Legend11 said:
Kasz216 said:
Legend11 said:
Kasz216 said:
Legend11 said:
If you're going to take a stand on something you should always imagine you or a loved one in a particular situation that the stand is about.
In this case imagine that your mother or sister or daughter was raped. Would you be OK with them being forced to carry the child to term against their will by the government because of the moral or religious views of others?
Does this politician and others that share his views for example have more of a right to decide if your loved ones' pregnancy should continue even at the very beginning of pregnancy than your loved one does?
He believes that he has more of a right than your loved one in making the decision even though he doesn't have to take into consideration or even deal with the emotional and physical trauma of such a pregnancy. |
Now that's a totally unfair position on his views.
This sentor believes (likely) that at conception, that life is a human life, because if not aborted it will grow into a baby and a human. So therefore that child is a human.
So he IS thinking it from the view of the loved on in particular. The baby.
I don't agree with him, but at the very least it's worth understanding where he is coming from. He said something stupid enough that his argument doesn't need to be strawmaned to hell.
|
How is it an unfair position on his views? At the end of the day it's the decision he wants taken. I basically boiled away everything else including the reasoning and arguments and then asked the reader to decide for themselves who the decision should be left to. I mentioned the emotional trauma of the woman because there would be many nameless women out there that would be forced to endure this that this politician won't even know exists.
|
Because you are completely ignoring the fact that he thinks a fetus is a human being in the same way babies and adults are
A correct presentation of his point of view would be
"Should someone have the right to kill a human being because their father was a rapist."
You can disagree with his point of view... like I do. However THAT is his view.
|
The last two paragraphs of my original post more than accurately give a representation of the issue at hand for people to decide if Akin's position is one that they agree with. The whole purpose of my post was for them to decide for themselves if an embryo is a human being, if women should be forced to continue a pregnancy when they are raped or even if they weren't raped, etc. It wasn't meant to simply state Akin's view, it was meant for people to form THEIR OWN views and in doing so it would show if they have the same views as Akin.Whil
|
While phrasing it from the point of view of the woman.
From his point of view it isn't the woman who's the person in the situation.
It's the child.
Your post from his point of view would look like this
"If you're going to take a stand on something you should always imagine you or a loved one in a particular situation that the stand is about.
Should the choice of your sister or friend living or dieing be made by there parents, or should there be laws to protect the life of a child?"
For example, if you have a newborn, who still hasn't reached quite "human" status, should parents just be allowed to stop taking care of them? Afterall, they clearly know better then the senator what kind of emotional stress continued taking care of the baby would cause right?
phrasing such a situation from his point of view, would ask if the life of a child can ever be worth less then the emotional trauma of a person.
In reality abortion should be argued on two fronts.
1) Sceintifically what is a good guideline for "human".
2) What level of care are people forced to give said humans/people.
