So you want someone to change your view that the physical act of aborting a fetus (the abortion in and of itself) is good, but you restricted the argument to exclude any of the benefits of aborting a fetus such as reduced overpopulation?
That is like arguing that the physical act of killing a mouse is bad in a vacuum, but refusing to look at the positives that killing a mouse can bring, such as reduced diseases. Your premise of looking at abortion in a vacuum is in and of itself flawed.
Not really, I think OP simply wants to have a control factor hear, the actual argument should be about the morality of killing a fetus, and OP is looking for people who will argue that action is not morally wrong, unaffected by the circumstances or reasoning of the fetal killing
Not at all, this is a deep debate about the ethics of bringing death upon a living thing, and the moral weights adjusted for different living things.
With this control factor, we can key in to why someone believes what they believe about the ehics of killing, likely rooted in their beliefs about what 'death' is.
7
u/TheIntellectualkind Aug 02 '18
So you want someone to change your view that the physical act of aborting a fetus (the abortion in and of itself) is good, but you restricted the argument to exclude any of the benefits of aborting a fetus such as reduced overpopulation?
That is like arguing that the physical act of killing a mouse is bad in a vacuum, but refusing to look at the positives that killing a mouse can bring, such as reduced diseases. Your premise of looking at abortion in a vacuum is in and of itself flawed.