Yeah but killing a human in self defense is never murder.
Comment on Abortion Rights: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver
cricket98@lemmy.world 10 months agoI genuinely do believe it is killing a human. The whole “its just a clump of cells!” is a reductionist argument that serves no purpose. We are all clumps of cells. I’m not religious either.
Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 10 months ago
cricket98@lemmy.world 10 months ago
What if the baby is not threatening the life of the mother at all? How is it okay to kill in self defense in that instance?
At least you admit you are killing a human. That’s nice that you have gotten that far.
CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Best way I’ve seen it put is this. If you’re (born) kid needs a kidney donation to live there is no law requiring you to give that kid a kidney. Why should there be a law requiring you to give an unborn kid use of a uterus? You’re not killing a person you’re simply denying them use of your own internal organs.
cricket98@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Ripping the child out of your womb is killing the baby by your own action. Letting someone else die due to inaction is quite different, and I think you know that.
Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Pregnancy is always a life threatening condition. A woman’s consent to the use of her body supercedes anyone else’s claim to life dependent upon her consent.
funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
I’m afraid I dont believe you. Have you approached the FBI, your local DA, over these “murders”? Have you even called the police? Have you hired a private investigator? If I knew someone was murdered I’d do all of these things.
cricket98@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I didn’t call them murders. Maybe try reading a bit more carefully.
funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
Wow you really got me. By replying as if you were the original person I was replying to you really ruined my argument by correctly noting I did not go back and check which username I was replying to.
Very well, s/murder/“unlawful killings” in my previous reply
cricket98@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I didn’t say unlawful killings. Things can be legal and can still be wrong. I shouldn’t have to explain that to you.
pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe 10 months ago
Good news, it’s not.
cricket98@lemmy.world 10 months ago
whats not?
dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 months ago
No, it’s not reductionist. It’s exactly what it is. What is reductionist is making it some kind of moral panic based on misinterpretation of religious text in order to force your perspective on others. The bible gives instructions on how to perform an abortion, and we know that abortion saves lives. Ectopic pregnancy, miscarriages, and other perfectly legitimate medical reasons are part of why abortion access is necessary and should be enshrined as female health care.
cricket98@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I’m not religious at all. Even though I’m not religious, I think it’s still fine for me to speak out on things I view as wrong.
I’m ok with abortion if the mothers life is directly at risk. I’m not ok with abortion being a backup birth control.
Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Nope, that’s exactly what abortion is, birth control. That is exactly what it was established as decades ago, and exactly what that partisan Supreme Court overturned against the will of the people.
Abortion is nothing less than birth control.
cricket98@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I’m glad you are admitting it. Many people try to hide this fact. I wonder why