Do you even know why abortion was made legal in the first place? Cuz women were DYING! They still do. 70,000 women die every year around the world due to illegal abortion, and SO DOES THE FETUS. You're not saving lives here dickweed. You're killing women needlessly, you're controlling their bodies and lives and leaving 220,000 kids orphaned because their moms just died from an illegal abortion. If it's not your uterus, it's not your decision. End of this.
I don't know whether you're familiar with the Trolley Problem, but this seems to be another instance of that to me. People feel intuitively that side-effects and intended effects are morally different even if the result is the same. Abortion is an intended effect (like pushing the fat man off the bridge) and unhooking the violinist is a side-effect (like diverting the trolley onto the track with one worker).
If pro-lifers stuck to scientific arguements against abortion, they'd convert me. Unfortunately they always resort to telling me that an invisible man in the sky told them to be anti abortion. That's where they lose me.
I am pro choice myself, however I do agree that the violinist example seems somewhat weak. Maybe if I sat down and really had a talk to an expert in the violinist example I could be convinced that it was a great argument. But I agree with you that the situation doesn't really apply (in most cases, as you said).
I think the important thing about abortion is that it doesn't cause any unnecessary suffering (i.e. the fetus doesn't suffer).
@TumshieX It appears that you are saying that abortion should be allowed because it doesn't cause any unnecessary suffering. That's a very dangerous standard for killing a human. There are a lot of ways someone could kill you where you wouldn't suffer, that doesn't make it right. It seems to me that the "important thing" is that abortion kills a human life without proper justification.
Suffering includes mental/emotional suffering. Any law allowing me to be killed without consent would make me very uncomfortable. This is not the case with a fetus.
Furthermore, if I was killed (even without me suffering) my family and friends would suffer. Again, not the case with the fetus. The only way the scenarios would be comparable would be if all my family and friends somehow agreed that we were all better of with me gone...
I've been pro choice since 1969 and have never heard of this argument before watching your video. Where did you get the idea that this is the no. 1 argument on our side? Do you have any proof that most of us actually agree with or use this argument?
@pirbird14 I see your point. It certainly isn't the most common argument. When I say it's referred to as the strongest argument I mean to say that from people who really know the issue and have a basic understanding of philosophy and argumentation this is the strongest. The average pro choicer isn't going to be familiar with the argument or why it's necessary.
I'd be curious to hear, from your position in the pro choice movement what do you feel is the strongest argument you have?
The fact that the term "person" does not have an objective definition means that we cannot say that the gestating being has rights that supersede the rights of the prospective mother. Her rights, as protected by most constitutional democracies, include the right to security of person - including but not limited to bodily integrity - the right to privacy and the right to due process. Constitutional rights accrue to born persons.
@pirbird14 You are correct the word person is subjective. Sadly, governments have a poor track record when it comes to allowing the abuse humans who aren't deemed to be persons.
If your strongest argument in favor of abortion is that 5 members of the supreme court said that humans don't get constitutional rights until after a trip down a birth canal that's pretty weak. Your strongest argument would vanish if a few people on the court changed their mind. Do you have a second best argument?
I made no reference to the supreme court of your country for the simple fact that it writ does not run in Canada. Re-read my argument and see if you can figure out what I actually did say.
@miggetymike1 Let me get this straight. You profess a university level understanding of philosophy; but, you can't understand a simple argument made in plain language? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for now. I made no mention of autonomy, partial or otherwise. I made no mention of any rights trumping any other rights. "the gestating being has rights that supersede the rights of the prospective mother". Non-existent rights don't trump anything.
Interesting. The reason I assume that most pro choicers think abortion doesn't kill a human being is because I believe in their humanity and that has been my experience in talking with them. There are a few out on the fringe that admit 3,000 innocent human beings are killed every day through elective abortions but for the majority of pro choicers if they realized this they wouldn't support it.
@miggetymike1 Well I guess everyone has their own opinion. I am pro choice but I am not going to begin a discussion because internet discussions never lead anywhere meaningful. Have a good day.
You know, when a baby is born, does it come out a full grown human being? No, it doesn't, it's still developing and growing... The moment conception happens, a human being is created, and they begin to develop. Drawing the line where something is human or not is purely for the fact of removing guilt.
Do you know what the Greeks did? So many children died in infancy, they wrote they weren't really people, so we shouldn't mourn them.
Abortion is almost murder. It's often by a woman with difficult choices - but it is one of the biggest evils in society today. A woman does not have the right to say it's her body - that right was given up at conception. It's called responsibility. Maybe the abortionist should kill the woman - see how she likes it.
Conception can only occur with both a man and a woman. Thus it's fundamentally unfair to women to say that they have given up the rights to their bodies when men don't suffer the same consequences. Unless you're going to pass a law saying that for every sexual act, a woman has to sign away the rights to her body in a waiver, you have zero credibility in making that statement.
A straw man is when you make up an argument and then tear it down. The violinist argument is the pro choicers own argument.
Calling it a straw man is actually a compliment because that means I did such a good job deconstructing it that you thought I made it up just to make myself look good.
In the future try to give criticism that's relevant to what was brought up.
You did make a strawman argument, simply because you categorize all pro choicers under one category. Dicto Simpliciter. Also contrary premises, and composition. You're full of fallacy.
An abortion is simply killing a cell.....You know how many sperm cells YOU go through in a week? Do you know how many egg cells a woman goes through in their lifetime? WE SHOULD BE HANGING ALL MEN AND WOMEN FOR ABORTING POTENTIAL BABIES11!!11111!!!!111 I like how people think a divided cell is a "Human Life"
You refer to "a cell" and "a divided cell." This is incorrect. A fetus is made up of more than one cell. Even if you would have said "it's just a clump of cells" that's still not a valid argument because YOU are just a clump of cells. Furthermore, sperm isn't a complete human just like your fingernail isn't a complete human. Like I mentioned in the video intelligent pro choicers no longer claim abortions don't kill a human. That's why they have to justify with this violinist argument.
Zegaton..... a zygote is just the 1st stage in a human beings life....a human being is a human being...you started out this way & so did every other person. dead things dont grow so its alive. But you know, the abortion arguement wld be a moot point, if people used thought & reasoning & didnt engage in an activity for which there might be an undesired out come...I mean you wldnt stick your hand in a would chipper, right?
The undesired outcome is pregnancy...the action is sex...now dont get me wrong, I dont blv sex is ONLY for makeing babies. But the fact is, thats how you get them. No matter the reason, if you dnt want a child, then why are you risking pregnancy? Why is it unreasonable to expect a person to act responsibly?
You seem to be missing my point...my question is...Why is it unreasonable to expect people to be responsible & NOT have sex? If you dont want a child (4 whatever reason) Why are you haveing sex & there by...risking an unwanted pregnancy? Why cant we be responsible BEFORE we become pregnant?
2.- pregnancies that end on abortion are not always unplanned or unwanted
if is most practical to have "responsible" sex(because of unwanted pregnancies and VD). but once a woman is pregnant, is up to her to act responsible according to her particular truth
I understand that about the sex drive....however to me that is a VERY weak issue. A dog, cat, cow....ect. come in to heat & are driven to mate. But we are not animals, what makes us different isnt just walking upright...but the ability to think & reason. Useing sex drive as an excuse is a slippery slope. What about a rapeist? Or child molester? We put both in jail....but according to pro-choice, cont..
Soooo she can think & reason enough to end a pregnancy but, doesnt have enough brain power to think or reason BEFORE pregnancy...So we are animals in no control over our sex drive & shldnt be expected to control our selves. sniff...sniff...You smell that?......I do. It smells like bull shit.
Its unreasonable to expect restraint...it cant be done....If that is so, why do we punish rapeists & molesters? According to the pro-choice stand, their sex drive isnt something they can control.
You are making the arguement right there that the fetus is not another person but just part of the mother. Huh?! Okay, well lets say the fetus is not a human at first, When exactly does the fetus become a human? 1st trimester? 4 and a half months?
if from a human being, a fetus is human, so were the sperm and egg that made it, but they are not half persons; therefore, zygotes are not persons, neither are embryos or fetus before their cortex is in place and they develop cognitive capabilities and become viable
an embryo and a corpse have none, neither is a person
and a fetus is not part of her carrier, a fetus is a totally different unity that needs A WILLING CARRIER (MOTHER)to develop into a person
I fear responding to this is like responding to someone who says "I know you are but what am I" but here goes anyway:
Simply asserting that it's a woman's right and that's final isn't an argument.
That's like an abolitionist explaining to a slaveholder that blacks are human and therefore shouldn't be enslaved and the slaveholder responding with the "argument" it's my right.
To almost surely respond beyond your comment, the 13th amendment has NEVER been applied to pregnant women.
Do you even know why abortion was made legal in the first place? Cuz women were DYING! They still do. 70,000 women die every year around the world due to illegal abortion, and SO DOES THE FETUS. You're not saving lives here dickweed. You're killing women needlessly, you're controlling their bodies and lives and leaving 220,000 kids orphaned because their moms just died from an illegal abortion. If it's not your uterus, it's not your decision. End of this.
electrobutt 1 month ago
damn!, this guys got some sexy piercing eyes!
rooskayaLUV 5 months ago
i'm sorry but are you wearing eye liner? lmao....and you have a weak argument :) against a born right to vindiacte ones own bodily choice.
Albanezkaa 8 months ago
@Albanezkaa You are a complete fucktard. If your going to call his argument weak and not back it up, guess what that makes you? a fucktard.
david52875 3 months ago
I don't know whether you're familiar with the Trolley Problem, but this seems to be another instance of that to me. People feel intuitively that side-effects and intended effects are morally different even if the result is the same. Abortion is an intended effect (like pushing the fat man off the bridge) and unhooking the violinist is a side-effect (like diverting the trolley onto the track with one worker).
curbyII 1 year ago
If pro-lifers stuck to scientific arguements against abortion, they'd convert me. Unfortunately they always resort to telling me that an invisible man in the sky told them to be anti abortion. That's where they lose me.
dave4248 1 year ago
I am pro choice myself, however I do agree that the violinist example seems somewhat weak. Maybe if I sat down and really had a talk to an expert in the violinist example I could be convinced that it was a great argument. But I agree with you that the situation doesn't really apply (in most cases, as you said).
I think the important thing about abortion is that it doesn't cause any unnecessary suffering (i.e. the fetus doesn't suffer).
TumshieX 1 year ago
@TumshieX It appears that you are saying that abortion should be allowed because it doesn't cause any unnecessary suffering. That's a very dangerous standard for killing a human. There are a lot of ways someone could kill you where you wouldn't suffer, that doesn't make it right. It seems to me that the "important thing" is that abortion kills a human life without proper justification.
miggetymike1 1 year ago
@miggetymike1
Suffering includes mental/emotional suffering. Any law allowing me to be killed without consent would make me very uncomfortable. This is not the case with a fetus.
Furthermore, if I was killed (even without me suffering) my family and friends would suffer. Again, not the case with the fetus. The only way the scenarios would be comparable would be if all my family and friends somehow agreed that we were all better of with me gone...
TumshieX 1 year ago
I've been pro choice since 1969 and have never heard of this argument before watching your video. Where did you get the idea that this is the no. 1 argument on our side? Do you have any proof that most of us actually agree with or use this argument?
pirbird14 1 year ago
@pirbird14 I see your point. It certainly isn't the most common argument. When I say it's referred to as the strongest argument I mean to say that from people who really know the issue and have a basic understanding of philosophy and argumentation this is the strongest. The average pro choicer isn't going to be familiar with the argument or why it's necessary.
I'd be curious to hear, from your position in the pro choice movement what do you feel is the strongest argument you have?
miggetymike1 1 year ago
@miggetymike1
The fact that the term "person" does not have an objective definition means that we cannot say that the gestating being has rights that supersede the rights of the prospective mother. Her rights, as protected by most constitutional democracies, include the right to security of person - including but not limited to bodily integrity - the right to privacy and the right to due process. Constitutional rights accrue to born persons.
pirbird14 1 year ago
@pirbird14 You are correct the word person is subjective. Sadly, governments have a poor track record when it comes to allowing the abuse humans who aren't deemed to be persons.
If your strongest argument in favor of abortion is that 5 members of the supreme court said that humans don't get constitutional rights until after a trip down a birth canal that's pretty weak. Your strongest argument would vanish if a few people on the court changed their mind. Do you have a second best argument?
miggetymike1 1 year ago
@miggetymike1
I made no reference to the supreme court of your country for the simple fact that it writ does not run in Canada. Re-read my argument and see if you can figure out what I actually did say.
pirbird14 1 year ago
@pirbird14 So your strongest argument is just that the temporary loss of partial autonomy of one human can trump the loss of life of another?
miggetymike1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@miggetymike1 Let me get this straight. You profess a university level understanding of philosophy; but, you can't understand a simple argument made in plain language? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for now. I made no mention of autonomy, partial or otherwise. I made no mention of any rights trumping any other rights. "the gestating being has rights that supersede the rights of the prospective mother". Non-existent rights don't trump anything.
pirbird14 1 year ago
Why do you assume every pro choicer says that abortion doesn't kill a valuable person. Assumptions make people sounds really stupid.
futboleroR10 1 year ago
Interesting. The reason I assume that most pro choicers think abortion doesn't kill a human being is because I believe in their humanity and that has been my experience in talking with them. There are a few out on the fringe that admit 3,000 innocent human beings are killed every day through elective abortions but for the majority of pro choicers if they realized this they wouldn't support it.
miggetymike1 1 year ago
@miggetymike1 Well I guess everyone has their own opinion. I am pro choice but I am not going to begin a discussion because internet discussions never lead anywhere meaningful. Have a good day.
futboleroR10 1 year ago
You know, when a baby is born, does it come out a full grown human being? No, it doesn't, it's still developing and growing... The moment conception happens, a human being is created, and they begin to develop. Drawing the line where something is human or not is purely for the fact of removing guilt.
Do you know what the Greeks did? So many children died in infancy, they wrote they weren't really people, so we shouldn't mourn them.
I see a shocking similarity.
Link0304 1 year ago
lol
Does that mean next time i can torture a baby because it's not valuable, productive, and can't look after it's self? :D
CASE CLOSED! *kicks baby across room*
CrMoshed 1 year ago
What if the violinist inspired the scientist to work on and later discover the cure for cancer? lol
fhslax 2 years ago
Your so hot ummmmmmmm. And I belive that people who have an abortion should be arrested for murder
heartbreaker3230 2 years ago
Abortion is almost murder. It's often by a woman with difficult choices - but it is one of the biggest evils in society today. A woman does not have the right to say it's her body - that right was given up at conception. It's called responsibility. Maybe the abortionist should kill the woman - see how she likes it.
AndyWhite007 2 years ago
Conception can only occur with both a man and a woman. Thus it's fundamentally unfair to women to say that they have given up the rights to their bodies when men don't suffer the same consequences. Unless you're going to pass a law saying that for every sexual act, a woman has to sign away the rights to her body in a waiver, you have zero credibility in making that statement.
PringlesLover123 1 year ago
lol...wood chipper...
taffygirlgood 2 years ago
Strawman Strawman. Nothing to see here folks.
yamilink03 2 years ago 2
A straw man is when you make up an argument and then tear it down. The violinist argument is the pro choicers own argument.
Calling it a straw man is actually a compliment because that means I did such a good job deconstructing it that you thought I made it up just to make myself look good.
In the future try to give criticism that's relevant to what was brought up.
miggetymike1 2 years ago
You did make a strawman argument, simply because you categorize all pro choicers under one category. Dicto Simpliciter. Also contrary premises, and composition. You're full of fallacy.
yamilink03 2 years ago
An abortion is simply killing a cell.....You know how many sperm cells YOU go through in a week? Do you know how many egg cells a woman goes through in their lifetime? WE SHOULD BE HANGING ALL MEN AND WOMEN FOR ABORTING POTENTIAL BABIES11!!11111!!!!111 I like how people think a divided cell is a "Human Life"
yamilink03 2 years ago
You refer to "a cell" and "a divided cell." This is incorrect. A fetus is made up of more than one cell. Even if you would have said "it's just a clump of cells" that's still not a valid argument because YOU are just a clump of cells. Furthermore, sperm isn't a complete human just like your fingernail isn't a complete human. Like I mentioned in the video intelligent pro choicers no longer claim abortions don't kill a human. That's why they have to justify with this violinist argument.
miggetymike1 2 years ago
abortion SURELY kills a human entity, but not a person
lifers claim a person is created at conception, ONE CELL PERSON indeed
no science fact would back you up
ZegatonZ 2 years ago
Zegaton..... a zygote is just the 1st stage in a human beings life....a human being is a human being...you started out this way & so did every other person. dead things dont grow so its alive. But you know, the abortion arguement wld be a moot point, if people used thought & reasoning & didnt engage in an activity for which there might be an undesired out come...I mean you wldnt stick your hand in a would chipper, right?
taffygirlgood 2 years ago
a zygote is the blue print on creating a person, if aborted, no person is aborted, but the blue print
we started as sperms n eggs , but they were not half people
undesirable outcome would be to bring unwanted embryos to personhood
ZegatonZ 2 years ago
The undesired outcome is pregnancy...the action is sex...now dont get me wrong, I dont blv sex is ONLY for makeing babies. But the fact is, thats how you get them. No matter the reason, if you dnt want a child, then why are you risking pregnancy? Why is it unreasonable to expect a person to act responsibly?
taffygirlgood 2 years ago
if the pregnancy is undesirable, it is irresponsible to pile more unwanted kids on the overflowing piles of unwanted kids
ZegatonZ 2 years ago
You seem to be missing my point...my question is...Why is it unreasonable to expect people to be responsible & NOT have sex? If you dont want a child (4 whatever reason) Why are you haveing sex & there by...risking an unwanted pregnancy? Why cant we be responsible BEFORE we become pregnant?
taffygirlgood 2 years ago
1.-sex is the strongest drive( after hunger)
2.- pregnancies that end on abortion are not always unplanned or unwanted
if is most practical to have "responsible" sex(because of unwanted pregnancies and VD). but once a woman is pregnant, is up to her to act responsible according to her particular truth
she has no one to answer but herself
ZegatonZ 2 years ago
I understand that about the sex drive....however to me that is a VERY weak issue. A dog, cat, cow....ect. come in to heat & are driven to mate. But we are not animals, what makes us different isnt just walking upright...but the ability to think & reason. Useing sex drive as an excuse is a slippery slope. What about a rapeist? Or child molester? We put both in jail....but according to pro-choice, cont..
taffygirlgood 2 years ago
we think and reason, and if woman think and reason that abortion is for them, is their right
just as is their right to keep their pregnancies
ZegatonZ 2 years ago
Soooo she can think & reason enough to end a pregnancy but, doesnt have enough brain power to think or reason BEFORE pregnancy...So we are animals in no control over our sex drive & shldnt be expected to control our selves. sniff...sniff...You smell that?......I do. It smells like bull shit.
taffygirlgood 2 years ago 2
" smell like bull shit.."
time to clean yourself up, or not
people are free to do with their bodies as they choose
ZegatonZ 2 years ago
Its unreasonable to expect restraint...it cant be done....If that is so, why do we punish rapeists & molesters? According to the pro-choice stand, their sex drive isnt something they can control.
taffygirlgood 2 years ago
we punish them because rapist are infringing in other people rights
you do not punish people for molesting themselves do you?
ZegatonZ 2 years ago
You are making the arguement right there that the fetus is not another person but just part of the mother. Huh?! Okay, well lets say the fetus is not a human at first, When exactly does the fetus become a human? 1st trimester? 4 and a half months?
JimiGilmoure 1 year ago
jimi
if from a human being, a fetus is human, so were the sperm and egg that made it, but they are not half persons; therefore, zygotes are not persons, neither are embryos or fetus before their cortex is in place and they develop cognitive capabilities and become viable
an embryo and a corpse have none, neither is a person
and a fetus is not part of her carrier, a fetus is a totally different unity that needs A WILLING CARRIER (MOTHER)to develop into a person
ZegatonZ 1 year ago
the only argument woman have for abortion is that is their right,
natural right
any argument against it is nothing but wanting to enslave woman to an archaic retrograde subjective and unjust creed
if not your vagina, keep your nose out of it
unless you are invited to sniff it
ZegatonZ 2 years ago
I fear responding to this is like responding to someone who says "I know you are but what am I" but here goes anyway:
Simply asserting that it's a woman's right and that's final isn't an argument.
That's like an abolitionist explaining to a slaveholder that blacks are human and therefore shouldn't be enslaved and the slaveholder responding with the "argument" it's my right.
To almost surely respond beyond your comment, the 13th amendment has NEVER been applied to pregnant women.
miggetymike1 2 years ago
fallacy
slaves were not embryos nor were they growing inside the owners
but the 4th the 9th and 14th amendment has
life liberty...for THE BORN
you do not make arguments to deprive teh born of their rights
conservatives have done it for generations, thous denying people of their rights
ZegatonZ 2 years ago
Hey Mike, thanks for the video response. I appreciate the feedback. I'll think about your response and hopefully find time to follow up.
SisyphusRedeemed 2 years ago