"I gave you a hypothetical situation between 2 choices and either way one side dies."
The worst part of that fallacious argument is that it assumes omniscience on the part of the rescuer. Why do pro-aborts always assume THEY are omniscient when they do not even know Human Biology 101?!?
In reply to this nonsense, I posed an interesting one once to a pro-abort:
"Your wife is at home with your 1 year old. Her best friend, who has just confirmed that she is pregnant a few days before and shared the news to many, including you and your wife, is visiting. You arrive home to find that a fire has broken out and all are passed out on the floor. Who do you save first? I look forward to your answer."
He chose to save the 1 year old, even though by his own utilitarian logic, he should have saved the pregnant best friend, and by his own pro-abort logic, he should have saved one of the adults first, because you know - sentience, personhood, dependency, parasite, etc. He proved his hypocrisy in going after the most vulnerable (born) child first. :-)
23 comments
Loosing scenarios are the lowest form of arguing. The best way of handling shit questions like this is to refuse to answer it on the grounds that you won't get into hypothetical quandaries. Or.
"I'd save them all"
"You can't save them all"
"Don't tell me what I can't do. And why'd you start that fire anyway?"
Why should anyone answer your stupid question when you fail at logic and biology? This pro-choice person isn't a hypocrite for saying he'd save the kid first, he's being consistent-- a 1yo is a person, an embryo is not. So, the kid was the "most vulnerable".
Pro-aborts? No-one is pro abortion, stupid, just as no-one is pro-appendectomy. They are medical procedures that remove human lumps of cells.
How do THEY assume they are omniscient? And what part of Human Biology 101 don't THEY know?
The one-year-old is a sentient person, dumbass! He might have saved the child first as it is lightest and easiest to save, which leaves time and energy to save one or more. If you take the heaviest first, you might be too tired to save more.
You cannot tell this guy there's no such thing as a pro-abort. If you do, he dances around you pointing at you going, "pro abort, pro abort, pro abort nyah nyah nyah." And then lines up a bunch of his sycophants to do the same thing.
The fire scenario might make sense with possessions, but never with people.
BTW, I guess one could say I'm pro-abort,. but I'm much more pro-birth control. My attitude on population growth is "One and you're done!"
> sentience, personhood, dependency, parasite, etc
You do know that the born child is a sentient person and relatively autonomous, right?
I like how this guy completely fails to understand even the simplest of the logic and arguments of the pro-choice side, but pretends like he does and that he can dance intellectual circles around us. What a fine example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
"he should have saved one of the adults first, because you know - sentience, personhood, dependency, parasite, etc."
This is basically the equivalent of screaming "I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT ANY OF THESE MEAN!!!"
Crazy, sweetie, nobody claims omniscience about abortion. Nobody knows if the fetus would have grown up to cure cancer, or to bomb the neighborhood. I repeat, NOBODY .....and I include the church and the legislature. That's why it should always be a CHOICE of the person most concerned, the pregnant woman, who is the ONLY ONE who knows the circumstances of the present day. Not her pastor, not her neighbor, not her legislator. She might discuss it with her husband or her doctor or her best friend, but one person needs to make the choice.The woman.
The possibilities of the future are a closed book.
Please excuse lapses into capitalization, but at this time I am unable to reach through the screen and shake you violently by the throat, or by the balls.
I would hate to meet anyone who would leave a baby in a burning house when they have the power to save them, and call it the moral choice.
As to who I would save first? I'd save my wife and child first (Cant' carry two people at once, can probably drag them though.)
Since you want logic for saving the child first (Actual people in the audience please be aware that this is intentionally heartless reasoning to make a point to this pro-death fellow, and this is not my normal operating logic irl), here goes:
Yes, I know all that is total BS, but it's very sciency sounding BS isn't it?
Ben & Jerry's or Haagen-Dazs, WGC?
Also, James Bond saving Dr. Swann as well as himself from the about-to-be destroyed MI6 building and ensuring the escaping Blofeld is apprehended by 'M'.
NEXT! [/"SPECTRE"]
I'd save our 1 year old. 1) I'm going to save one of my family members first, and 2) I assume my wife would want me to save our child over her, just as I'd want her to save our child over me if she were given the same choice.
The problem with your situation is that humans are naturally biased towards their own families, so of course you would try to save YOUR CHILD first. Sure, going by utilitarian logic the pregnant women is the most important, but if you're in the middle of a goddamn fire, instincts are probably going to trump your worldview.
"Why do pro-aborts always assume THEY are omniscient when they do not even know Human Biology 101?!?"
Why do pro-tyrannies always assume THEY are omniscient when they do not even know pro-aborts don't exist?
@Frogflayer
"Never mind them Save the Ice-cream "
image
Puncess Carlostia: 'Samuel Pepys saved his cheese from the Fire of London, so there y'go. Otherwise, it would've suffered a Gruyere some fate. Or a Feta worse than death. Imagine it burning like that: Edam ned for eternity.
...incidentally, do you know what is the Mysterious Mare-Do-Well's favourite cheese? Mascarpone !
...now you must excuse me. I hear my pet Philomeena; when she's hungry, she goes all Chhurpi . Once she's fed, she's Sirene again.
Are you leaving? Ah well; when you Gouda go, you Gouda go, eh? You go Carephilly. ' X3
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
