Debating Ethics: The Abortion Discussion at FriendZone
Summary
The FriendZone | Make Friends & Chat ⋅ Active Social Fun ⋅ Chill ⋅ VC server is hosting a deep-dive discussion regarding the ethics and biological definitions of abortion. This announcement outlines a logical argument concerning human rights and the status of an unborn child. It serves as a focal point for community members to engage in complex moral debates and exchange perspectives on sensitive social issues within a structured environment.
Ahhh
There it is haha
Got it
So it literally does not matter, on the question of whether it should be permissible, their financial status, mental/emotional/physical health, whether the child was a product of r##e or ince##
Because even if none of that were the case, you’d still be okay with it
So the only thing that matters to you is whether they want it or not
Correct?
Ok but my question was more about the fact that the financial status or the other reasons you listed here literally do not matter on the question of whether it should be legally permissible
You just said if all of that is okay and the only issue was that they simply did not want it, then they should be able to abort it
Yes?
Im not talking about the current legal status of it
Laws can change
I’m just talking about it morally/philosophically
Ok so if it became illegal you’d be against abortions then?
Is that all it takes for you 😂
According to this, if the law changed then that means morality has also changed
😭😭😭
Do you not realize the flaw in this
I agree
But not always
Following this same logic you would’ve been pro slavery in 1840s southern United States
And then an abolitionist in the reconstruction era
Laws follow the morality, not the other way around
You are basing your morality off the law 😭
It’s backwards
When morality changes, that’s when laws change
It’s not the law changes and then morality changes
You got it the wrong way around
If everyone thought the way you did in the 1840s, then slavery would’ve never been abolished
It took the abolitionists to recognize an unjust law and fight for that change
As I said, the law follows the morality
A slave owner back then would be like “if you can tell me how I can keep my farm running for just as cheap, I would be against slavery”
How about it’s wrong to own slaves?
How about it’s wrong to kill humans? Just because they are unwanted?
So are you saying if they didn’t have any laws to help former slave owners after their slaves were freed, you’d be against abolishing slavery 😂
I know you don’t mean that brother
How about abolishing slavery is good regardless of what it does to the finances of the slave owner?
You don’t have a right to someone else’s labor even if it means you will be in poverty
Likewise, you don’t have a right to kill a human even if it means you will be in poverty
The change happened because there were thousands of abolitionists who fought against slavery…
Do you think that one day they just woke up and decided to end it?
Like lincoln decided it?
It was thousands or millions of abolitionists who recognized how morally twisted the practice was and they fought against it for decades… REGARDLESS of what it did to some farmer’s stream of income
It just didn’t matter
It doesn’t matter if that guy’s farm will be driven into the dirt… you don’t have a right to someone else’s labor period
It doesn’t matter if that farmer is going to be in financial ruin and end up homeless or even dead
He still can not force someone else to work for him
Did the “fixes” really matter back then though?
Be so fr bro
If there were no plans to get farmers help after emancipating the slaves, would you not be against slavery then?
