Peter Singer on abortion (moral, reject, choice, euthanasia, sex)

[Storm]

Originally Posted by robtex

do you see the issue that was addressed OP? When you make a counter-argument of "pro-choice" you fail to address the conservative equation of

p1 = it is wrong to kill an innocent human being
p2 = a fetus is an innocent human being.
c1 = therefore it is wrong to kill a fetus

Probably not in an equation if that's what you're looking for. The thing is, I agree with the conservative argument: abortion IS wrong. It just happens to be LESS wrong than violating the rights of the mother.

when you say pro-choice trumps pro life can you explain why this is so

I'll try again when I'm more awake

and do you see the point Singer is making that it completely ignores the conservative arguement?

I'm not ignoring the conservative argument, I'm agreeing with it.

[The Voice of Reason]

Originally Posted by Storm

For me, it's a conflict of rights. The baby's right to life is in direct conflict with the mother's right to control her own body. So whose rights take precedence? I come down on the side of the mother.

I have to say that I've never heard anyone take this position before, but from a strictly rational standpoint, I not only understand it, I find myself in agreement.

[Storm]

Thanks.

[robtex]

Originally Posted by The Voice of Reason

I don't really care about the rest of the argument, but I have to say that I take GREAT offense at the characterization of the pro-choice position being defined as "pro-abortion".

I put pro-abortion in there. He just labels them "conservative and liberal " arguments. Maybe I should have been more careful with my word choice.

[robtex]

Originally Posted by The Voice of Reason

I have to say that I've never heard anyone take this position before, but from a strictly rational standpoint, I not only understand it, I find myself in agreement.

Bill would you elaborate?

[The Voice of Reason]

Originally Posted by robtex

Bill would you elaborate?

Sure - I understand Storm's position that, even if you concede the point that the fetus is a person, the mother's right to choose has a higher standing than the fetus' right to life.

Now, personally, I don't agree with the premise that the fetus is a person, but if I concede that point (as Storm sees it), then I can still appreciate the second premise.

[Storm]

Robtex, can you tell me where it is you think my position is unclear?

[robtex]

Originally Posted by Storm

Robtex, can you tell me where it is you think my position is unclear?

You said pro-choice trumps pro life. I was hoping you could qualify that statement. Map it out for me. If you want to throw rocks at me instead at this point for constantly asking for more details I will understand.

[Storm]

Originally Posted by robtex

You said pro-choice trumps pro life. I was hoping you could qualify that statement. Map it out for me. If you want to throw rocks at me instead at this point for constantly asking for more details I will understand.

You mean why do the mother's rights trump the fetus'?