Whoops, turns out we were out of time :P bc of the restart I had about two more minutes on my clock. I probably don't have much more time today, but maybe we can do a part 2. some other time
Had a great conversation with @orionlt and I look forward to doing many more of these so that we can promote wonderful discussion on this site!
@burnsstephen16 I am curious about how hard line are you on the concept of abortion?
@troysimons31 it is a pretty core value to me so I'd say pretty hard line but I accept that I could be wrong
@burnsstephen16 I mean even considering it wrong are you able to compromise in circumstance it may seem necessary?
@troysimons31 did you even watch the full discussion?
@change_my_mind I did and let me watch it again perhaps I missed something sorry.
@troysimons31 all good it just seems you are asking questions on thinks we did discuss to a level and should answer your question
I saw what you said about rape and extreme circumstances, but I am curious do you know about the situation with North Korean immigrant situation in China? I bring it up due to the fact that at the end you discussed your moral bias. I have a friend right now working in as missionary through a group the outreaches to Beijing and surrounding areas of China. Now one major issue happen their is that people are escaping North Korea to get away regime at the time. China will and does extradite these refugees most the time their best chance is to meet up with a group that will take them to Thailand who will not extradite. If they are unlucky, specifically woman, though they will pay the wrong person to help them escape and instead of being smuggled to Thailand they are forced into prostitution in China. My friends church group, for safety reason's I can not divulge, end up going in and saving these women for the criminals who are making them sex slaves. In order to save them they either pay money that goes towards abortions, or some groups directly expect them to pay for the abortions of specific women. Under this circumstance how where do you stand on the moral position?
@troysimons31 at the end of the day I conceded to rape and extreme circumstances in order to prevent them from being the focus of the conversation as time was a factor... Personally, I believe that abortion is the taking of a human life that has committed no crime and done no wrong... now, frame that exact situation but with toddlers instead of pregnancies... we wouldn't say it is justified in killing the toddlers in order to help these women escape... so I think the main factor is again, is the unborn human... if it is then i dont think we should kill it... as it has done no wrong and has a right to life... if it isn't... then yes do what you can to save the mother, but I am also not sure how paying for an abortion would help these women escape sex slavery
@change_my_mind I get what you are saying but to answer the last part these are specific requests from the groups that are keeping these woman. The church in essences is pay for the woman. (http://www.antislavery.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/full_korea_report_2005.pdf) I agree with many of your talking points especially the concept of err on the side of caution. However, though if you are willing to concede to that are you also willing to err on the side of caution as to can and often does happen in countries where abortions are illegal? Abortions don't stop because legislation makes it illegal what changes is safety measures put in place to make it a more sanitary condition. I believe life begins at conception as well and for that I am prolife in the sense that I think it is wrong to have an abortion. I also accept the reality that my personal view on that and legislation would not prevent the abortions from happening. All that would do, as we have seen in the is effect mortality rates of mothers would would either attempt it themselves or have it done illegally. So I feel as from a utilitarian aspect it allows for the great good to allow abortions to happen.
@troysimons31 you have to admit that is like saying "i believe murder is wrong but it should be legal so we can have safer murders" if you truly believe that life begins at conception and that it is morally wrong to take innocent life then you have to agree to it being illegal... if we shouldn't have a law because people will break it then why would we have any laws
@change_my_mind I think it is more akin to concepts of just war theory then the model you gave. In that we say that war is all wrong but in some cases with specific policies can be justified.( p.s. if I have grammar errors please forgive them as I have dysgraphia)
@troysimons31 grammar is not a problem... but no you can not compare it to war theory as it is most comparable to murder... you cannot say that you believe it is wrong but should be legal because murders will still happen... that just doesn't make sense
@change_my_mind I believe you are over simplifying my argument here. I don't think it is akin to murder this is where we differ.
@troysimons31 well if it is a human life, and you are killing that life with intent... then by that logic it is murder
@change_my_mind I am sorry I should have explained I believe that life begins at conceptions, as is the case with any organism in that category, plant, animal or otherwise. For that sake, I feel it is taking a life but no different than taking the life of animal or up rooting a plant.
Cool approach to the topic @burnsstephen16
@sigfried thanks! Means a lot
Awesome discussion, thank you @burnsstephen16 & @orionlt!Looking forward to more and I would like to participate too :grin:
@gigi that would be awesome! any particular topic you would like to change my mind on?
@change_my_mind We could have the same topic but from a different approach.. being pro-life is great but before you advocate against the right to abortion, first make sure that responsibilities and rights are fair for fetus, mother, father which I don't think is the case right now.
@gigi If youd like to have the conversation I'll set it up!
@change_my_mind Awesome, looking forward to it!
So as far a recap/breakdown of this discussion goes, I feel where @change_my_mind and I arrived at is the following:Agree:- Abortion is justified in extenuating circumstances such as rape, incest or putting the mother's life in danger. Thankfully these are rare enough cases that conceding these need not set precedent for general cases.- Post conception a xygote/embryo/fetus becomes a separate entity that is distinct from extensions of biological material from mother and father.- There is still some ambiguity regarding the exact development of a fetus, and as such some implementation of the precautionary principle is appropriate. Disagree- Pro believes that humanity begins at conception, I think it develops during pregnancy. -Pro believes that changed cognitive capacity only changes your access to political rights, and your status as a human guarantees your human rights. I believe that cognitive capacity is key in determining your personhood, and thus insufficient cognitive capacity can affect your human rights.- Pro thinks that we should be precautionary to the point where we ought try and avoid aborting any post conception entity, I believe prior to 20 weeks is adequately precautionary. I feel like there's still a lot to cover on this topic and I haven't quite successfully convinced you of anything. If we want to do a part 2. picking up where we left off I would be very open to doing so.
@change_my_mind This I Assume is Steven Crowder inspired? Lol
@drag0nbait yes I mentioned that in my original Facebook post about it
It is great to see such a civil debate on this topic. That is extremely rare! My views are very much the same as yours change_my_mind, and I enjoyed watching this discussion. You were both very eloquent in presenting your views, and I believe that is the best way to make a difference in this topic!