So you're simultaneously crying out about the alleged injustice of punishing to any worthy degree degenerate murderous scumbags who kill innocent people while at the same time proclaiming as a positive good the industrialised butchery of one million innocent unborn children per year without realising the absurd contradiction? For me, it's quite the opposite scenario: I want to put to justice the murderous scumbags who kill innocent people while protecting with the full power of the law millions of innocent human beings from massacre. In both instances my goal is to protect innocent life, but in your instances you are on the one hand for preserving the worst specimens of humanity in existence while favouring the continuity & expansion of a Holocaust of innocent lives. Whereas mine has no contradiction, yours is so grossly contradictory words cannot describe it.
@9CJ6CB62mos2MO
I factor in both my own thought process of the moral value of a fetus and the moral value of a criminal. I see the criminal to be higher because we cannot decide the fate of the born with a threat of death, because it’s never given us the right to attack them once they’re in prison. A fetus has far less moral value than that of a fully grown person, and yes, I do not care what that person has done. If that person is currently committing a crime and you can take them out with death, do whatever you please, but once they’re in prison, they remain alive, because the goal of the… Read more
@Patriot-#1776Constitution2mos2MO
A fetus has far less moral value than that of a fully grown person
Disgusting, morally reprehensible, and scientifically ignorant. As I have said so many times before, it does not matter that the unborn child cannot think logically; there are plenty adults who cannot think logically and using the child's mental capacity as justification for his murder is disgusting and has equally horrible implications for the already-born. Using the child's inability to feel pain eat certain stages is also logically bankrupt and has disgusting and horrific implications for the already-born, logicall… Read more
@9CJ6CB61mo1MO
Just as I have said before, the condition of being born was a requirement for that mora logic. You must be born to have the same rights as anyone else, as I’ve also stated a thousand times.
This is, again, the Question-Begging Fallacy. You have assumed your own viewpoint in order to argue for it, making no logical argument. What you have said is that "I know you have to be born to have equal rights because you have to be born to have equal rights!" Circular reasoning – a real vicious case of it, with deadly repercussions. Instead, take my argument on its own merits. Do you have a rational response? Or does the Marxist Death Cult pretty much get ripped to pieces with this?
@9CJ6CB61mo1MO
For starters, morals are based upon one’s own beliefs and logical thought processes behind it. I am setting up my own morals by adding requirements, the same way most people do, and that’s why I add that they must be born, because there’s a massive difference between someone on their deathbed with loads of meds, and a fetus who’s never seen daylight and is incapable of feeling.
