Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
Let's have a look.
I think we've cut to the chase somewhat. The alien is merely an artifice, a motivator to have you provide an answer from the perspective of another. I didn't ask for textbook. I didn't ask for a moral judgement. I wanted to see if you could put yourself in their shoes and see things as they do before making value judgement. That is not perfectly accomplished because we all see the world through our own experiences, however the effort to do so is essential in itself. If one does not make a good faith effort then no understanding or compromise can be reached. We have what we have today.
My admittedly imperfect answers would be that the first group holds that the fetus is more than a collection of cells, that it is the embodiment of human life, and therefore has rights of its own even though not fully developed
The other side might say that a woman has a right of reproductive self determination and that there is no objective evidence that a fetus is in fact human. That being the case no one has any right to tell her that she has to bear something she never wanted. The hypothetical argument of the other side ought not to bind her to their beliefs.
Here's the thing. I may be completely wrong in some cases. I may (no, have) oversimplified and generalized too much, but how I have framed things allows for amplification, clarification and discussion. If I had taken the position of "They just want to enslave women" or "They just want to murder babies" I have completely misrepresented both sides and cut off any hope at all for an improvement on the issue. In fact I've done the reverse. Also note that I have not approved of anything. I haven't taken my perspective to be used as a club to beat one side or the other. That does not mean I cannot have strong feelings myself, or must be ambivalent. But it's not about "winning" the argument, because that cannot be done by beating the ideological drum. One can shout all one likes, but if you cannot listen and have others listen then everyone is deaf.
Textbook response: it is their interpretation and belief to oppose the ability to abort an unborn child.
Textbook response: they believe, and it is the law, that the fetus is a part of a woman's body (until a certain period) and can be aborted.
I think we've cut to the chase somewhat. The alien is merely an artifice, a motivator to have you provide an answer from the perspective of another. I didn't ask for textbook. I didn't ask for a moral judgement. I wanted to see if you could put yourself in their shoes and see things as they do before making value judgement. That is not perfectly accomplished because we all see the world through our own experiences, however the effort to do so is essential in itself. If one does not make a good faith effort then no understanding or compromise can be reached. We have what we have today.
My admittedly imperfect answers would be that the first group holds that the fetus is more than a collection of cells, that it is the embodiment of human life, and therefore has rights of its own even though not fully developed
The other side might say that a woman has a right of reproductive self determination and that there is no objective evidence that a fetus is in fact human. That being the case no one has any right to tell her that she has to bear something she never wanted. The hypothetical argument of the other side ought not to bind her to their beliefs.
Here's the thing. I may be completely wrong in some cases. I may (no, have) oversimplified and generalized too much, but how I have framed things allows for amplification, clarification and discussion. If I had taken the position of "They just want to enslave women" or "They just want to murder babies" I have completely misrepresented both sides and cut off any hope at all for an improvement on the issue. In fact I've done the reverse. Also note that I have not approved of anything. I haven't taken my perspective to be used as a club to beat one side or the other. That does not mean I cannot have strong feelings myself, or must be ambivalent. But it's not about "winning" the argument, because that cannot be done by beating the ideological drum. One can shout all one likes, but if you cannot listen and have others listen then everyone is deaf.
Last edited:

