Pro-life conservatives VS a Simple hypothetical

THIS!!!!!

I save the baby, if anybody wants to know.

Hypothetical:

A woman who has been pregnant for six weeks is shot in the stomach by her husband.

The woman survives, but the embryo dies.

Should the husband be charged with murder?

when you’re trying to justify elective abortion up until the moment of birth by comparing born babies to embryos, you get a wee bit defensive.

Lmao who is doing that

Abortion up until the moment of birth!

Are you saying a woman shouldn’t have that choice? If so what’s your grounds for her not having that choice?

I thought the hypothetical was an effective tool at shining a light on the hypocrisy of forcing women to have children by pretending that an embryo is a human life then pulling the rug out from support for actual human life

It’s not a medical reality, it’s a political delusion of the feeble minded such as yourself

Nice dodge.

You saying it’s a medical reality for people to choose between saving five embryos or saving a baby?

We’re not even talking about the law here. Do you think it’s wrong for a fetus to be aborted an hour before birth on an elective basis (not to save the life of the mother)?

I mean, if we’re going to make up nonsense hypotheticals, do you believe a twin who absorbs their sibling in the womb should be charged for their murder at birth? Don’t you believe it’s wrong for a fetus to absorb another living being?

Well, do you?!

I'd say it's wrong for her to not put it up for adoption.

I don't think women have absolute reproductive rights but it would take extreme circumstances to override her natural rights. Like our primitive ancestors. Probably millions of infants were technically murdered but it was for the survival of the group. So under those sort of circumstances or if there were only one male or one female, the species rights override the individual's.

They don’t have the motive to murder, so no.

Also looking it up it happens in the first trimester, which is the unlimited abortion have at it I don’t care at all trimester.

I literally only start to care about the fetus once the fetus can be considered sentient. That’s usually somewhere in the second trimester.

But again even if the fetus killed another fetus there’s no intention to kill.

This would be true even if it was a 2 year old killing another 2 year old.

See how easy it is to just answer the question instead of dodging? So now that I answered your moral question can you answer my very simply moral question?

Even if you think “omg what mother would go through all that just to kill their baby”? That’s not an answer, because as we both know infanticide does happen and infanticide isn’t even legal. In some states 3rd trimester elective abortion is legal.

You’ve completely lost the plot, so to back up to the beginning again, you claimed this:

I’m not engaging in your discussion because the above simply never happened. No one has tried to justify elective abortion at birth anymore than anyone has tried to justify letting the baby burn to death in the hypothetical.

This conversation exists because real laws and policies are being made over the claim that embryos are equivalent to viable human babies, and real women are suffering the consequences. It’s a relevant issue.

What you’re doing, as usual, is throwing an unrelated wrench into an otherwise linear debate. You routinely make discussions worse when you join them. Nobody owes you unlimited patience or engagement, least of all me when debating a woman’s right to choose. You can stop with the targeted antagonism.

Yawn. Do you think it’s wrong for a mother to abort a fetus into the third trimester up until the point of conception or not?

You don’t know what linearity is at all. What you’re doing of rambling and ad hominem is the lack of linearity. I don’t care about your moral grandstanding when you can’t even do the obvious thing of saying that killing a fetus in the third trimester for no reason is wrong. That’s why you want to focus on embryos, so you can pretend not to understand why anyone cares about abortion and thinks it’s horrific that it’s legal for someone to do elective abortion in the third trimester. It’s effectively legalized baby killing. Would you be against infanticide being legal even if the practice was extremely rare? I’d hope you would be.

Oh interesting how in the mod thread it was “I barely notice you at all” and now in this thread it’s “you make every discussion you enter into worse”.

I don’t take it personally, I know that people like you can’t help but to lie, gaslight, and use social bullying tactics. I’ve met plenty of your ilk online, so you’re nothing special.

Everyone thinks it’s wrong to kill viable babies, crd. So who are you claiming is trying to justify it?

Ok. Over 2/3 of your posts today have been stalking me from thread to thread harassing me.

I’m not going to tolerate targeted antagonism or boundary violating. If you have an issue with Luciom being banned, or Victor not being banned, or me finally matching your energy, you can take it to PMs with the mods. For now, you’re taking a break.

If you need female attention so badly, go pay for it.

If you were in a logic class, you'd be failing.

There's a lot of F's in this thread.

It’s definitely been an odd derail by several people not understanding that comparing embryos to babies is not the same as comparing babies to elderly people, babies to six year olds, or babies about to be born to babies a few minutes old. The whole concept of viability being the crux of the issue went straight over everyone’s heads.

The more I see online, the worse my outlook is on society. This was a very simple thought experiment, and we should be debating the value of embryos vs babies based on everyone’s answers. But we can’t even get there because half the class is too ****ing intellectually challenged to properly view the problem being posed.

What about "a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush"? According to this wisdom the number of embryos matters. With that in mind, what if we were talking about 1000 embryos which were slated to be birthed?

Or what if you had to choose between 2 women and one was pregnant? Does the pregnancy affect your decision or are you flipping a coin there?

No embryo is guaranteed to be birthed. That distinction is hugely important to this discussion.

In a legal sense, our human ancestors murdered probably millions of babies over our history. I don't think that was wrong or immoral considering the circumstances.

It was a deranged post full of misinformation and misogynistic accusations. Women are not electing to legally kill their fully formed babies. We can just leave it at that.

I have no idea if CRD was 'stalking' you or not, but he is a philosopher and this thread is of a philosophical nature.

To continue the conversation:

A New Hypothetical that is an extension of yours in some important sense:

A woman who has been pregnant for 30 weeks is shot in the stomach by her husband.

The woman survives, but the unborn in her womb dies.

Should the husband be charged with murder?