evil rather than going to play more defense
TLHLIM
- Thread starter sturg33
- Start date
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Nope, you're framing it that way because of your personal bias.
sturg33
I
"Forcing birth only to put them in adoption is WAY MORE UNETHICAL than having an abortion"
I guess we just live in two different english language understanding
Actually, kind of. Not really a different language, but different tenses. Just as nobody would tell an adopted person they should have been aborted, nobody will tell the tenth child of a dysfunctional family that they shouldn’t have been born. However, if you were to ask someone if they think some idiot with 9 kids they can’t take care of should have a tenth, they might reasonably say it’d be wrong.
I respect the pro-life position more than many might expect, but if you see a zygote/fetus as a future person whose life is being extinguished, that is a bias that informs your opinion on this take. If you see it instead as a clump of cells inside a person, you won’t necessarily have the same reaction to it. Your personal belief regarding the conception of life is informing your opinion here.
For the record, I did find the OP to be dumb anyway. I don’t think there’s any compelling ethical argument to support abortion over putting a child up for adoption, and even if we grant the OP is talking about the state forcing a woman to bring an unwanted child to term, any question of ethical harm in that would be toward the mother in my view, not the unborn child.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
No she said only to dump them. The implication is that the child is not wanted and putting everyone through the trauma of birth and rejection is a different kind of negative than an abortion before the fetus can register anything.