You don’t need to repeat your arguments, I have been listening to them for all my life. I understand them. But since I think they are false and hypocritical, all the “reasoning” you derive from them is as false as your premises.
I have already defended why is morally good. The point is that we don’t share the same premises or moral principles. For me, people have a right to body integrity. Is a human right. So the moment you accept that a person is human, that person has body integrity. Not just that, in any other situation where body integrity is confronted with other person rights, laws say that body integrity is more important. For example, if a baby needs marrow and a man is compatible donor but he refuses to donate marrow, they would let the baby die. You aren’t campaigning for forced donation.
But you believe without proof things like the existence of the devil. And many, many other things. So regardless how many data and proofs and logic I use, you would refuse to listen. Your choice, but I’ll keep mine.
2. Even if I believed that there is a baby at conception (which is false, since what we have at that point is a zygote and most times is not even viable and ends in natural abortion), you would still have to explain why your double standard. Or how it is that you aren’t campaigning to pay more taxes to feed the unwanted children. Or the wanted children that parents can’t feed. Does a children’s life stop mattering once its born? I mean, at that point I do consider is a baby. Yet, for some reason, you don’t seem aggravated by the starving children or the ones who are abused. As if their lives didn’t matter once they are outside the womb.
But as I said, an embryo is not a foetus and a foetus is not an embryo. And until there is some stage of development, there is not a baby. In fact, most abortions are natural and women didn’t even know they were pregnant. It is just biology. Otherwise you should consider “god” the greatest abortionist.
3. My nail is human, but is not a person. When I cut my hair I’m not killing anyone. Yet my hair is human. You keep repeating the word “human”, while I use “people”. There is a reason. And it seems I put a lot more value in “people” and “person” than you do in “human” since you don’t care about african children dying of hunger while US government refuse help unless they ban abortion. Which would lead to more hungry children that would die of starvation. Well, that is cruel. But as you stated, you consider that “tough love” and are willing to “make the sacrifice” (which means sacrificing children) in order to push your moral standards. At this point, your actions towards those children shows that you didn’t care about children at all. Again, google pictures of starving african children and explain to me how is that “tough love”. No, is plain and simple contempt for them.
4. You say the we were all “embryos” but the fact is that at that point we were nothing. I know it is difficult to think that at some point we didn’t exist at all. But that’s exactly what happened. For you and your religious doctrine, life starts at conception. Well, now they say this. But before, the church decided that it was 40 days from conception for males and 80–90 days for females (since we were considered inferior) because supposedly it was the time the soul came into the body. It is arbitrary and simply put, shows the hypocrisy. Budist think the soul reincarnates, so I guess for them you existed before, but aren’t you until the soul comes into the body. Which is similar to old christian doctrine. The thing about the moment of conception is recent. It changed more of less at the time women rights started being recognized. I would say it is “curious” but it is not, the church hates women so of course they don’t want us to have freedom or equality. XD
5. Funny thing about this, not all women want to be mothers. But the ones who are mothers, many times work to feed the children. I know, in your world “god would magically provide” and things “somehow” would work out. But for most people, if you don’t work, there is no food or other necessities. And some women who are mothers, struggle. When those mothers get pregnant, some of them choose to not have more children in order to be able to feed the children they already have. They are aborting because they put their children first.
Interestingly enough, many campaigner against abortion are against social care and benefits. They are also against contraconception and, basically, don’t provide free healthcare to women and children. But then again, you probably never had to think about how to feed yours, so you lack empathy for those who struggle. In fact you said exactly that, that you are willing to “make the sacrifice” of letting children and women with health problems to die in order to reduce abortion. That is your real aim: reduce abortion. The death children is irrelevant or you would consider the already born as important or more than the ones who didn’t exist. Then again, for you is not really about children, is about your morals that think that unmarried sex is sin and must be punished with unwanted children. And that a woman’s worth is based on who she has sleep with.
But I don’t even think that you would put your children’s needs over your own. Since your religious beliefs make you reject homosexuals, trans, single mothers and “chosen families”. That means that if your children don’t follow your religion, are homosexual, trans or one of your girls is raped, you won’t put their needs first, you would put your need to comply with your religious beliefs over their need to be loved as they are. How many girls who become pregnant are throw away by supposedly good mothers in your community? How many girls are called whores and liars after being rapped? You complain about children leaving their biological families for chosen ones. Why do you think that happens? Because their parents haven’t put them first. They expected them to obey blindly, not to be their own persons. So by your own standards, they are bad mothers.
6. Your rhetoric shows that you haven’t really think about the real life situations where they apply. Example: I’m in favor of Euthanasia. Because some people only suffer, and need the right to die with dignity. and before you try to not think about what living in suffering, go and google “bone marrow cancer”. Some people doesn’t want to live several months with unbearable pain, knowing that there is no cure. They prefer to just die and end their suffering. Then you talk about murdering homeless people, yet, cutting taxes and subsidies do that. Die of cold and hunger is to die. You keep ignoring the point about children dying of hunger. Children that you supposedly care about. And die of hunger is a painful death. Yet you push a “choice” that meant more hungry children because for you is more important to reduce abortion. And consider “tough love” to force women to give birth to children that would only know pain because for you suffering provides “spiritual gain”. But you aren’t the one suffering, they are. You claim that I’m detached from reality, yet you are the one who ignores something as basic as people starving.
As for the girl “being sad”, it is quite ironic you chose that example. Probably because you wrongly assume I only empatice with women. XD But it is ironic, because you are willing to let girls die in unsafe abortions, because for you it is a worthy trade off to reduce abortion. Your choices and actions shows that you don’t really care about life beyond birth. And I’m unsure if your really care about embryos and foetuses, since the health of the pregnant person is key for the development. so unless you are financing free gynecologist and doctors for pregnant people, and making sure they eat well, then you aren’t really working to make those foetuses viable. It might end in a natural abortion.
You repeat old religious talking points but don’t actually think in real world life situations. Because once you put faces and real life dilemas, those talking points show the contradictions. I accept that the world is not perfect and that it is for us to make choices to try to make it better, not hope that some divinity fix it for us. In fact, some people think that their god expects them to make the world nicer in order to go to heaven. Well, ending abortion won’t make the world better, on the contrary. Helping poor would. For that we need to pay taxes. So I prioritize social services over my property.
Maybe the reason that you can’t understand people like me, is because you assume that we don’t have morals, instead of consider that we pay attention to the consequences of our actions and that our values are different. So just for a second, instead of looking pictures of supposedly aborted foetuses, look at the pictures of starving children. And then think, “If I don’t do something, no one would”. Things won’t “somehow” work for them. Their parents doesn’t have food to give them. They might be death and they aren’t being adopted. Or if you don’t want to care about children in other continent (even if you would try to make abortion more difficult in countries where they have not enough food), think in the homeless children in your own country. Or the ones who aren’t being aborted. You already “won” that, they weren’t aborted, but are abandoned. Now, in the world you claim doesn’t exist because I’m detached from “reality”. Or maybe I don’t look the other way when the consequences of anti abortion show. Maybe “unmoral modern women” are cleaning the mess anti abortionist create. Trying to help the children already born and offer people less suffering and better lives instead to bring more people to life only to suffer and eventually go to war because there aren’t enough resources to feed them all.
Here:
Now explain again how platitudes about “good mothers putting their child first” fix anything. Because they don’t or those children won’t be homeless. Help those children first and then we can talk about the ones that didn’t exist (and might exist or not in the future). Until then, no matter how passionate is your speech about life, it would be hollow. Not “tough love”, plain cruel.
