Justifying Infanticide

[palerider]

There are lots of grey areas that do not prevent us from talking about black and white.

When does day become night?

Are you saying there isn't any day or night because you can't say when one stops and the other starts?

I am saying that your argument is a logical fallacy. You beg the question and simply assume that we aquire personhood far enough along in a pregnancy so that killing unborns becomes a rational and reasonable course of action and only then try to construct an argument to prove the arbitrary time you have claimed that personhood is achieved.

The rational person first tries to determine what personhood is and only then attempt to determine whether it is a thing we aquire or not.

Your day/night analogy proves that you simply don't know and any claim you make is like setting fire to a building that you hope is unoccupied.

 

[Agnapostate]

The fact of life itself demonstrates an interest in its continuation. If there were no interest in the continuation of life, there would be no life.

Do you then hold that the continuation of the "life" of cancer cells is a commendable goal?

Name a bright line moment when you believe self awareness happens and can be designated as a time, before which, no self aware human being will be arbitrarily killed by another individual without judicial review and without legal consequence.

There are none. But birth is the best that we have for normal, healthy infants.

 

[palerider]

Do you then hold that the continuation of the "life" of cancer cells is a commendable goal?

Commendable or not, it is what it is. Cancer, however, isn't a different species growing in your body. It is your own body growing in a way that is detramental to the entire system.

There are none. But birth is the best that we have for normal, healthy infants.

So your entire argument is an attempt to justify setting a building on fire that you "hope" is empty. Perhaps you should work on a better argument as that one is doomed to go down in flaming defeat.