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 justice system is to ensure the crime committed never happens again. For a murderer, life in prison will be the most fair option, because it gets the job done without needless death, and it also destroys any risks of killing an innocent person. A fetus is unborn, unthinking, and incapable of most every form of feeling. It doesn’t have the same rights as a human because it’s still a part of the human keeping it growing, and relies on them to literally exist at all. Once that child is born, they’ve developed far more than enough complexity, feeling, and thinking to gain the rights of a fully grown human, because now they do not rely upon the parent to exist in the form of incubation. The moral differences here are rather cut and dry, once you’re born, you have rights at a far higher level than before you were born.
@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.
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.
Still begging the question, all you did was rephrase it to make it look like you weren't. You still have never bothered to explain WHY there's a moral difference (which is what we would be discussing if you had been honourable and logical) and I am instead left politely asking you to provide a rational argument for your position, which you so far seem incapable of doing. It that is the case, just say so, and we can end this here, right now...
