When I said life = life I thought you would know that "human" was implied; human life = human life. Maybe your non humous flails are Freudian slips and you believe an unborn child's life is equal to dead cells, chairs and ants. On the otherhand, I believe an unborn child is human being.
Quote:
Originally Posted by toretorden
As Hesher writes, to many this statement will seem utterly ridiculous. Not only is it idealistic to the point of naitivity, it's also rather unable to help us when we need to make important decisions about life. By this logic, stepping on an ant makes you a murderer. You have life - the ant has life. If only you or the ant could live, which one of you should? The rule says to revere all life equally. The ant might as well live.
See? It makes no sense at all.
|
toretorden,
I don't believe in Utilitarianism in justifing abortion.
What I said was
a mother has life, you understand the importance of this statement, right? It would wrong to take the life of the mother, right? The unborn baby also has life, so therefore it would be wrong to take the life of the unborn baby. And I never said one was more important then the other, when I was talking about mother and unborn child.
child is a human being
an unborn baby is a human being
taking the life of an innocent child is wrong
human being = human being
If one believes taking a life of an innocent child is wrong, then one must come to the conclusion that taking the life of the unborn human being is wrong.