|
|
No, I'm not avoiding the question. I know precisely why it is wrong. However, you've asked a question and removed a possible answer before we began. What I'm telling you is that it doesn't matter ultimately because the laws in this country protect an infant. For those same laws not to protect a fetus is inconsistent.Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
it's "wrong" in the same sense murdering you would be "wrong". There's no natural law against it, but my personal code of ethics and morality, as well as the code of ethics of enough other people that murder has been outlawed, makes it "wrong" to murder people. And since I believe a fetus deserves every protection an infant does, it is "wrong" to murder a human fetus.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt
Surely your code of ethics has a "reason" why it is wrong. Why is murdering anyone wrong, according to your code of ethics?
Jordan Mills on choosing Tech:
“It’s a great experience seeing them play. It was a good atmosphere. The fans stood up the whole game and never sat down. They have a great fan base.”
I have asked a question why something is "wrong" (meaning immoral, unethical) as opposed to why something should be "illegal."
Jordan Mills on choosing Tech:
“It’s a great experience seeing them play. It was a good atmosphere. The fans stood up the whole game and never sat down. They have a great fan base.”
And your eyes have not been opened to receive the answer. To give it to you...again, would be a waste of time for both of us.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
I know. It is very challenging to navigate my internet browser and respond to messages with my eyes closed. But old habits are hard to break.
Jordan Mills on choosing Tech:
“It’s a great experience seeing them play. It was a good atmosphere. The fans stood up the whole game and never sat down. They have a great fan base.”
Most major religions hold that life is sacred, regardless of the existence of an afterlife. And if there's no God, then this is the only life we have, and therefore ending anyone's life early on purpose would be wrong. So whether youre a theist or atheist, life is pretty important. And the importance of living makes it wrong for someone else to decide whether or not they deserve the right to live.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt
Why does the "importance of living" dictate that it is wrong to murder another person? I understand that your life is important to you, but why does that mean that it is morally wrong to take someone else's life that may be important to them? Why should you be concerned with someone else?
Jordan Mills on choosing Tech:
“It’s a great experience seeing them play. It was a good atmosphere. The fans stood up the whole game and never sat down. They have a great fan base.”
That was a great reply. Why? Because it takes the another side of the abortion argument. One that removes emotion and bases it purely on logic. I respect the case you've made.
I think the replies are exactly what I expected to hear. To pose a question "Why is it wrong to kill an infant?" shows the argument of a principle. Change that argument slightly. Ask instead, "Why is it wrong to kill Grace (an infant)?". And here's a picture:
Now answer that question. Put that into words. Or better yet... Why does that infant deserve the protection of society?
Good question - any answers? Why should we be concerned about the lives of other people (or at least their ability to live)?"Why is it wrong to kill Grace (an infant)?". And here's a picture:
Now answer that question. Put that into words. Or better yet... Why does that infant deserve the protection of society?
Jordan Mills on choosing Tech:
“It’s a great experience seeing them play. It was a good atmosphere. The fans stood up the whole game and never sat down. They have a great fan base.”
The burden of "proof" in your question lies on you Guisslap. It is genrally accepted my nearly ever society on the face of the planet that it is wrong to kill an infant. If you assertion is that it is not, tell us why.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
I am not making assertions - merely posing questions. Can you not answer them?
Jordan Mills on choosing Tech:
“It’s a great experience seeing them play. It was a good atmosphere. The fans stood up the whole game and never sat down. They have a great fan base.”
Your bias won't accept my answer. If I held to your worldview, I couldn't honestly think of a good reason.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
Even if you take this "only concerned with yourself" approach with a total disregard for the importance of life, it would be wrong for the person who killed the infant. If someone killed GRACE with this attitude (not the faceless "infant") they woud be doing themselves great personal harm. I live on 175 acres of land. That's just about big enough to insure that nobody would hear the screams. I would think real hard about using the opportunity to make that person appreciate the importance of life. I am a teacher after all...
I don't mean this as a personal threat, but merely an illustration of how the application of a real world situation gives you an easy factual response.
Well, this is you anti-abortioners thread to shine as far as I am concerned. I am merely asking questions so that you guys can fully lay out your case.
Jordan Mills on choosing Tech:
“It’s a great experience seeing them play. It was a good atmosphere. The fans stood up the whole game and never sat down. They have a great fan base.”
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
