Jump to content
Frequently asked questions... Read more... ×

why do u support abortion but not euthanasia?

94 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

I support both (in certain circumstances) but these two issues aren't related. the people that support abortion don't see the fetus as a being whereas euthanasia is related to beings exclusively, so asking them this question doesn't make sense

 

side note making a thread about a serious topic and asking a question only to attack people that display different view points and screaming /endthread?  it's not right. if you want to have a discussion then at least hear people out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Communion said:

By this argument, a doctor who makes a baby braindead by medical negligence cannot be prosecuted for harm because the baby is still alive and sentience is just "philosophy". :skull:

Comparing a voluntary act to an accident is not wise.

 

& I doubt anybody gets your argument about doctors negligence not being prosecuted. People can prosecuted for harming people who are still alive all the time .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pro choice

 

UN0Injq.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, TheCheetahwings said:

Abortion is "killing" a lump of cells, euthanasia is killing a full living breathing human being. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, frenchyisback said:

Comparing a voluntary act to an accident is not wise.

 

& I doubt anybody gets your argument about doctors negligence not being prosecuted. People can prosecuted for harming people who are still alive all the time .

Yes, and the argument that personhood is defined as simply existing as an organism and not sentience would pushback against being able to view making someone braindead as causing harm. 

 

We value sentience because science helps us understand that sentience is our consciousness and our conscious is our personhood. If you drive your car into someone and turn them into a vegetable, and their family is angry, it's because you essentially destroyed their personhood. The person that they were is gone. The phrasing of one being a vegetable literally acknowledges the lack of personhood in a braindead human. 

 

Humanity is different from personhood. A human fetus may have humanity by virtue of genetically being of the human species, but even the scientific community doesn't acknowledge a fetus as having personhood. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pro-choice and pro-euthanasia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can anyone inbox me, i need help pls

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Harmonous said:

I'd love to hear your take on pre-marital sex, homosexuality, alcoholism, woman speaking in church all being a sin (1 Cor 6:9-11) in Bible (PART 2 tho). 

 

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+6%3A9-11&version=NIV

no cuz im in a bad state, mentally

 

i dont have the strenght to bs this..i really dont care sis, even if there are flying unicorns outside flying and shooting rockets idc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I support boats :flower:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I support both

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Grumpy Cat said:

no cuz im in a bad state, mentally

 

i dont have the strenght to bs this..i really dont care sis, even if there are flying unicorns outside flying and shooting rockets idc

but they do exist. I support both :flower:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Communion said:

Yes, and the argument that personhood is defined as simply existing as an organism and not sentience would pushback against being able to view making someone braindead as causing harm. 

 

We value sentience because science helps us understand that sentience is our consciousness and our conscious is our personhood. If you drive your car into someone and turn them into a vegetable, and their family is angry, it's because you essentially destroyed their personhood. The person that they were is gone. The phrasing of one being a vegetable literally acknowledges the lack of personhood in a braindead human. 

 

Humanity is different from personhood. A human fetus may have humanity by virtue of genetically being of the human species, but even the scientific community doesn't acknowledge a fetus as having personhood. 

Do you have a statistics for this or are you pulling this out of your ass?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, fabbriche said:

Do you have a statistics for this or are you pulling this out of your ass?

The medical community in the US (and largely worldwide) agrees sentience doesn't develop in a fetus until at least 24-28 weeks in and this is why the same medical community largely advocates for legal, unrestricted abortion up until this point.

 

Are you going to address the difference between humanity and personhood or are you going to talk out of your ass and pretend you'd be fine with someone making your loved one brain-dead because "PERSONHOOD IS EXISTING!"? :ahh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Communion said:

The medical community in the US (and largely worldwide) agrees sentience doesn't develop in a fetus until at least 24-28 months in and this is why the same medical community largely advocates for legal, unrestricted abortion up until this point.

 

Are you going to address the difference between humanity and personhood or are you going to talk out of your ass and pretend you'd be fine with someone making your loved one brain-dead because "PERSONHOOD IS EXISTING!"? :ahh:

There is no scientific agreement on when sentience begins as there is no test for it until the baby is born. Such test would never pass an ethics committee. The cutoff point for abortion is just an estimate for when fetal consciousness is possible and it has been reduced from 24 to 20 to 18 weeks in some countries like the UK while others countries even limit it to just 9-12 weeks. 

 

The difference between 'human' and 'person' is that the former is scientific and clear cut while the latter is philosophical and arbitrary. Science is a category error when it comes to personhood and there is no scientific consensus on what counts as a person otherwise this abortion debate would no longer be a thing. Scientists who speak on the issue do so only on the basis of their religious/philosophical views. Personhood is not a scientific category but a legal and cultural construct. Abortion is not a scientific debate but an ethical one. The definition of personhood has varied from being speciesist and exceptionalist to racist and ableist, since the time of Aristotle, to John Locke and David Hume. There is no consensus on personhood in philosophy, let alone in science. The only thing that is established in science is the point where life begins and whether that life is human or not.

Whatever puts individuals on a higher category or into a hierarchy isn't science but philosophy. Whatever talks about worth, value and meaning is philosophy and not science. 

 

I don't understand why you keep bringing up your braindead analogy when I clearly said that any act that strips off a human being of its natural capacities is causing harm to it and is immoral. Personhood is the status for when a human being gains the right to live, and the requirement for that status shouldn't be exhaustive and should be set to the minimum – when it is alive then it has a right to live.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, fabbriche said:

There is no scientific agreement on when sentience begins as there is no test for it until the baby is born. Such test would never pass an ethics committee.

Muffy, sis... the scientific illiteracy. Do you think.. we know nothing of fetuses? 

 

It's funny you mention the UK when the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has long been agreed in the CONESUS now that a fetus cannot feel pain until after 6 months/24 weeks because a fetus younger than 7 months old hasn't even developed the wiring to receive and send pain signals from nerves around the body to the cortex. Scientists have studied nociception versus pain for decades in fetuses. 

 

And it is religious conservatives pushing to restrict abortion on the grounds of religious theory, not scientists using scientific evidence. In the UK - where the abortion limits remains 24 weeks, not 18 - the conservative party continues to try and limit the legal right to abortion through religious reasoning and have been called out over and over and over for decades now by medical organizations representing the nation's doctors that say the 24-week mark must stay in place.

 

I know your gig is to overstuff posts with unrelated historical tangents about religion, sis, but you literally have shown you don't know what you're talking about and it's insulting to everyone reading this thread for you to continue on trying to seem like you do to mask that you have no actual justifications for your anti-abortion religion-fueled hysterics. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/13/2019 at 7:57 AM, HANZ94 said:

I support both :flower:

This

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JUST LET PEOPLE DO WHATEVER THE **** THEY WANT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I support both. Every woman should have the right to decide over their own health and body and every individual should have the right to end their lives. Ofcourse there are nuances depeding on certain situations etc. But I rather see people having a safe abortion or save euthanasia. Then having people throwing themselves for a car, hanging themselves or in the case of abortion try some weird things that eventually affects their health and unsafe etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites