4 ms·

Same stunt being pulled in American courts except getting slapped down. Speaking of future generations, imagine duty of care being applied to abortion policy...

Daishiman 5y ago
The legal argument with regards to climate change has to do with lives that will be realized, not that lives that won't. For those who do live in the future, climate change will impact them. If a potential person does not exist in the future because it is aborted, it is not subject to suffering due to climate change.
- rubyist5eva 5y ago
  Life begins at conception.
  - Daishiman 5y ago
    Non-sentient life that cannot suffer isn't something I care much about.
    - rubyist5eva 5y ago
      All human lives matter.
    - dane-pgp 5y ago
      If someone is in a medically-induced coma, should it be legal for their enemy to inject them with an overdose of morphine? Just because someone isn't currently fully aware of their surroundings doesn't mean they stop being human.
  - analognoise 5y ago
    So charge every woman who gets an abortion with murder. And miscarriages should be...what, second degree murder, I guess? Be consistent - how long should we jail women for, for terminating a pregnancy? Good luck trying to form your fascist theocracy.
    - rubyist5eva 5y ago
      The difference between abortion and miscarriage is intent, obviously. If not wanting to kill human babies is fascism, I don't want to be whatever the alternative is. I'm an agnostic atheist, btw - so theocracy...not so much. My views on abortion are informed by science.
      - Daishiman 5y ago
        No, because for some reason you prefer to value the lives of non-sentient embryos that are not human over, for example, extremely sentient non-human lives, unless you're also a vegan out of ethical concerns. If that's your position it has nothing to do with science. Value systems are informed by science but ultimately determined by subjective values. I subjectively don't give a rat's ass about an embryo that cannot feel anything and that has not experienced consciousness. I'd much rather care about sentient non-human beings.
        rubyist5eva 5y ago
        > for some reason you prefer to value the lives of non-sentient embryos that are not human over, for example, extremely sentient non-human lives My, "some reason" being that as a member of the human species that members of my species have moral value over those that are not my species. Preserving my own species is of more importance to me than the preservation of sewer rats or farm animals. Your premise is also flawed: Embryos are human. They have distinct, unique human DNA from the moment they are conceived. > unless you're also a vegan out of ethical concerns. I try not to talk about it unless asked, and I've held these view long before I was vegan. Sentience has very little bearing on my argument, as there are humans that exist in early and late stages of life that have some kind of disfunction that renders them, for all intents and purposes, non-sentient. I do not believe it is ethical to kill a 40 year old that is in a coma, with no chance of ever waking up, for example. > If that's your position it has nothing to do with science. Value systems are informed by science but ultimately determined by subjective values. This is what I said. I said my views are informed by science. It is a scientific statement to say that an embryo is a human being because of it distinct DNA. > I subjectively don't give a rat's ass about an embryo that cannot feel anything and that has not experienced consciousness. I'd much rather care about sentient non-human beings. These are not mutually exclusive.
  - pfisch 5y ago
    An arbitrary distinction that does not convey the true complexity of the issue. Anyone would destroy millions of embryos vs killing a single actual baby. So they are clearly extremely different things.
    - thaumasiotes 5y ago
      I'm pretty sure it's not true that anyone would make that choice. It's not like killing a single actual baby is all that unusual.
      - pfisch 5y ago
        If you were in a burning building you would save a jar of embryos over an actual baby? Is that what you are saying? If that is true you are a sociopath.
        heylook 5y ago
        > If you were in a burning building you would save a jar of embryos over an actual baby? Is that what you are saying? > If that is true you are a sociopath. Just wait til you hear what rubyist5eva thinks.
        rubyist5eva 5y ago
        Just see the other response to know what I think.
        Karunamon 5y ago
        In that particular contrived hypothetical that's only ever existed in the mind of pro-abortion advocates: I apply triage. The jar of embryos is a big pile of unknown, as preserved embryos have a high rate of non-viability, and that's before the conditions of storage are accounted for. And, and if the scenario requires me to pick and run, I don't have time to look for documentation. I save the baby, not because it's "more alive", but because there are no questions as to whether I'm actually saving someone I can help.
  - seattle_spring 5y ago
    No it doesn't. See what I did there?
Bluestein 5y ago
Ouch ... ... now -that- would be a can of worms ...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

Daishiman 5y ago

The legal argument with regards to climate change has to do with lives that will be realized, not that lives that won't. For those who do live in the future, climate change will impact them. If a potential person does not exist in the future because it is aborted, it is not subject to suffering due to climate change.

rubyist5eva 5y ago
Life begins at conception.
- Daishiman 5y ago
  Non-sentient life that cannot suffer isn't something I care much about.
  - rubyist5eva 5y ago
    All human lives matter.
  - dane-pgp 5y ago
    If someone is in a medically-induced coma, should it be legal for their enemy to inject them with an overdose of morphine? Just because someone isn't currently fully aware of their surroundings doesn't mean they stop being human.
- analognoise 5y ago
  So charge every woman who gets an abortion with murder. And miscarriages should be...what, second degree murder, I guess? Be consistent - how long should we jail women for, for terminating a pregnancy? Good luck trying to form your fascist theocracy.
  - rubyist5eva 5y ago
    The difference between abortion and miscarriage is intent, obviously. If not wanting to kill human babies is fascism, I don't want to be whatever the alternative is. I'm an agnostic atheist, btw - so theocracy...not so much. My views on abortion are informed by science.
    - Daishiman 5y ago
      No, because for some reason you prefer to value the lives of non-sentient embryos that are not human over, for example, extremely sentient non-human lives, unless you're also a vegan out of ethical concerns. If that's your position it has nothing to do with science. Value systems are informed by science but ultimately determined by subjective values. I subjectively don't give a rat's ass about an embryo that cannot feel anything and that has not experienced consciousness. I'd much rather care about sentient non-human beings.
      - rubyist5eva 5y ago
        > for some reason you prefer to value the lives of non-sentient embryos that are not human over, for example, extremely sentient non-human lives My, "some reason" being that as a member of the human species that members of my species have moral value over those that are not my species. Preserving my own species is of more importance to me than the preservation of sewer rats or farm animals. Your premise is also flawed: Embryos are human. They have distinct, unique human DNA from the moment they are conceived. > unless you're also a vegan out of ethical concerns. I try not to talk about it unless asked, and I've held these view long before I was vegan. Sentience has very little bearing on my argument, as there are humans that exist in early and late stages of life that have some kind of disfunction that renders them, for all intents and purposes, non-sentient. I do not believe it is ethical to kill a 40 year old that is in a coma, with no chance of ever waking up, for example. > If that's your position it has nothing to do with science. Value systems are informed by science but ultimately determined by subjective values. This is what I said. I said my views are informed by science. It is a scientific statement to say that an embryo is a human being because of it distinct DNA. > I subjectively don't give a rat's ass about an embryo that cannot feel anything and that has not experienced consciousness. I'd much rather care about sentient non-human beings. These are not mutually exclusive.
- pfisch 5y ago
  An arbitrary distinction that does not convey the true complexity of the issue. Anyone would destroy millions of embryos vs killing a single actual baby. So they are clearly extremely different things.
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    I'm pretty sure it's not true that anyone would make that choice. It's not like killing a single actual baby is all that unusual.
    - pfisch 5y ago
      If you were in a burning building you would save a jar of embryos over an actual baby? Is that what you are saying? If that is true you are a sociopath.
      - heylook 5y ago
        > If you were in a burning building you would save a jar of embryos over an actual baby? Is that what you are saying? > If that is true you are a sociopath. Just wait til you hear what rubyist5eva thinks.
        rubyist5eva 5y ago
        Just see the other response to know what I think.
      - Karunamon 5y ago
        In that particular contrived hypothetical that's only ever existed in the mind of pro-abortion advocates: I apply triage. The jar of embryos is a big pile of unknown, as preserved embryos have a high rate of non-viability, and that's before the conditions of storage are accounted for. And, and if the scenario requires me to pick and run, I don't have time to look for documentation. I save the baby, not because it's "more alive", but because there are no questions as to whether I'm actually saving someone I can help.
- seattle_spring 5y ago
  No it doesn't. See what I did there?

Bluestein 5y ago

Ouch ... ... now -that- would be a can of worms ...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]