Timothy Murray lost his father earlier this year and had been asking his principal for counseling when she called in the police

  • Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Pretty sure […]

    Followed by ignorant bollocks about what “those other people” supposedly think.

    “It just explains so many things” When you’re a moron

    Ah, it’s satire.

    Well done!

    • jasory@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      I said a popular defence, not the only defence. Go to the abortiondebate or pro-choice subreddits and count how many people say that abortion is good on the basis of eliminating unwanted children.

      Even better make a post asking if abortion is morally good (not just permissible, good) if the child would be born poor or the parents don’t want them. You will receive an overwhelmingly positive response, and you know it.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Nope.

        People would at most say that of an embrio, not a child.

        Unlike what the “every sperm is sacred” crowd thinks against all scientific evidence, a ball of cells with no brain activity is as much a child as a piece of human intestine, a toe or the cells flaking of your skin every minute of the day are: they’re all mindless bundles of cells which happen to have human DNA - organic things, not persons.

        The non-morons who support abortion actually set a time limit on how late in the pregnancy it is legal to do an abortion exactly because having thought about it, they’re aware that a viable embrio will eventually transit from mindless bundle of cells with human DNA into person (though you need to be seriously undereducated to call a fetus at even that stage a “child”) and morality dictates that once it’s a person their life is sacred.

        This is why in most civilized countries abortion is allowed up to 12 weeks: because before that tne embrio has no brain at all and is as much a person as a human toe or kidney, but once it does have some brain activity, whilst we don’t really know if and how much of a person that early in gestation it is, we chose to consider it as person just to be on the safe side hence with the right to live.

        Only the ultra-simpleton crowd would think that the ball of indiferentiated human cells the size of a pea which is the embrio earlier in gestation is a child.

        PS: The funny bit is that the people you’re criticizing have the same moral posture with regards to children as you do, the only difference being that they’re informed enough and have thought about it enough to know that an early gestation embrio is nowhere near the same as a child hence it makes no sense for the rights of the woman that carries said embrio to be suspended in favour of that mindless ball of cells.

        The arguments of the anti-abort crowd really just boil down to “Because I’m too ignorant to understand that which has been known for over a century, other people must be thrown in jail”

        • jasory@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          This is ontologically and empirically false. I don’t really have time for debunking this incredibly self-masturbatory screed, but holy shit you have no idea about categorisation of beings or an arguments about the wrongness of killing. (You’re not exactly talking to someone as mentally deficient as you).

          The cortical organisation argument is simply cherry-picking a worse instance that satisfies the criteria of possibility of human experience. The fact that it is already a human organism is sufficient, especially since cortical organisation doesn’t grant consciousness and even if it did by definition it would fail to describe the wrongness of killing temporarily unconscious humans.

          • Aceticon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            You clearly don’t even understand the meaning of the words you’re parroting there, to the point that you ended up making the case for even later than 12 weeks abortion.

            It really is a case of your own ignorance justifying that others must go to jail.

            • jasory@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              “You’re making the case for even later abortion”

              Well of course, the 12-week limit is pure horseshit. Literally nobody in ethics makes this argument it’s merely invented by supremely ignorant lay persons to pander to both sides.

              You only feel that it is an argument for later abortion, because you are affirming the consequent (a laughably stupid logic error to make) by assuming that abortion is already permissible.

              Either killing humans is permissible period or it’s not. Dependency and development arguments fail to provide exceptions that don’t also apply to adults.