AbsolutePunk.net
   Username
Password
 
Share
03:37 PM on 10/12/12 
Offline
User Info.
bung
Peel slowly and see
bung's Avatar
Minneapolis, MN
Male - 26 Years Old
I fail to see how advocating that we should not hold human life as sacred is 'improving our ethical views'.

Because human beings are merely animals with varying preferences (or lack thereof) and varying qualities of life. Nothing about being a member of the species homo sapien and being considered "alive" allows us to determine the value of an individual life, and subsequently whether or not that life should continue or end. For example, I fail to see how it's perfectly fine to allow one million cows/pigs/etc. to live horrible, miserable, torturous existences only to be slaughtered, while, at the same time, holding the loss of one human life, under whatever circumstances, as a great tragedy because it's held as "sacred."
03:43 PM on 10/12/12 
Online
User Info.
jawstheme
I'm not here. This isn't happening.
jawstheme's Avatar
Pennsylvania
Male - 28 Years Old
The whole framing of the abortion debate in terms of when life does or does not begin, and thus using that criterion in determining its ethical status, is fundamentally ill-conceived. A better argument is just to say that, in some cases, it's morally acceptable to take the life of an innocent human being.

Well The Constitution would hold that if it is deemed a person it is entitled to certain protections that can't be taken away without due process. So as a pro life advocate this isn't ill conceived at all, its a very good way to get what you want. There's an argument to be made on whether we should be following a 200 year old document, but that will probably go over about as well around here as me arguing that we should scrap capitalism.
03:50 PM on 10/12/12 
Offline
User Info.
bung
Peel slowly and see
bung's Avatar
Minneapolis, MN
Male - 26 Years Old
Well The Constitution would hold that if it is deemed a person it is entitled to certain protections that can't be taken away without due process. So as a pro life advocate this isn't ill conceived at all, its a very good way to get what you want. There's an argument to be made on whether we should be following a 200 year old document, but that will probably go over about as well around here as me arguing that we should scrap capitalism.

The argument rests on a fallacy of equivocation between being human and alive with personhood.
06:17 PM on 10/12/12 
Online
User Info.
jawstheme
I'm not here. This isn't happening.
jawstheme's Avatar
Pennsylvania
Male - 28 Years Old
The argument rests on a fallacy of equivocation between being human and alive with personhood.

Many legal arguments rest on fallacies, or at least assumptions, but its still law. I wasn't talking about the logical merits of the argument. I don't agree with the argument.
05:25 AM on 10/13/12 
Offline
User Info.
bung
Peel slowly and see
bung's Avatar
Minneapolis, MN
Male - 26 Years Old
Many legal arguments rest on fallacies, or at least assumptions, but its still law. I wasn't talking about the logical merits of the argument. I don't agree with the argument.

But first and foremost they're making an ethical argument. And, moreover, the law can and does take circumstances and contingencies into account. For example, in some cases it is already legal (and, in my opinion, perfectly ethical) to kill an alive human being who even possesses personhood, i.e.; active human euthanasia in Oregon. So we need not fear that using personhood rather than life as an ethical criterion will be in any way more problematic, legally speaking, since we may apply whatever contingencies we see fit to the situation at hand.

Edit: I should also add that, far from being a sufficient condition, life is apparently not even a necessary one to establish personhood, as evidenced by the fact that corporations are granted the legal rights of persons.
07:10 AM on 10/13/12 
Online
User Info.
jawstheme
I'm not here. This isn't happening.
jawstheme's Avatar
Pennsylvania
Male - 28 Years Old
But first and foremost they're making an ethical argument. And, moreover, the law can and does take circumstances and contingencies into account. For example, in some cases it is already legal (and, in my opinion, perfectly ethical) to kill an alive human being who even possesses personhood, i.e.; active human euthanasia in Oregon. So we need not fear that using personhood rather than life as an ethical criterion will be in any way more problematic, legally speaking, since we may apply whatever contingencies we see fit to the situation at hand.

Edit: I should also add that, far from being a sufficient condition, life is apparently not even a necessary one to establish personhood, as evidenced by the fact that corporations are granted the legal rights of persons.

Good point.
08:05 AM on 10/13/12 
Offline
User Info.
Dustin Harkins
Go support Kony 2012 some more
Dustin Harkins's Avatar
Garland, TX
Male - 23 Years Old
Finally watching this.



NEWS, MUSIC & MORE
Search News
Release Dates
Exclusives
Best New Music
Submit News
CONNECT
Forums
Contests
RSS
Mobile Version
Banners, Flyers, Widgets
HIDDEN TREASURES
Free Music
Video News
Sports Forum
AP.net Related News
Recommendations
INFORMATION
FAQ
Contact Us
Copyright Policy
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy
FOLLOW
Twitter | Facebook
PropertyOfZack
PunkNews.org
UnderTheGun
Chorus.fm