On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
January 22nd, 1973, the Supreme Court hands down its decision to legalize abortion in America.
January 22nd, 2011, the evidence that the fetus is not a person has still not been presented.
The argument over abortion is over what a person is. If the fetus is a person, abortion is murder. If the fetus is not a person, abortion is the removal of cells - cells that look strangely like a small person.
There exists vast amounts of evidence - biological and philosophical evidence - that a fetus is a person. Anyone who has ever seen an ultrasound can tell you all about it. Thus abortion, defined as the intentional killing of the unborn, is murder.
The benign King Barack opined today in support of abortion, "Government should not intrude on private family matters". Don't say he never made a small government argument... I think that's the same argument the mob uses when the Feds show up at their door, so it's a versatile argument as well.
Is there any evidence from the libbie-tarians or other pro-abortion folks out there that the fetus is not a person? I have often admitted that a biological or philosophical proof that the fetus is not a person would provide me with a great deal of relief. For if the fetus is not a person then we haven't, as a country, systematically murdered tens of millions of citizens. If such evidence exists, please do present it and ease my mind. If no evidence exists, then we should probably think about what that means for a quick second, on this sad anniversary.
Hopefully this isn't above the Ricochet pay grade of $3.47 a month.
Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever....The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest.
Thomas Jefferson
- Comment (93)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
I'm libertarian, and I'm anti-abortion. I arrived at my position through reason, not religion; strangely (rightly?) enough, that now guides my choice in church.
We've never had the argument in this country about when human life begins, before or after the decision. Maybe this year will be it?
Jul '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Well, I bet every Ricochet Member was once a fetus. And I bet every "pro-abortionist" was once a fetus. But I doubt a fetus in a Lady's womb has ever turned out to be a grasshopper... or a dog..... or an elephant.... or a blade of grass....
May '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Samwise Gamgee: January 22nd, 1973, the Supreme Court hands down its decision to legalize abortion in America.
January 22nd, 2011, the evidence that the fetus is not a person has still not been presented.
What's your definition of a "person"? The burden of proving that a fetus is a person lies with you, since you begin by offering a universal affirmative proposition here. You say categorically that "All A are B" but one should not have to rebut you until you argue how it is the case that all A in fact are B.
Edited on Jan 22, 2011 at 5:15pmMay '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Samwise Gamgee: Is there any evidence from the libbie-tarians or other pro-abortion folks out there that the fetus is not a person?
From my experience, the "pro-abortion" label is a subtle kind of derision. The distinction between advocating abortions and advocating the government recognition of abortion rights is a elementary one that everyone is capable of making.
Jun '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
When the subject is life, the assumption must always favor humanity, for the same reason that in our criminal justice system the accused is presumed innocent.
May '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
In court, the proposition "The defendant is not guilty" is presumed to be true because the proposition "The defendant is guilty" has not yet been proven and the latter proposition is the initial proposition offered. In these settings, it should not be assumed that introductory propositions without evidence are true because the possession of evidence is a necessary condition for the knowledge that a proposition is true. Offering the clam that "A fetus is a person" in the absence of substantiation (as well as a definition of "person") and then requiring opponents to disprove it, from what I understand, violates the conventional rules of etiquette governing the dialectic.
Edited on Jan 22, 2011 at 5:52pmMay '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Michael...
First question: To perform any act without the most possible certainty when a human life is even possibly on the line would be extremely immoral. Agreed? If so, how could the burden of proof not be on the assertion that a human person is not threatened?
Second question: What makes it acceptable to kill a month-old fetus but not a month-old child? What makes one a person inherently deserving of life and not the other?
May '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
I suppose its true that the fetus is a life, if by "life" once means something that possesses some kind of self-sustaining, biological momentum. The question is: does the fetus deserve legal rights that protect it from abortion? Samwise argues that the fetus is deserving of such legal rights. A formalized version of his argument for this claim is as follows:
1.) A fetus is a person
2.) A person is something that deserves legal rights (assuming that this is a belief of his, though he has not defined what a "person" is here)
3.) A fetus is something that deserves legal rights
Sam has not offered to prove premise #1. He claims "There exists vast amounts of evidence - biological and philosophical evidence - that a fetus is a person," so if this is the case, then a demonstration shouldn't be difficult to undertake. But as long as premise #1 is asserted without proof, it can be denied without proof. The content of premise #1, i.e., the subject and the predicate, do not change this.
Edited on Jan 22, 2011 at 6:45pmJun '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Michael Labeit
From my experience, the "pro-abortion" label is a subtle kind of derision. The distinction between advocating abortions and advocating the government recognition of abortion rights is a elementary one that everyone is capable of making. · Jan 22 at 5:23pm
So you think abortion should be legal but not advocated? Why should they not be advocated if they are allowed to be legal?
Edited on Jan 22, 2011 at 6:52pmJun '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Michael Labeit
What's your definition of a "person"? The burden of proving that a fetus is a person lies with you, since you begin by offering a universal affirmative proposition here. You say categorically that "All A are B" but one should not have to rebut you until you argue how it is the case that all A in fact are B. · Jan 22 at 5:13pm
Edited on Jan 22 at 05:15 pm
All humans are persons. An unborn baby is biologically human. Therefore it is a person.
Jul '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
The "demonstration" takes approximately nine months.
Jun '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Michael Labeit
Sam has not offered to prove premise #1.
Edited on Jan 22 at 06:45 pm
A fetus has a genetically human DNA code, a fetus is growing a human nervous system something mere cells do not do. The fetus has a beating heart at a young gestation and can feel pain, see light, suck their thumb. Oh, and it looks like a person. Every medical textbook prior to 1973 asserted as much and the original Hippocratic Oath implies it by forbidding abortion. Changes were made for political, not scientific reasons.
But you're dodging my question, most likely because you cannot answer it.
Michael, my question is, can you prove biologically or philosophically that the fetus is not a human?
May '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
A fetus is a part or an appendage (some object to the term "appendage" nut it seems this comes from the belief that it is a crude predicate for "fetus," but I find the predication to be correct nonetheless) of a mother. The mother is a human being, i.e., a physiologically autonomous, rational (i.e., capable or will be capable of reasoning) agent worthy of legal rights because the possession of legal rights is a necessary condition for human flourishing. One such necessary legal right is the right to unconditionally control one's body - without this right, human flourishing is infinitely vulnerable. The right to abort one's fetus follows from this right, as mentioned earlier, a fetus is but a part of a woman's body. A child is not a part or an appendage of another human being; it is physiologically autonomous. It too is a human being, hence it deserves legal rights.
May '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Samwise Gamgee
Michael Labeit
From my experience, the "pro-abortion" label is a subtle kind of derision. The distinction between advocating abortions and advocating the government recognition of abortion rights is a elementary one that everyone is capable of making.
So you think abortion should be legal but not advocated? Why should they not be advocated if they are allowed to be legal?
Whether a mother should abort her pregnancy or not is something she should determine with medical professionals. I hold that she should retain the right to abort her pregnancy, but to assert that my position is "pro-abortion" is to suggest that I encourage abortions per se as opposed to the recognition of abortion rights. If every woman decided not to abort her pregnancy, this would not change my position.
May '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Samwise Gamgee
Michael Labeit
What's your definition of a "person"? The burden of proving that a fetus is a person lies with you, since you begin by offering a universal affirmative proposition here. You say categorically that "All A are B" but one should not have to rebut you until you argue how it is the case that all A in fact are B.
All humans are persons. An unborn baby is biologically human. Therefore it is a person.
What's your definition of "human"? "Person"?
May '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Samwise Gamgee
Michael Labeit: Sam has not offered to prove premise #1.
Before the burden of rebuttal falls upon me, there must be something to rebut. You must offer an argument and a proper description of the concepts you employ with in that argument (if the content of those concepts is unknown).
Now the above purports to prove that a fetus is a person (premise #1). Should I take it then that you argue {a thing that possesses "a genetically human DNA code," a growing" [or grown] "human nervous system," a "beating heart," the ability to "feel pain," to "see light," to "suck their thumb" and a resemblance to persons} is a person? In order to prove premise #1, your premises would be:
-A fetus is X, and
-X is a person
Would you agree then that your X is that which exists within the {braces} above?
Jun '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Actually, the presumption of innocence comes from the English common law; the reason we use it is, simply, that most people are not criminals and it would be a supreme violation of both individual freedom and the spirit of open society for the State to assume otherwise.
Michael, I have a hard time believing that you're actually making this argument. Ask yourself the following, then see if it still makes sense to argue that a fetus should be considered anything other than a human being:
When does consciousness begin? At what point of gestation should the fetus be considered a human, and who gets to make that decision? How can that decision be anything but arbitrary, since no one can know?
The key is... no one knows the answer. If we on the anti-abortion side are wrong, then restrictive abortion laws are an inconvenience for women who didn't use contraception; if we're right, the federal and state governments sanction the murder of innocents. Why bet against life?
Jun '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Michael Labeit
Before the burden of rebuttal falls upon me, there must be something to rebut. You must offer an argument and a proper description of the concepts you employ with in that argument (if the content of those concepts is unknown).
Now the above purports to prove that a fetus is a person (premise #1). Should I take it then that you argue {a thing that possesses "a genetically human DNA code," a growing" [or grown] "human nervous system," a "beating heart," the ability to "feel pain," to "see light," to "suck their thumb" and a resemblance to persons} is a person? In order to prove premise #1, your premises would be:
-A fetus is X, and
-X is a person
Just say "no" and we'll move on. Look, I won't hold it against you man. You believe abortion should be allowed without knowing what it is you're killing. It's a position held by a lot of people. It would be worse if you acknowledged the fetus was a person and were still pro abortion.
A fetus is a human being, homo sapien.
A human is a person.
All humans are persons
Jun '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
Casey makes some good points.
Consider the following analogy: You're out hunting in the woods and you see the bush move. Now, it might be just a deer, but maybe it's your fellow hunter. Should we shoot that thing in the bush? If it were me I wouldn't shoot
If I were slaughtering tens of millions of things in a bush, I'd want to be sure they were not human, wouldn't you? We certainly have more evidence that the fetus in the womb is a person than the thing in the bush is a person. Perhaps we should employ the same caution and not shoot.
I'll direct you further to the following lecture site, it might help you sort some of these issues out. You'll want the "pro-life Philosophy" lecture, # 19.
Peter Kreeft... great man
May '10
Re: On the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, What is a Fetus?
I'm formalizing your arguments now. I'll respond in a few.