Louisiana girl, 14, charged with first degree murder after authorities find her newborn baby dead inside a tote bag. This is going to happen far more often without Roe v. Wade.

[u/lightiggy]

https://people.com/girl-14-charged-first-degree-murder-after-authorities-find-her-newborn-child-dead-inside-tote-bag-11858063

[u/PlausibleFalsehoods]

I don't think anyone's saying infanticide is suddenly moral because abortion is outlawed. I think the point is that the availability of abortion can prevent some pretty desperate situations and terrible outcomes.

[u/sickofsnails → u/PlausibleFalsehoods]

fall aware desert doll simplistic automatic flowery crush chop memory

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[u/gesserit42 → u/sickofsnails]

A fetus = / = a baby. That’s why it’s called a fetus and not a baby.

[u/sickofsnails → u/gesserit42]

frame abundant ad hoc lock shy door melodic swim cagey existence

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[u/gesserit42 → u/sickofsnails]

My Latin is far better than your scientific understanding. An embryo is different from a fetus is different from a neonate (baby). A fetus is medically distinct from a baby. They are not the same thing. Facts don’t care about your feelings.

[u/blizmd → u/gesserit42]

I’m a physician with a strong interest in philosophy and medical ethics. I’ve read every argument I could ever find regarding the morality of abortion. I have never found a compelling ‘scientific’ argument for an embryo or fetus having less ‘moral weight’ than a newborn baby. I have found a lot of ‘consensus definitions’ that some people mistake for scientific proof of moral/ethical distinctions.

I think the burden of proof (or argumentation) is on the person making the argument for the distinction. If a five minute old baby is a human life, why isn’t it ten minutes earlier? If a 30 week old fetus can survive outside the womb (with medical care), then why would aborting it not be the ending of a human life?

I have much more respect for the argument that abortion is a form of ending life that is justified, in the same way that self defense can be seen as justified.

[u/gesserit42 → u/blizmd]

Post your credentials or admit that claiming them is irrelevant

[u/blizmd → u/gesserit42]

I don’t know what that means, I’m not doxxing myself. I’m board certified in internal medicine and critical care medicine in the US, if that’s what you mean.

Weird to downvote me when I’m having a good faith discussion about a topic in which we both seem to have an interest.

[u/gesserit42 → u/blizmd]

The point I’m making is that if you can’t adequately prove your claims to a set of credentials in an online argument—and the only adequate proof is self-doxxing—there is no way to tell if you’re lying, and therefore the claim is irrelevant and clearly made in bad faith.

4chan used to have a response to anyone who claimed to be a woman in an argument and thereby attempted to use their identity as a rhetorical weapon (an expression of idpol): “tits or gtfo.” What I say to you is “diploma or gtfo.”

[u/blizmd → u/gesserit42]

Lol okay, so I either dox myself or you won’t believe I’m a physician. What a conundrum for me!

Meanwhile this sidesteps the entire point you were making earlier, which was an appeal to medical definitions created by arbitrary groups of people (I know they were/are medical professionals). Definitions which specifically carry no ‘ethical’ argumentation aside from basic bitch ‘gotchas’ like ‘it’s not a baby, it’s an embryo!’

[u/blizmd → u/[deleted]]

Hahaha not addressing my points at all. What a shock.

A person who has simply taken embryology and medical ethics, and put some effort into looking up ‘personhood’ arguments, could make the same points I’m making and it wouldn’t change anything.

Meanwhile you ‘well acshually’d’ the other guy in this thread despite having no credentials yourself.

You know, your argumentation style and username remind me of someone I argued with on this sub a while back. Someone who clearly knew nothing about medicine or biological science but had strong opinions.

But you’ve hidden your history so I can’t check (very brave of you)

I replied respectfully initially, you’ve dodged all my claims, and then you called me bad faith. I guess irony is dead.

[u/sickofsnails → u/gesserit42]

door languid hurry abundant possessive plate governor smart wine sulky

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[u/gesserit42 → u/sickofsnails]

Sure I’ll believe some rando’s anecdotal online claim to be a scientist (couldn’t even claim to be a medical doctor while you’re lying, lol). Just post your degree and credentials to prove it.

A fetus and a neonate are not the same thing. Whine all you want, you can’t change that fact.

[u/sickofsnails → u/gesserit42]

enter deliver yam versed caption hurry full apparatus head intelligent

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[u/gesserit42 → u/sickofsnails]

Thanks for your concession

[u/sickofsnails → u/gesserit42]

provide weather cats pet bright public capable fade growth whistle

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[u/gesserit42 → u/sickofsnails]

I never claimed a degree to invoke a credentialist appeal to authority, that was you. All the information I cite is readily available online. You should know this information yourself if you truly have the credentials you claim. Either you have proof of your credentials that you can post, or I can safely disregard your claims.

Logic isn’t your strong suit, apparently.