Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Reward Points: | 6 |
Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 88% |
Arguments: | 7 |
Debates: | 1 |
target the root causes of unwanted pregnancies: poverty, lack of education, poor sexual education, etc.
- Agreed.
The primary difference is whether the practice is driven underground and left wholly unregulated, which opens up room for black market abuses of women, or not.
- If the fetus is a human being, then why would we make it safer for a person to kill it? Perhaps this analogy would help:
If you murder a pregnant woman you are charged with the death of two people. That is a dirty business, murdering people. It isn't safe. A person who does that is often mixed up in the black market of untraceable guns which is very dangerous and a person is likely to be taken advantage of or abused, aside from becoming acquainted with all kinds of undesirable people.
We shouldn't make it safer for that person or for those who are getting abortions.
What we should do is make pregnancy as safe and as comfortable for pregnant women as possible.
Biology informs us that a living thing with a unique set of genes is an individual. If it comes from a giraffe, it is an individual of that species. If it comes from a human, it is of the human species.
We shouldn't permit the killing of innocent members of the human species.
Let's not throw around big words like "honest, accurate, prolific, and productive" with science. Science is a set of tools. Do scientists not lie, disagree, or become counterproductive simply because they using these tools?
The best system to remove human error is to combine reason and faith. Science is clearly limited to the realm of reason. Science does not speak to love, justice, or virtue. It is helpful by revealing how things work, but it cannot tell us how to live well.
In order for "should"s to be futile you must be willing to admit that no thing or act has objective value over another.
If teaching someone to cultivate their own food supply holds no objective value over consuming as many Twinkies as possible then perhaps there is no morality.
Since, as you note, we all have value systems, and since truth is objective, there must be some values which are better than others.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know! |