Abortion Rights

#704
#704
For the religious who believe in a soul and the afterlife:

At what point does a soul attach to a being?

Do souls develop as a person develops or does the soul remain an unchanged entity?

If a fetus has a soul and is terminated either through miscarriage or an abortion, what is the destiny of the soul?
 
#705
#705
Squints said:
Two and half years ago, my wife was rear ended at high speed on I-40W in Knoxville (totaled the vehicle and practically put the trunk in the backseat), near MM385. At the time, she was 7 months pregnant. If something had happened to her or my unborn son, due to whatever the **** prevented this kid from operating a vehicle safely, should he be given a mulligan because he didn’t know?

He would’ve known and I would’ve been in the pen. We can debate laws and philosophy until the Holsteins come home to get their teets milked, but I have a more personal association to this than most anyone here.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to be dismissive, but I couldn't figure out what you are trying to say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#706
#706
Can someone else reconcile the belief that abortion is morally acceptable but hunting for sport is not? This thread has been rolling on and I haven’t heard an actual argument. If it were so absurd to suggest there’s connection, then it should be pretty easy to explain
 
#707
#707
therealUT said:
You don't have to. But, if you think that human DNA is just inherently special, that sounds pretty arbitrary.
Click to expand...

So you referenced this before when we were talking. Just DNA.

So dead skin cells are just DNA. Cut hair is just DNA. You equate an unborn fetus the same level as that. Again, I’m not arguing rights just biology. You see no difference in composition. Basically a human body without a consciousness is just an organ farm right?
 
#708
#708
golfballs said:
Can someone else reconcile the belief that abortion is morally acceptable but hunting for sport is not? This thread has been rolling on and I haven’t heard an actual argument. If it were so absurd to suggest there’s connection, then it should be pretty easy to explain
Click to expand...

TBH, I only know one person who thinks hunting for sport is unacceptable. She is also pro-life, so no help there.
 
#709
#709
NorthDallas40 said:
So you referenced this before when we were talking. Just DNA.

So dead skin cells are just DNA. Cut hair is just DNA. You equate an unborn fetus the same level as that. Again, I’m not arguing rights just biology. You see no difference in composition. Basically a human body without a consciousness is just an organ farm right?
Click to expand...

Permanently unconscious or something else?
 
#710
#710
apevol said:
Homicide doesnt constitute murder.
Click to expand...

But homocide is just that ape, homocide. Intent or knowledge of the individual aren’t a basis in determination. If you take some action that results in the death of another human being that’s homocide. The degree of homocide depends on intent, etc...

Edit: nm you guys broke it out later.
 
Last edited:
#712
#712
NorthDallas40 said:
But homocide is just that ape, homocide. Intent or knowledge of the individual aren’t a basis in determination. If you take some action that results in the death of another human being that’s homocide. The degree of homocide depends on intent, etc...
Click to expand...

We were talking about murder?
 
#713
#713
NorthDallas40 said:
I submit that it doesn’t matter. I think TRUT attaches consciousness as a requirement for a person.
Click to expand...

OK. I would submit that if we're talking about a permanently unconscious human body, (i.e. brain dead from an accident or the like), then harvest away. Assuming the donor agreed to be a donor or his POA does.
 
#716
#716
Danl said:
OK. I would submit that if we're talking about a permanently unconscious human body, (i.e. brain dead from an accident or the like), then harvest away. Assuming the donor agreed to be a donor or his POA does.
Click to expand...

So where I was going with this is that organ farm just lost person status. And thus rights. The body is still alive but it has no civil rights or protections under the law.
 
#722
#722
Danl said:
TBH, I only know one person who thinks hunting for sport is unacceptable. She is also pro-life, so no help there.
Click to expand...

I’m trying to keep from inferring a rationale or inventing one. Based on the poll, it’s not an uncommon opinion, and from the initial responses to this thread some think that questioning them is absurd. But I’m curious. I know people who are pro life and also opposed to sport hunting. And I know people who are pro choice and are hunters.

There are also others who are drawing a distinction between hunting to survive and sport hunting. Is it morally wrong to shoot some pheasant and eat them - even if I don’t need to in order to survive - but it’s morally acceptable to eat a chicken which someone else killed for me and put in the grocery store? I just want to hear the rationale behind a seemingly widespread opinion
 
Last edited:
#724
#724
NorthDallas40 said:
So you referenced this before when we were talking. Just DNA.

So dead skin cells are just DNA. Cut hair is just DNA. You equate an unborn fetus the same level as that. Again, I’m not arguing rights just biology. You see no difference in composition. Basically a human body without a consciousness is just an organ farm right?
Click to expand...

Basically. A fetus can feel pain at a certain point, but so can a duck, and I love eating duck.
 
#725
#725
therealUT said:
Basically. A fetus can feel pain at a certain point, but so can a duck, and I love eating duck.
Click to expand...

So take a look at the next post I made after that. If consciousness is a requirement then the loss of consciousness loses “person” status? And if your no longer a person you have no rights or protections under the law?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top