I really hate the saying “Fetuses have more rights than women do”. Currently the debate is whether or not people should be allowed to kill fetuses indiscriminately.
Last time I checked, I cannot walk outside and kill any woman I please. So can we stop saying that now?
Sorry, you seem to be misinformed. Fetuses aren’t walking around the streets just trying to live their lives like the rest of us. They are inside someone’s body and potentially using it against the pregnant person’s will. The debate is whether or not fetuses should have to right to use someone’s body against their will. This is a right that no one else has, so why should fetuses have this extra right?
Oh my god.
- You can be critical of a movement while still believing in it. Criticism is good. This argument fundamentally misunderstands the pro-life position and will never, ever change a single person’s mind.
- I initially mentioned on the first post that I was pro-choice. That being said, I am against a solid 60% of what pro-choicers say. You know why? Because I was that guy. I was the person who made these shit arguments and got shut the fuck down because to pro-lifers you are arguing that murder is not morally reprehensible. That is the stance this argument necessarily takes and that is not a supportable or defensible stance.
Condescending to me about an argument I understand, have used in the past, and have since realized is trash does nothing but piss me the fuck off.
If you understood anything about the argument then you would understand why the abortion debate has nothing to do with whether or not indiscriminate killing is morally reprehensible.
edit: In case that’s too hard to understand, it’s because abortion isn’t indiscriminate killing.
There is a very, very large reason why at the rate you are going pro-choicers are doomed to fail. Why? Because there is a stunning inability to see the debate from the other side.
I agree that abortion isn’t indiscriminate killing. Pro-lifers do not. Those are the people you are arguing with. Not other pro-choicers. What does that mean? Using the language that you would use when talking to a pro-choicer is a guaranteed way to lose the debate before you even start.
Pro-lifers see the fetus as a fully-fledged human being. They see pro-choicers as advocating for the murdering of infants. Arguments like the one I used in the OP come off as either completely out of left field (You can’t kill an adult, why can you kill a baby?) or completely psychopathic (You are advocating for the destruction of babies.). So there are really two options that you have with this argument: you can keep using it and get angry when people like me mock it, or you can throw it away and use actual effective arguments.
So what are some actual, effective arguments? Science, for one. Biologically, a fetus doesn’t resemble anything even close to human until about eight weeks into pregnancy. Statistically, 85% of abortions happen within the first nine weeks. By nine weeks, the fetus in both very small and also completely unsustainable outside the womb.
That argument has varying levels or success. I found arguments such as “People will get abortions no matter what” and basically explaining the history of abortion and how criminalizing abortion will do nothing but make the conditions much more dangerous for the seeker generally works pretty well. Also clarifying that pro-choice does not mean “I want every fetus in the entire world aborted” but rather “I want there to be safe, legal, and accessible clinics for those seeking abortion so people have the option to choose whether to keep the fetus or not” helps as well.
Using arguments such as the one in the OP, calling a fetus a parasite, or any such inflammatory garbage does nothing but insight the other side and does not foster communication at all.
I will state this very clearly: I am pro-choice. I am critical of a lot of the movement because I see it floundering (with fewer people being pro-choice than before) and that is not good. Thus I mock the bad arguments. The problem is people see any criticism of pro-choice arguments as the criticizer being pro-life. That is not the case and does nothing but isolate the people who are part of the movement already.