11-07-2011, 11:35 PM
Join Date: May 2011
Originally Posted by DerekB
You're definition of pro-life cannot possibly be right. Think about it, if it counted for ALL LIFE, that would extend not only to animals but to plants as well. As a result, human beings wouldn't be allowed to eat anything, and humanity would die off in weeks. Pro life refers to human beings, who are unique and special among the creatures of earth due to our intelligence and awareness.
So that's what makes it murder?
Then if you are being logically consistent you have conceded this argument:
Okay, here's mine. A person, an agent with rights and to whom society has ethical responsibilities, has interests. That's not a complete definition, but I do think it's required. In order to have interests, you must have a brain. The brain does not even begin developing until several weeks into the pregnancy, which if the premises above are accepted, proves it is not a person at conception. |
Now, a brain and interests are not all that is necessary for something to be a person, otherwise, society would consider cows and lizards people. So, beyond that, the argument becomes fuzzier. But a fetus is not inherently a person.