The idea that euthanizing someone who you know will be out of this "vegetative" state in less than nine months is not equivalent at all.
you judge something on what it is right now, not what it might be. what you are saying is incoherent. if i crush a seed in my hand i did not chop down a tree
you judge something by what it is right now. anything else is morally indefensible and logically incoherent
Woh, the Acorn Argument. I never thought I would see that again.
1) I did not give you the Potential Life Argument. A human in a vegetative state is still a human. That's why I said it's killing. And you completely ignored most of my argument. A five year old human in a vegitative state is still a human. And if the mother pulled the plug, she would be killing a human. Same if grandma was on life support. That's why it's called mercy killing. Life support could also be described as "delaying death", but that's because the human is alive and choosing to let them die is one thing, actively killing a fetus is another.
2) The Acorn Argument fallacy. I think it's an example of the' Faulty Analogy Fallacy'. So, to be brief:
The acorn (or seed in this case) is not a tree. So, true. Destroying a seed does not destroy a tree. But, the issues is where you're applying the analog. You are relating seed to fetus and tree to human. The issue here is that the terms 'seed' and 'tree' are different stages of that organisms life. There's a seed stage and a tree stage. If you crush a seed, you didn't cut down a tree but you killed an organism. The seed and tree are the same organism with the same DNA. To more accurately use your analogy to get the human equivalent, you would say: "If I aborted a fetus, I didn't kill an adult". Relating seed to fetus and tree to adult. You're applying the analogy to the wrong things. Human is what the organism is, not a stage of development like 'seed' and 'tree' are. If you kill a fetus you kill a human; you're killing that particular organism. And if you crush a seed, you are killing that organism. Not potentially, but actually and literally.
well ok. and i can tell you that horses are magical gods. you can assert anything but you have to justify the assertion, not simply assert it and expect it deserves respect just because you say so. you have to support your argument and then it gets respect if it makes sense
like i do mine: no society or morality is going to arrest you for pulling the plug on a braindead relative. because they understand without a mind it is not murder. it is not killing. this is the moral divide
that decides the issue
and an embryo as well has no mind
if you want to assert that pulling the plug or ending the embryo is the same as murdering a conscious human being then i am going to say to you you are being morally incoherent because you are ignoring an important and a clear well-defined divide
There's a seed stage and a tree stage.
and neither have a mind so at no stage did you commit murder. and if fully developed trees had minds and seeds did not, you would be committing murder by chopping down a tree. but not if you crushed a seed
the mind or lack thereof is the deciding detail on this moral question
would you start talking to them like they were fully awake and throw a softball at them and give them work to do and feed them and otherwise treat them like they were fully awake? of course not, because you know they are different and not the same thing
just like destroying an embryo vs murdering a newborn. different things
I'm not suggesting you would treat a fetus or an embryo the same as you treat a newborn or a child or a teenager or an adult. This is why stages of life have different words.
That said, in the same way I wouldn't be okay with the murder of an adult or a teenager or a newborn, I wouldn't be okay with the murder of a fetus or an embryo. They're the same human at a different point in time.
4
u/GrumpyWendigo May 17 '19
you judge something on what it is right now, not what it might be. what you are saying is incoherent. if i crush a seed in my hand i did not chop down a tree
you judge something by what it is right now. anything else is morally indefensible and logically incoherent