Can someone help me understand this

D

Diogenes

Guest
Someone who is as anti-abortion as he is should be more careful about careless mistakes.....

Just sayin....

When did did I say abortion should be illegal?

I think he made a typo and meant that mentally incompetent and mentally ill aren't the same.

Thank you for the charity.

I would correct his statement to "there's nothing about depression that would necessarily make a person unable to make decisions with intent." It certainly can do so, but that does not mean that all people with clinical depression are mentally incompetent, even though they are mentally ill.

Agreed. Sometimes the brain forgets to tell my fingers to type or write words intended.
 
D

Diogenes

Guest
No. It's part of their job. If they don't want to do it, get another job. Same as any job.

Assuming it was a non-emergency and there was reasonable time for another person to preform the work, I would have no issue with conscientious objector. To me, it would be like protect a worker from working on a day of religious observance.

If it's an life-threatening emergency, I have no issue with forcing them to do it.

Understood.

Personally, I prefer Thompson's people-seeds to her violinist as the violinist involves kidnapping and theft whereas the embyro/foetus is actively killed largely = due to the happenstance of biology. If save Thompson's violinist, we would be equally justified in kidnapping people for bone marrow or liver "donations" as these do no more permanent harm as mere kidney use.

The people-seeds also allow the distinction between a non-person embryo and late-stage foetus that has the neural structures that are correlated to personhood. Pro-lifers really should advocate contraception (including Plan B) and comprehensive sex education.

Firstly, why does that causal connection make a difference?

Secondly, is it the causal connection rather than the genetic inheritance that is at issue here? For example, consider these beings:
- one that I fathered with my wife, via the normal means
- one of which I am the biological father via a woman using my sperm taken from a sperm bank with my knowledge
- one of which I am the biological father via a woman using my sperm taken from a sperm bank with my knowledge (but my tacit consent)
- one of which I am the biological father via a woman using my sperm illegally (somehow) taken from me
- one to which I bear no relationship at all

To which do I have more or less responsibility?

Within the analogy to abortion, engaging in sex would be the causal connection. The reasons given for abortion are rarely for "hard" reasons and is rather done as a consequence of willing having sex.

And they would be right. Nobody is forced to care for another person. Any person who does not want a child they have created can give it up to the authorities. When a parent is charged with neglecting a child it is implied that they accepted the responsibility for doing so and failed. Had they given up the child to the authorities, they could not have been charged with neglecting it, even though they did nothing for it at all.

The argument then would be that having sex includes the acceptance of responsibility of the consequences, as with any action. Otherwise, being a biological father wouldn't entail any sort of responsibility for the child, including financial assistance for the child.

As I'm not a huge fan of Thompson's violinist nor am I opposed legal abortion per se, I can only counter-argue to a limited degree.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Assuming it was a non-emergency and there was reasonable time for another person to preform the work, I would have no issue with conscientious objector. To me, it would be like protect a worker from working on a day of religious observance.

If it's an life-threatening emergency, I have no issue with forcing them to do it.



Personally, I prefer Thompson's people-seeds to her violinist as the violinist involves kidnapping and theft whereas the embyro/foetus is actively killed largely = due to the happenstance of biology. If save Thompson's violinist, we would be equally justified in kidnapping people for bone marrow or liver "donations" as these do no more permanent harm as mere kidney use.

The people-seeds also allow the distinction between a non-person embryo and late-stage foetus that has the neural structures that are correlated to personhood. Pro-lifers really should advocate contraception (including Plan B) and comprehensive sex education.



Within the analogy to abortion, engaging in sex would be the causal connection. The reasons given for abortion are rarely for "hard" reasons and is rather done as a consequence of willing having sex.



The argument then would be that having sex includes the acceptance of responsibility of the consequences, as with any action.
Getting an abortion is dealing with the consequences.
Otherwise, being a biological father wouldn't entail any sort of responsibility for the child, including financial assistance for the child.
It shoudln't.
 
Top