Bill Burr on abortion
(youtu.be)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (58)
sorted by:
Why would it? Does an acorn count as an oak tree?
Viability is just the ability to live outside the womb. Why on earth would you give legal protection to a fertilized egg after conception, which has no self-awareness, no brain, no heart, nothing at all that makes humans what they are.
Not really. The acorn does not need to be fertilized, after all.
And do you think an acorn that 'sprouted' as the same of an actual oak tree?
Right, but that was not the question. The question was whether it should be considered a tree as is.
Seems a bit of a psycho thing to do, yes. But supposing someone had a good reason for it, I'd rather have that than chopping down an oak tree.
Supposing that we do not understand it, how reasonable is it to draw one extreme line rather than another?
Anti-abortionists were very clever to pass such laws, because that enables this sort of 'logic'. But the act itself would be no better or worse if such laws did not exist.
Because whether you want an apple tree, palm tree or a fir, that acorn will always grow into an oak tree. The only difference is if you kill it before it has that chance to grow. It doesn't matter how many people outside the acorn say that it's just a clump of cells, if you let it grow it becomes an oak tree.
Because if you don't as I said, there are millions of people who lack the ability to live on their own, so why should they be given legal protection if a fertilized egg doesn't?
But does that make it an actual oak tree, and we don't treat it as such.
You seem to be arguing against the pro-abortion position that the fertilized egg is not "human". I'm not making that argument. Obviously, it is a human organism. But it's nowhere near developed enough to merit legal protection of any kind.
Like I said: they are viable: they're not attached to someone else's body for sustenance, nor will they die if they are disconnected.
Why does anyone merit legal protection of any kind?
Aside from being an arbitrary and subjective standard, it's also dumb and false.
We all depend on someone else's body for sustenance. Where do you think food comes from? 410 farm workers died on the job last year in the USA. Farming is one of the deadliest jobs.
I assume because I am more valuable than a clump of cells.
And they provide this voluntarily. There's no one person you can point to and say that you depend on that person.
If you did though, would that mean that this individual is in bondage to you, that he has to perform unpaid services to ensure that you stay alive? I'd say only if this is what you chose.
Seems pretty arbitrary. It can’t live outside of the womb as a baby without assistance, so why is that such a significant milestone?
Because you know what it will become in X weeks assuming that you don’t kill it. I mean, why do we give extra legal protection to children? They are more protected than adults even though they are far less emotionally and mentally developed. Yet we know they will become adults with full legal rights at some point.
Maybe that’s because they are more vulnerable, and less capable of defending themselves? Now how does a fertilized egg compare to a child? Seems even more helpless, and perhaps that makes it even more worthy of legal protection.
Am acorn isn't a human dude