Pro-life conservatives VS a Simple hypothetical

Makes sense.

As you know, the legal precedent is that a fetus (i.e. unborn baby) is a human life. Therefore, the intentional killing of a fetus is murder.

Many pro-abortion rights groups opposed the enactment of this law.

What I'm getting it is that a human life has a 'right to life' even in the womb. (Based on current law.)

I'll slightly rephrase my question: Should the intentional killing of a fetus be considered murder in your opinion?

It’s technically a human life but it’s not a person in any normal sense of the word. Killing it without consent is closer to pulling the plug on someone in a vegetative state without the consent of nearest of kin.

I took logic and it wasn't easy or fun.

But explain it to me please.

So, is it murder or not in your opinion?

And if it's not murder in your opinion, then what crime would it be?

Is pulling the plug on someone in a vegetative state without the consent of nearest of kin murder?

The above is not an accurate description of legal precedent surrounding fetal homicide and fetal injury. There is no single national legal precedent; and personhood of the fetus varies by state. Not every state even has fetal homicide laws.

I can’t debate with you if your premise and facts are inaccurate.

I will say to somewhat answer you questions that my beliefs surrounding abortion are science based and centered around medical viability of the fetus. After ~21 weeks, when a fetus is considered viable outside the mother’s body, that is a whole person. This is a commonly held pro-choice belief as far as I know. But an embryo is not a person and cannot be “murdered”. This has been my larger point all along- the stage of development matters.

The boogeymen of murdering babies right before they’re born is just a right wing scare tactic for people who lack critical reasoning.

This might be the dumbest hypothetical I've ever heard.

The context of an embryo outside of a pregnant mother is ******ed. And only psychopaths don't consider an embryo a human being. I believe the soul and body are combined at the moment of conception and is most certainly a person. That's what Christians have always taught.

So you would grab the embryos?

Millions of embryos exist outside of pregnant mothers as we speak.

And Stone Age peasants were certainly unaware of embryos so I doubt it’s an ancient teaching 😀

Regardless of lack of scientific knowledge, Church fathers in the first millenia were more educated and sophisticated than any modern intellectuals.

well thats just ignorant

Erm…

Sums it up perfectly doesn’t it

well duh

you are correct of course

of course he should!

lol

Well let's use an expected value of viable births from the embryos then. Let's say we expect 989 births from the embryos and they all have expectant parents. Does the number affect your decision?

And what if this took place on a colony on another planet in which humans were trying to seed a population? Are you still not going to consider the potential lives of the embryos as greater than the potential of one baby? Ultimately we are talking about potential here, expected outcomes. Any argument you can make against the embryos can also be made against the baby, only differing in degree.

Justo so you can't accuse me of not answering your question, of course I would save the baby in your scenario. Please tell me what you would do in the scenarios I conceived.

A lot of people aren't going to reckon with this the way you anticipate. Hitchens soured many of us to Teresas.

Were you avoiding the hypothetical posed to you because it was too difficult or because it makes you uncomfortable?

Amazing the mental gymnastics you guys engage in to justify some whore you slept with to murder her baby because it's inconvienent for you. Let's be real. This is why you support abortion and this is the reason for the vast majority of abortions.

You murder babies every time you jack off in your one bedroom apartment wan

Feels like you’re just mad you didn’t get to do this in college. It was a fun time.

In my opinion, yes.

I haven’t spent a ton of time thinking about the expected value of embryos in the context of quantity, but my first thought is probably no the number of embryos does not matter, for a few reasons. I do not view embryos, or potential life, as equal to sentient life, so a thousand clumps of cells is still not worth one human baby.

But also sometimes I think the concept of embryos is not clear to the average man when we’re discussing these hypotheticals. On average, each adult fertile woman will produce approximately 300-500 eggs, all of which have the potential to be fertilized and become embryos. 1000 eggs/embryos is just the product of 2-3 women in their lifetime. Now imagine 3.5 billion women. Embryos are plentiful and replaceable in ways a developed child is not. Sure, you can argue that each embryo contains genetic differences that will produce different people, but those differences can only be appreciated once they are in fact fully developed human beings. Embryos are not babies, the potential to exist is not the same as existing, and there is greater moral obligation to sentient life than non-sentient cellular potential for life.

Were scarcity an issue that would change things. Scarcity is not an issue.