Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
reply to post by TheColdDragon
I disagree. It does not weaken it. I know that a zygote cant live without support. What I am saying is that if you give a human zygote support it will become a human being, barring any complications. So therefore it is a human life.
Correction: If you give a zygote support, it has a non-zero probability of being carried to term. The likelihood of becoming a human being is definitionally tied to what a human being is considered, and there is no presumption that the possibility of it living to full term somehow lends it qualities it would not otherwise have.
When considering and debating with human secularists or those of a scientific bent and disbelieving nature, you cannot lend a quality that does not exist in the present to an entity because it may exist in the future.
Water has a freezing point. All water can become ice. This does not mean that all water is ice because of what it can be. The state at which it resides is the state at which it is referred to.
Thusly, from a logos argument, you cannot impart a future quality to a present element; It is a plea to emotion or morality.
You are entitled to whatever view you want. To me, it just seems that pro-abortionists must take that view, because if you didnt then it would impossible to see abortion as anything less than a mother having her own child murdered.
My interests and wants are not relevant to the topic, and present/previous/future comments are not necessary indicators of my disposition upon a subject.
You are again conflating your own worldview with the worldview of others. Whether you view it as murder does not indicate whether others view it as murder, and you should not assume that they do.
You are inferring a hypocrisy that is entirely based upon your own worldview; others see no hypocrisy because their definitions differ from your own.
This makes you totally correct. Your absolute correctness is just limited within your head.
