I have rebuked lifers AND pro-choice people for using the idea that being a human is a reason for or against abortion - ie, if you can determine a fetus is a 'human being' then it cant be killed and if its isnt, then its ok to kill it. But this whole position is hinged on an illogical premise - that human life is special for some reason. My position is however - what does being a human matter? Why is the determination of someone as a human being determine whether killing them is bad or not? It doesn't. Oh yes, of course in the US legal system it may be said that such an arbitrary and irrational position is valid, but the law is IRRELEVANT to such discussion because the question still remains - why is the classification as a human being so special and definitive? I see NO reason why humans should be considered untouchable simple for the fact they are human. And I have yet to see ONE lifer give me such a reason. All they can do in their ignorant and irrational rhetoric is talk about the law - NEVER ABOUT THE QUESTION - WHY IS HUMAN LIFE SO SPECIAL? The answer is quite simple - it isnt.
I do believe the answer is that humanity is not special, however, it is OUR species, and the survival of our species is dependant upon, mostly, the reproduction and protection of said species.
Human life is special, because that is the only resource in the world that is absolutely for free, you need not pay a penny for it. Animals' life is not for free, the ecosystem must regenerate itself. But human life, you can always make more, any time, with zero investment. In fact, human life simply comes around endlessly whether you want it or not. And to make money out of it, really simple, you just have to destroy it for half the people, and the other half will work for you for free, not to get destroyed. Is there any other resource in the universe this good? So human life is really absolutely special. What's your take?
That argument is completely illogical and nonsensical. Human life isnt a "free resource"! Humans have to reproduce - they dont just appear. They are EXACTLY THE SAME as animals in this regard, so I dont see what your argument here is.
What a sad question. Although you hang around here too much and I can see how the question has relevance.
How's it sad? 'too much'? Well yes, I have yet to see ANY challenge to what I've said so I hang around to wait and see if that changes. Ok, so will you address it or just run away like most other lifers?
　 　 You don't consider your own life precious? If not why do you allow it to continue? Maybe you should make it interesting and do crazy illogical dangerously exiting things, to place your life at risk if you are to much of a scared coward to eliminate it on your own. Cliff diving in monument valley for instance, or base jumping without a parachute, or maybe shark fishing in a t-bone wet suit. Doesn't that sound like fun? 　 　 　 　 If it is a challenge you seek, maybe you could get you a sign that says I hate n(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s, and go hang out in Harlem on the street corner. Obviously the experience would be extremely exhilarating, and a challenge that couldn't be matched by punching keys on a computer keyboard. Sure would beat the dull existence you are experiencing, sorry forced to endure at the moment. 　 　 　 　 Address? Abortion? Well I'm a male so it doesn't effect me since I will never have to make the decision for somebody elses body. I'm not promiscuous so it is doubtful I will have to worry about somebody else making a decision that is relative towards me. I also feel no guilt for an individuals decision to eliminate an unwanted birth, as long as they make that decision within the first trimester of the pregnancy. After that unless it was detrimental to the mother's mental state or life or the life of the child or it's ability to have a reasonable quality of life, I see no reason for the government to be involved in whatever the mother decision and/or whomever she determines to be involved in that decision making process. 　 　 So maybe I am not the right person to ask.
Please, for the love of all that is good, read this next paragraph VERY carefully. I get way too many strawmen rebuttals after I right it, so read it and comprehend it before you respond; Killing a fetus is fine because the baby has no interest in its own existence. This is because it has no a consciousness or mental function that allows it to think and comprehend its existence and its life. If it had preexisting interests, as say an unconscious (born and grown) person does, there would be grounds for reconsideration of abortion, but the fact is there aren't. A fetus has no interests as it has no mind - no conception, of space, time, of itself or of anything within the confines of reality. It has feelings in the most primitive sense of psychical sensations, sure, but that does not constitute an interest or evidence that the mind has developed to keep an interest in living. That could start interesting intellectual conversation, although it owuld be quite short, the problem is it isnt about abortion, which is what I want to talk about. 　Why would my experience now be dull? I mean, its sure dull talking to some one like you who attacks strawman instead of my arguments and who accuses me of being 'obsessed' or something even though you are clearly just as interested as I am, else you wouldnt be commenting. 　 Why only in the first trimester? So do you agree with my position above?
Because we are sentient (Sapient, whatever). That is the only reason. Any other sentient life we find would be equally special. Many despots would agree with you. According to who? What the hell makes YOUR personal opinion so special?
I must respectfully disagree. Animals reproduce as a function of their environment. People reproduce boundlessly, like viruses and parasites. This makes peope, in assence, a resource that turns up out of nothing, and without the opportunity to control it. That is unique.
Isn't it true that there is no woman on Earth who wouldn't want to try out what it is like to be pregnant? (And ruin her shape with it.) Isn't this the same as no man would resist touching a shapely woman? After that, the personal choice of whether to spend money on the result or not, is only an afterthought. If you have children and you spent money on them, you are a statistical anomaly, 90 % of the world's population doesn't spend money on their children, the children fight life out between each other.
Animals will reproduce on their own as much as they can. They are not a 'function" of their environment...not any more than we are. Human beings can actually control their reproductive behavior consciously...Animals cannot do that. They reproduce on instinct and nothing else. Witness things like this: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-03-08/conditions-ripe-for-return-of-mice/2666476 Animals have no instinct for seeking a "balance" with the environment. They are not even aware of their environment except for their immediate surroundings. They dont "plan" things.
　 　 I can only address one question at a time and the title of this thread is, drum roll please, Why is human life special? 　 　 No straw man at all discussing the original question. 　 　 　 　 Because IMHO that should be long enough to make an educated determination as to whether or not you want to take the pregnancy all the way. Unless there are legitimate complications, if they don't want the child, adoption should be the proper choice for a fetus in such a development stage. JMO. 　 　 　 　 To a point, but life is precious, or should be considered so, but I have no guilt if someone determines they are not mentally or physically mature enough or desire not to be a parent and the first trimester option should be available for these cases. 　 　 I believe humans are sexual animals programmed for the inevitable, and it is illogical, and unrealistic to assume otherwise. The best I can hope for a person is to at least practice safe sex, and use contraceptives if you are not ready for a child, and if an accident happens there should be a way of rectifying that situation at an early stage of pregnancy. Other wise, guess what, you bought the whole enchilada. 　 　 Can't be any plainer than that.
Don't think so. Most women who want children still don't anticipate pregnancy with glee. If there were an easier way to get them, I believe many would avail themselves of it, such as an artificial womb. Also, I believe more and more women are coming to the realization that having children isn't the only important thing in life. Whether or not to spend money on resulting children may be an afterthought, but it's not a personal choice, it is, in fact, compelled by law in this country. 90% sounds a little high to me, do you have a link?
This is interesting. So if it is not about a body thing such as pregnancy, then why do all women want at least 1 child? (Mostly 2.) I thing the women that want 0 probably change their minds occassionally. It appears that demography and population dynamics are driven by women. I think this child welfare idea is the best con in the entire universe. But I arrived to the 90 % figure by dividing the USA + EU population with the total world population, which gives about 10 %. The rest of the world lives on average under $1 a day, so for them spending money on their children is not even a concept, I think.
"ALL" women do not want at least one child. A growing number of women are choosing to bypass motherhood, recognizing that other things, other goals, in life may be more satisfying for them. I think you are too high with that. Even impoverished countries have a certain percent of wealthy. Whatever impoverished people do live on, they share their goods with the children they have, most of them doing without in order to feed the children.
I agree, which means animals must also be recognized. BUT if we acknowledge sentience, then there is no need to acknowledge a fetus because it has no sentience until after birth. Furthermore you prove my point that there is nothing intrinsically valuable about human life, rather sentient life. You cant possibly be a despot with the principle behind my stating that point. But regardless, the fact a despot may agree with me doesnt show how its wrong. You think I'm wrong? Your first comment was an expression of what my position essentially is.
What does than even mean? How is animal reproduction ANY different to human? Not at all. This is just an ignorant assumption on your part. No it isnt. You clearly dont know what you are talking about. Humans have the proclivity to expand more than other animals, but the way in which our population (naturally) would be stabilized is NO DIFFERENT to animals - if you dont get resources, or there is something more powerful than you, then you die. Survival of the fittest. Even if humans are unique in the way you describe, which I dont think they are, how does that make them special in terms of protecting their life? It doesn't. If anything, according to your strange position human life is expendable because it "turns up out of nothing". btw have you ever heard the concept of sexual intercourse?
　 You're the only guy here with a strawman, which is amazingly illogical of you to ignore. Go back and read the OP. It isnt just a stand alone question - its about abortion. But what if it isnt? But why should abortion be arbitrary cut off at the second trimester? Makes no sense. At what point do you stop? WHY? THIS IS MY QUESTION. Why is you 'bought' the enchilada? Your position has no logical basis behind it - its just your irrational arbitrary opinion. It can - human life isnt special. End of story.
The fact that it continues our species. It's a survivalist instinct that we have evolved with. It is what has gotten us this far. Almost all animals (with the exception of maybe Pandas) have it. It's not a question of it being special, it's just that we do it because it is important to the survival of our species, something our hunter-gatherer ancestors realised a long time ago and embedded into our psyche.
