People who have not arrived at a position by logic or reason can never be dissuaded by logic or reason. This is humor, because trying to debate or convince an anti-abortion terrorist that they are not only wrong but evil would be pointless.
they are evil, but they are not illogical. there seem to be a confusion between logic, which is objective, and morality, which is not. they are reaching the logical conclusion of pro-life from their morality, which is evil.
i think the mentality of “they are evil, therefore they are not logical, therefore there is no point trying to talk to them” is very unconstructive. because it rules out the possibility of change. if you think they cannot be changed, what else can you do? wait for them to all die, then we’d all be living in paradise? or throw 40% of US citizens in prison?
Their logic is “women are cattle that exist to breed” and so there’s literally no argument in favor of abortion you can ever make.
The only thing that ever convinces them is if a woman becomes a person to them, so perhaps a daughter or other family member, and so they’re able to justify her abortion because she’s a person. This will never be applied to a woman they don’t know.
Many of them are illogical, or have logic descending from extremely dubious axioms.
For example, “abortion is murder of an innocent baby” + “allow abortion for rape or incest” don’t square well together, but see commonly seen together.
The “abortion is murder” crowd is against it up until it personally affects them.
I once had to dodge a punch because in an argument with someone I used to go to church with as a child, I brought up his own daughters getting pregnant as teens and him taking them 3 states over to get abortions.
Apparently “that’s different and you know it”
Besides, who gives a shit whether their logic is internally consistent when they can just ask sky daddy to forgive them and they’ll get into heaven no matter how many (according to them) babies they murder.
Lol, I’d say its only different if she were raped or if he knocked her up himself. Doubt that was the case (and/or that he’d admit it if it were the later).
What’s extra wild to me are those who stay logically consistent through that patch; that is they believe abortion even in cases of rape and incest is still immoral and thus should be illegal.
I’ve got a family member with that take and I was legit speechless when she said that to me, esp since I consider her one of the more rational and compassionate members of my family.
Is it logically equivalent? I mean they both drain their host, they both require a host to survive, and usually one dies when removed from the host.
Are conservative Christians going to care? Of course not because NO ARGUMENT WILL EVER BE ENOUGH for them. They believe a sky fairy will save them from eternal suffering that the same sky fairy sends them to for not believing hard enough that sky fairy exists. Logic isn’t important to them.
An organism living in, on, or with another organism in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host. The ends to the mean is worth the sacrifice to most mothers and often intentionally planned for or accepted, but yes, a fetus qualifies.
As far as using it as an argument, no, it won’t work for various reasons. But as presented as a question of definition…
I get where you’re coming from. It’s kind of annoying when other pro-choice people smugly treat pregnancy and sometimes even children as inherently undesirable all the time. But like other people have already pointed out, the purpose of the post was never to convince anyone, it’s just being funny.
Do you think comparing a parasite to a fetus is logically equivalent and a good way to convince pro life people?
People who have not arrived at a position by logic or reason can never be dissuaded by logic or reason. This is humor, because trying to debate or convince an anti-abortion terrorist that they are not only wrong but evil would be pointless.
they are evil, but they are not illogical. there seem to be a confusion between logic, which is objective, and morality, which is not. they are reaching the logical conclusion of pro-life from their morality, which is evil.
i think the mentality of “they are evil, therefore they are not logical, therefore there is no point trying to talk to them” is very unconstructive. because it rules out the possibility of change. if you think they cannot be changed, what else can you do? wait for them to all die, then we’d all be living in paradise? or throw 40% of US citizens in prison?
Their logic is “women are cattle that exist to breed” and so there’s literally no argument in favor of abortion you can ever make.
The only thing that ever convinces them is if a woman becomes a person to them, so perhaps a daughter or other family member, and so they’re able to justify her abortion because she’s a person. This will never be applied to a woman they don’t know.
Many of them are illogical, or have logic descending from extremely dubious axioms.
For example, “abortion is murder of an innocent baby” + “allow abortion for rape or incest” don’t square well together, but see commonly seen together.
The “abortion is murder” crowd is against it up until it personally affects them.
I once had to dodge a punch because in an argument with someone I used to go to church with as a child, I brought up his own daughters getting pregnant as teens and him taking them 3 states over to get abortions.
Apparently “that’s different and you know it”
Besides, who gives a shit whether their logic is internally consistent when they can just ask sky daddy to forgive them and they’ll get into heaven no matter how many (according to them) babies they murder.
This is conservative thought. Different rules for different people. In-groups to protect, out-groups to bind.
You can also see it when it’s like “when I needed welfare I was down on my luck and needed help. When they needed it, they were lazy cheats”
It’s poor empathy, poor reasoning, emotional dominance. They are, frankly, stupid
I absolutely love reminding my parents that they have depended on some form of socialism for my entire life
Lol, I’d say its only different if she were raped or if he knocked her up himself. Doubt that was the case (and/or that he’d admit it if it were the later).
What’s extra wild to me are those who stay logically consistent through that patch; that is they believe abortion even in cases of rape and incest is still immoral and thus should be illegal.
I’ve got a family member with that take and I was legit speechless when she said that to me, esp since I consider her one of the more rational and compassionate members of my family.
No one has ever told you that about right-wingers and religious extremists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_the_Vendée
Is a good inspiration
Is it logically equivalent? I mean they both drain their host, they both require a host to survive, and usually one dies when removed from the host.
Are conservative Christians going to care? Of course not because NO ARGUMENT WILL EVER BE ENOUGH for them. They believe a sky fairy will save them from eternal suffering that the same sky fairy sends them to for not believing hard enough that sky fairy exists. Logic isn’t important to them.
Do you know what a shitpost is?
An organism living in, on, or with another organism in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host. The ends to the mean is worth the sacrifice to most mothers and often intentionally planned for or accepted, but yes, a fetus qualifies.
As far as using it as an argument, no, it won’t work for various reasons. But as presented as a question of definition…
And more importantly, who fucking cares?
I get where you’re coming from. It’s kind of annoying when other pro-choice people smugly treat pregnancy and sometimes even children as inherently undesirable all the time. But like other people have already pointed out, the purpose of the post was never to convince anyone, it’s just being funny.
A fetus is a parasite…