Things They Say

sturg33 said:
I'll ask again.

At what point between conception and birth is it a person, if there is one?

I've asked you directly 3 times and you won't provide an answer. Of course I know why you won't provide one.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiousity...here's a little thought experiment:

You're in a hospital which is overtaken with a rapidly spreading fire. You're in a room with a six-year-old child and a refrigerated container containing 200 human embryos. You don't have the time or the physical strength to grab both. What do you take?
 
Julio3000 said:
Just out of curiousity...here's a little thought experiment:

You're in a hospital which is overtaken with a rapidly spreading fire. You're in a room with a six-year-old child and a refrigerated container containing 200 human embryos. You don't have the time or the physical strength to grab both. What do you take?
Click to expand...

Take the boy by the hand and have him hold the embryos.

:elefant:
 
The triple is the most exciting play in baseball. Home runs win a lot of games, but I never understood why fans are so obsessed with them.
-Hank Aaron


Dg3j4hkU8AE2ybR.jpg
 
Julio3000 said:
Just out of curiousity...here's a little thought experiment:

You're in a hospital which is overtaken with a rapidly spreading fire. You're in a room with a six-year-old child and a refrigerated container containing 200 human embryos. You don't have the time or the physical strength to grab both. What do you take?
Click to expand...

Why I dignify this nonsesne with a response is beyond me.

Basically the same as me asking the same hypothetical, where you can save one adult or a 9 month pregnant adult. WHAT DO YOU DO
 
So, yeah...let's consider. A 9-month-pregnant person is materially different than a fertilized egg, yes? Or is it? Your logic, as I understand it, ascribes personhood to embryos. So your answer, I guess, is clear. You go for the frozen embryos, right? Not sure what's so hard about answering the question.
 
I'd help the kid.

Because the embryos require medical intervention for survival.

On the other hand, abortion requires medical intervention in order to destroy. Its literally intentionally disrupting a natural and healthy process to destroy a living being.

Why would you choose the pregnant lady? At what point are you no longer ok with an abortion happening? Why at that point?
 
Hm, well, I appreciate the honest answer, although I must say it surprises me. You've been so adamant about the full personhood of fertilized eggs that I thought that you would unblinkingly save 200 lives at the cost of one.

So what you've told me is that you are in a position that is not unlike mine, and not unusual: unable, perhaps, to fully accept an absolutist point of view and left to struggle to find a morally permissible position in between.

My position is informed by the individual bodily soveriegnty of the person carrying the fetus. The rhetoric of "choice" is actually meaningful to me. I consider the medical and legal framework that has arisen around the issue...28 weeks being the legal standard around Roe, with the understanding that medical procedure has advanced to extend the possible viability (with extreme medical intervention and 50% rate of success) a couple of weeks sooner.

So, I've made a choice that is to some degree arbitrary. The thing that my thought experiment was designed to underscore is that, despite your previous protestations, so have you. Everyone without an extremist point of view has done the same.

It's interesting that your Procrustean libertarian ideology does not extend to this issue. Welcome to the real world.
 
I think my answer is both reasonable and consistent. Those embryos require a lot of help in order to make it.

The more realistic question is the 1 month old pregnant lady, against another person.

In that situation, I take the pregnant lady.
 
Whew, don't it just suck when you're always getting called a racist for no reason.

[tw]1013071801759469572[/tw]
 
sturg33 said:
I think my answer is both reasonable and consistent. Those embryos require a lot of help in order to make it.

The more realistic question is the 1 month old pregnant lady, against another person.

In that situation, I take the pregnant lady.
Click to expand...

I mean, maybe it is. But that's not really the message I've gotten from you over the years.

One academic question that is nonetheless possibly still important. How do you know a month-pregnant person is pregnant? She might not even know.

Not really sure I see the relationship between the questions.
 
Julio3000 said:
Just out of curiousity...here's a little thought experiment:

You're in a hospital which is overtaken with a rapidly spreading fire. You're in a room with a six-year-old child and a refrigerated container containing 200 human embryos. You don't have the time or the physical strength to grab both. What do you take?
Click to expand...

Here's a more reasonable hypothetical. You have a chance to save a human embryo that will likely become a six year old human child or you have a chance to live a life that may be more personally comfortable and convenient. What do you choose?
 
Julio3000 said:
Just out of curiousity...here's a little thought experiment:

You're in a hospital which is overtaken with a rapidly spreading fire. You're in a room with a six-year-old child and a refrigerated container containing 200 human embryos. You don't have the time or the physical strength to grab both. What do you take?
Click to expand...

And to answer this question, it depends on the future likely outcomes of the embryos and my emotional decision at the time. I may run out with the six year old for emotional reasons. But it doesn't make it the better moral outcome.
 
weso1 said:
And to answer this question, it depends on the future likely outcomes of the embryos and my emotional decision at the time. I may run out with the six year old for emotional reasons. But it doesn't make it the better moral outcome.
Click to expand...

That's fine, but that's not really the point of the question. Sturg has indicated, in effect, that he believes that a fertilized egg = an independently viable human being. The question is designed to test that conviction.
 
Julio3000 said:
Sturg has indicated, in effect, that he believes that a fertilized egg = an independently viable human being.
Click to expand...

No i havent. I've never said a fertilized egg is independently viable, and you know that

I've indicated that a fertilized egg is a viable living being that, without the forced destruction of it, will become a living human being that walks the earth.
 
sturg33 said:
No i havent. I've never said a fertilized egg is independently viable, and you know that

I've indicated that a fertilized egg is a viable living being that, without the forced destruction of it, will become a living human being that walks the earth.
Click to expand...

Um, you're misunderstanding me here. I'm not saying you believe a fertilized egg is viable, I'm saying you believe it is equivalent to any other human life. Fertilized egg=hypothetical 6-y-o=sturg or Julio.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top