To provide the best experience, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Man, that really is scraping the bottom of the barrel. Scary thing is that prolifers need to address it, as it pops up so much. I have a hard time deciding whih is dumber: genocidal masturbation or the white supremacy charge: http://liveactionnews.org/the-dumbest-theory-of-pro-life-ulterior-motives-yet-courtesy-of-msnbc/
isn't 23 pairs for 46 chromosomes?
This masturbating argument isn't an attempt at rational argument. It's just an attempt to dehumanize the unborn.
http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/handbook/basics/howmanychromosomes.
don't talk about science when you don't know how many chromosomes are in a human haploid cell……you're not a doctor, stop trying to make decisions for doctors.
Yup, it really should be fixed to prevent prochoice trolls from saying we're not scientifically accurate – even though it doesn't affect the argument being made.
I agree. I think this may have misinterpreted the intent of the choicer argument: not to say that sperm and fetuses are the same, but that both are human and alive and therefore equally 'human life'. It's still a bad argument, but you refute it somewhat differently.
"stop trying to make decisions for doctors"
?
I would like to know which pro-choice arguments do you guys consider good? Exceptions like rape or fetal malformations? I really thing the only good and honest argument is the one in which one supports abortion and infanticide.
Thank you for pointing it out. I've actually updated the paragraph and I'm trying to fix it but unfortunately Blogger is giving me issues. It will be fixed ASAP, as soon as Blogger cooperates.
Yes, you're right. I'm trying to get it fixed (see my comment above), but Blogger isn't cooperating at the moment.
I did briefly address the difference between a zygote being an organism and the sperm being a human cell. But the argument fails for many reasons, including several philosophical reasons. I've argued the difference in more detail elsewhere.
I indicated in the article that I'm not an expert. I am correcting the paragraph in question, just as soon as Blogger cooperates with me. Admittedly I'm much more well-versed in philosophy than in science. But as someone mentioned above, it doesn't affect my argument. But for the sake of accuracy, I'm changing it.
I'm not trying to make decisions for doctors, any more than I'm trying to make decisions for anyone when I say that murder and rape should be illegal. They should be illegal for the same reason that abortion should be illegal, because an innocent human being is unjustly infringed upon; namely, an innocent human being is being intentionally killed, which is grossly immoral.
Well, I can't speak for SPL as an organization.
But the strongest pro-choice argument there is is the argument from bodily rights. I still believe the argument fails for many reasons, but bodily rights is the way to go if a pro-choice person wants to use the strongest argument there is for abortion. David Boonin wrote a book called A Defense of Abortion which is a book that any pro-choice person should read if they want to make the best reasoned arguments they can, and any pro-life person should read it so they know the best arguments out there, and what they might expect from an educated pro-choice person who tries to argue against their arguments.
There we are, I finally got it to go.