I came across a pretty awesome site with well-thought out philosophical tests to determine the logical consistency of ones beliefs. The test about right to live and abortions is here: http://www.philosophyexperiments.com/whosebody/Default.aspx What are you waiting for? Take the test and post your results!
My result: Your moral judgement of abortion: Pass Internal consistency of your views: Pass Your responses during this activity indicate that you should think abortion is morally justified except perhaps on those occasions it occurs in the late stages of pregnancy. This is in line with your stated position on abortion, which is that it is normally justified. Moreover, all your responses have been consistent with this view: your position on abortion seems coherent and well thought out (which, of course, is not the same as saying it is right). The principle reason this test has determined you should think abortion is morally justified is that your view of what gives human life value is inconsistent with the idea a fetus has the kind of life worth preserving and also the right to that life. Specifically, you claimed it is the presence of sentience that gives life value and secures the right to life. As you perhaps know, there is no convincing evidence that a fetus is sentient until at least the start of the third trimester, and even then it is doubtful. In general, there is nothing in your responses to suggest you think there are intrinsic reasons for preserving the life of a fetus.
Yep, b/c being pregnant is somehow equivalent to being kidnapped and hooked up to another human being right? Fantastic Fail! Right from the get go.
Actually, it is kind of like that, except, of course, a zef isn't "another human being", at least early in pregnancy when almost all abortions are done.
In some ways they are surely equivalent, and there are also some differences that may be relevant for your view, thats the point. Just complete the test. It is not a fail, but quite well thought-out test.
Being pregnant IS being hooked to another person, using them to sustain your own life. That is the very definition of pregnancy.
Quite possibly the most ridiculously biased thing I've ever seen. You can tell it was written by a pro-abortionist. The soccer player scenario only works as an analogy for rape. The people seeds scenario doesn't take into consideration the idea of just using your air conditioning. And you've gotta love the phrasing here. Clearly no bias at all..... Would it kill you people to be objective once in awhile? I'm just wondering. You guys have a really bad habit of skewing things to make yourselves look better. Are you even capable of an objective assertion of something? Can you acknolwedge when you're inserting your own bias into something? Do you see it here? Or are you so emotionally caught up in the need to be right that you cannot take a step back and just observe something without needing to manipulate it?
No, I dont see any bias. I really do not see how the soccer player thingy could be an analogy for rape. I think it is a very good analogy of pre-viability pregnancy except that the player is sentient. And using air conditioning, what? Do you realize this is a thought-experiment? The purpose is not to make the scenarios absolutely plausible, but philosophically relevant. Your air conditioning is broken and you have no money to buy new air conditioning... And whats up with the phrase? I think you are strangely paranoid and see attacks on your beliefs everywhere instead of honest philosophical analysis. I dont know the opinion of the author, but both me and Makkede are pro-choice and yet we passed the test as having consistent views.
I would say that it doesn't matter what you think of the test, just take it anyway. Its important to know if your views are consistent.
True when i see abortionists use thew temr pro choice and anti choice my thoughts go immediately to the baby is the baby given a choice for life or no choice and summarily executed?
I think the questions and the answers both could have been posed better. I got Your moral judgement of abortion* Fail Internal consistency of your views Pass The last question, whether it is morally right to abort. It was hard for me to answer with the choices given. I am pro choice, I do not try to judge anyone who made the choice to abort as its very personal. But morals can also be very personal and subjective so I limited it myself and answered never, though it may be the right choice for some I could never have one and feel right about it.
not at all when the child is old enough to decide is when they should be asked if they desire to be aborted
Your accepting the premise that: a) the fetus is a child - and - b) that it could, theoretically, reply to a question. Reject the premise (or at least do what Ayn Rand has requested of others: "check your premises")
Ok, let's check your premise tha a fetus is not a child. If a fetus is not a child, how can we pull a fetus out of the womb at 24 weeks and keep it alive? Up until week 40,it's not a child right? Then how is the "fetus" laying over there in ICU look like a child but not be considered a child? I want to see all pro-abortionists honestly answer this question with reason and logic.
a) semantics. A fetus is a child in the sense that it is an offspring, thats how I meant it. b) thats my point, it cant reply, it cant even think. Therefore parents should decide.
