Bill Burr on abortion
(youtu.be)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (58)
sorted by:
Unfortunately, humans are not quantized objects, so there is a point where you just have to choose arbitrarily where that line should be drawn. It's a value judgement.
This is effectively a "Ship Of Theseus". When is it a new ship? After you've replaced every bolt? After you've replaced one bolt? The difference between one bolt and another isn't relevant... but we damn sure know something had to have changed.
Life doesn't begin at conception. This is because babies aren't abeogenic. Babies are a continuation of a constant state of life. We can talk about "it's a different chromosome", but that's only for sexual reproduction. In asexual reproduction it isn't different chormosomes.
At some point we chose to recognize the fetus to be a separate life. A line has to be drawn. Some people are going to get screwed over where that line is, and they are just going to have to deal with it.
When's the right time? Fuck if I know, that's still a value judgement, that's why it should be decided by the fucking states and not the feds. I guarantee that most people are going to be against allowing abortions 12 months, and also against executing a mother with first degree murder for taking Plan B. Most countries in the west seem to compromise on 6-15 weeks, which doesn't seem unreasonable.
That is the first point you get a unique being, though. If a line to be drawn, conception is certainly the cleanest. To be clear, not even saying there is no argument to be made for abortion some point after that fact, but you're certainly aborting a unique creature at any point after that. Conception is the least arbitrary and most clear cut definition you can get.
Also, we're talking humans, so sexual versus asexual reproduction is a moot point.
I tend to agree.
Also agreed.
I'll say it's certainly one of the more reasonable time frames, yes. Whether or not it's good enough is another thing but, like you said, it's a value judgement. It will be good enough for many, some will think it's still too much, and others will say it's too restrictive.
I don’t know why any time is reasonable to murder a baby. I used to be one of those people that said it was fine at X weeks, but you’re correct, it’s entirely arbitrary.
Once I realized it, it made no sense. Let’s say you think six weeks is reasonable. But all you had to do was wait a week or two, or several, and then the baby would have met the criteria that caused you to say it’s no longer reasonable. You know the “fetus” will become a baby, which will become a child, which will become an adult, barring any catastrophic events. So why are we pretending like it’s not a human as long as it’s in the woman’s womb?
As far as utility goes, to whom? To the woman who wants to be a whore? Yes, it’s very convenient for her, but that’s never a good reason to do anything.
It's absolutely arbitrary, but it's based on how much investment is actually made into the pregnancy. This is why rape is seen as a legitimizing factor in an abortion. By definition, the pregnancy was non-consensual, and the disruption of the woman's life was an injury to her. She has no investment in it. In fact, it's highly likely that the father who raped her doesn't either. So, literally no one is invested in the child. No one wants it.
As such, it is valued less than that of a baby whom was conceived intentionally by a couple who want to bring it into the world. They might have already brought equipment and baby clothes. Selected a room in their house for it to live in. It's already invested in as a much as any child is. This is why it's near universally accepted that if a man violently punches the mother in the stomach and kills the fetus, it is considered a murder of a baby.
We can even talk about the times mothers will have funerals for miscarriages. It's not even a baby to them. It's not a fetus. It's a 6 year old little boy who never aged long enough to get there.
But to a rape victim, it's horrific violation of a woman's life. A permanent reminder that she can be overpowered and forced into the life of a mother through violence. In time, she will resent the baby and the child for being a reminder of that helplessness and brutality.
The subjective investment of partnes is actually why babies are basically built to illicit an empathy response in women. The babies (and children they become) are infinitely abounding with love and adoration for their parents. Its a survival mechanism to guarantee that the baby is cared for. It dies if it's not cute.
That, fundamentally, is the problem. You're going to have to end a life if you tolerate it at any point. You can't enforce an objective standard completely on a subjective problem.
Rape is not a legitimizing factor. It only seems that way because society is currently geared towards whatever is most convenient for the woman instead of what is moral.
I don’t see how someone wanting you or not changes the value of your life. Either your life has value independently of your guardian’s desires, or people should be able to kill orphans since they aren’t wanted either.
It’s only a subjective problem if you don’t believe in morality. If you are a Christian, it’s not subjective at all.