Hypothetical no anti-abortionist will honestly answer

[Avatar4321]

Hypothetical: You are are at a fertility clinic - it doesn't matter why - and a fire breaks out. You run for the exit. As you are running down the hall, you hear a child screaming behind a door. As you throw open the door, you see a five-year-old boy crying for help in the corner. In the opposite corner is a phial labelled 1,000 viable embryos. The smoke is rising, and you begin to choke. You realise that the room is too large for you to have time to save both the embryos, and the boy. If you try you will die, as will both the boy, and the embryos.

Do you:

• A: Save the boy?
• B: Save the embryos?

There is no "third option". Any "third option" will result in the death of both the boy, and the embryos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, I rather quite doubt that any anti-abortion advocate will honestly answer this question. They will equivocate, deflect, or simply ignore this post, and hope that no one will take note of it. Because they can't answer the question, and maintain their their primary argument against abortion - that a fetus, from the moment of conception is equal, in every way, to a child.

The rational response, the clearly moral response, is A. Because an actual living child is worth a thousand embryos. 10,000 embryos. Or even a million embryos. This is because they are not the same. Not morally, ethically, nor biologically. This is the rational, ethical, and moral position. However, this position also destroys the anti-abortionists position that an embryo, or a non-viable fetus is a "child", so they will not answer the question.

Many extreme christian righties will tell you that God didn't create the Test Tube baby.. so the 5 year old of coarse..

.And I am not a rightie so don't go there.

.

So many that literally none have argued that

 

[Zander]

Go ahead rationalize killing over 50 million human infants in the womb by ripping their limbs off you blood thirsty liberal deviants.

As I said, cannot answer the question, as it destroys this silly argument.

Actually you destroyed your own argument by trying to draw a false equivalents of a child in the womb compared to a frozen embryo in a test tube. Saving the living child in your scenario is not equivalent to actively preforming an abortion.


.

It is not his "own" argument. He stole it from someone else, without attribution. He's as dishonest as they come!

Guess what? It's not Patrick's argument, either. The thing has been around for a while. I just thought it would be fun to bring back, and expose the duplicitous pricks for who they are. And you're all doing a great job of proving me right. Not one of you will answer the question. Just like I predicted.

Like you predicted? You mean like Patrick (or whomever he stole it from) predicted......

At any rate, lots of people, myself included, have answered the question. You fail.

Dismissed.

 

[flacaltenn]

Save the boy...alert the staff to save the embryos. The boy is asking for rescue. The embryos are cool with the situation. They will go straight to heaven, without having to endure the stupidity of your hypotheticals.

There you go. The embryos die, and you decided that the child was of more value than the embryos. So, please cease referring to embryos as children.

False choice. ---- Let's extend it --- Save a thousand old men or one child? Just because the benefit of the moral greyness goes to the child in SOME cases -- does not make it the MORAL decision in others.

 

[Czernobog]

You didn't destroy shit. You did exactly what I predicted you would do: refuse to answer the question, because it exposes you for liars.

So you admit your entire thread was about trying to gotcha people with a far fetched scenario and that was your goal, got it. Weird.

You do understand that a "gotcha" only works if a person is engaged in dishonesty, right? if one holds an honest position, they can't be "got by a gotcha". Congratulations for admitting that you know that you position is dishonest.

Sorry pop, you're a plagiarist.

yeah, you can deflect with accusations, stupid sidebars, and bullshit all you like. You are still just doing exactly what I said you would.

You do know that it is against the rules not to post a source?

You do know I didn't plagiarise, right? And by the way, I didn't plagiarise. Here. Here is a link to his argument. I took it, and expanded on it, because I recognised a flaw that duplicitous fucks like you would take advantage of. So, I fixed that. He made no mention of the size of the room. I knew that left the "I run really fast, and get both" cheat open. so, I altered the parameters to not allow for that.

Guess what altering it did? Made it mine, and not plagiarism. But it does make all of you still guilty of deflection to avoid your own dishonesty.

 

[Czernobog]

Go ahead rationalize killing over 50 million human infants in the womb by ripping their limbs off you blood thirsty liberal deviants.

As I said, cannot answer the question, as it destroys this silly argument.

Actually you destroyed your own argument by trying to draw a false equivalents of a child in the womb compared to a frozen embryo in a test tube. Saving the living child in your scenario is not equivalent to actively preforming an abortion.


.

It is not his "own" argument. He stole it from someone else, without attribution. He's as dishonest as they come!

Guess what? It's not Patrick's argument, either. The thing has been around for a while. I just thought it would be fun to bring back, and expose the duplicitous pricks for who they are. And you're all doing a great job of proving me right. Not one of you will answer the question. Just like I predicted.

Like you predicted? You mean like Patrick (or whomever he stole it from) predicted......

At any rate, lots of people, myself included, have answered the question. You fail.

Dismissed.

No you didn't. You said it was stupid, and started asking a lot of irrelevant questions. Those who did answer I responded to.

 

[Avatar4321]

Has my vote for dumbest libtard thread of the month.

Deflection noted. You are dismissed.

Aliens invade Earth, decide liberals are idiotic morons and start killing them. Conservatives can't save all liberals so which liberals should we try to save?

More deflection. Again dismissed. LOL

Look up the word mocking fool.

Look up the word deflection fool.

Can't address counter arguments. Doesn't say much about your confidence in your argument. But then neither was your attempt to poison the well

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

This OP clown is trying to suggest frozen embryo's and human fetuses growing in the womb are the same thing in some twisted attempt to justify abortion.
Your thread exposes jack shit, I'm sorry you worked on this all weekend and we destroyed it in seconds.

You didn't destroy shit. You did exactly what I predicted you would do: refuse to answer the question, because it exposes you for liars.

So you admit your entire thread was about trying to gotcha people with a far fetched scenario and that was your goal, got it. Weird.

You do understand that a "gotcha" only works if a person is engaged in dishonesty, right? if one holds an honest position, they can't be "got by a gotcha". Congratulations for admitting that you know that you position is dishonest.

No. A "gotcha" question is designed to entrap the person questioned into an apparent hypocrisy.

Now that you have learned what that means, why not be honest with everyone and admit that you are a plagiarist and an asshole?

No. Not "apparent". Actual hypocrisy. If there is no hypocrisy the gotcha doesn't work. That's kinda the point.

It is apparent hypocrisy because of the inherent faults in your hypotheticals premise.

Logis is not your strong suit.

 

[Czernobog]

Save the boy...alert the staff to save the embryos. The boy is asking for rescue. The embryos are cool with the situation. They will go straight to heaven, without having to endure the stupidity of your hypotheticals.

There you go. The embryos die, and you decided that the child was of more value than the embryos. So, please cease referring to embryos as children.

False choice. ---- Let's extend it --- Save a thousand old men or one child? Just because the benefit of the moral greyness goes to the child in SOME cases -- does not make it the MORAL decision in others.

Nope. Let's not extend it. The thought experiment is what it is. Either you honestly believe that an embroy is the moral equivalent of a child, in which case it only makes sense to save a thousand children, or you don't in which case it only makes sense to save the actual child. It is a simple moral calculation.

 

[Avatar4321]

The hypothetical is nonsensical.

The embryo is only viable if it is growing in the womb.

If a pregnant women and a child were both asking for help and I could only save one......Now that is a dilemma!

Someone is clearly not up on current science...
Deflection noted. Dismissed.

Says the person claiming a human embryo isn't human life

 

[Czernobog]

Deflection noted. You are dismissed.

Aliens invade Earth, decide liberals are idiotic morons and start killing them. Conservatives can't save all liberals so which liberals should we try to save?

More deflection. Again dismissed. LOL

Look up the word mocking fool.

Look up the word deflection fool.

Can't address counter argumenta. Doesn't say much about your confidence in your argument. But then neither was your attempt to poison the well

Your response was not a valid counter, so deserved not address.

 

[Czernobog]

The hypothetical is nonsensical.

The embryo is only viable if it is growing in the womb.

If a pregnant women and a child were both asking for help and I could only save one......Now that is a dilemma!

Someone is clearly not up on current science...
Deflection noted. Dismissed.

Says the person claiming a human embryo isn't human life

Please quote, with a link to the post, where I ever said that. That is another lie.

 

[sealybobo]

Has my vote for dumbest libtard thread of the month.

Because it forces you to admit there is a difference between an embryo and a living breathing human being.

If 2500 embryos burned up because a terrorist broke in and started the fire, would you say it was the biggest terrorist attack on US soil since 9-11? No you would not. It wouldn't even register on your radar like the Pulse Nightclub shooting. Why? Because fertilized sperm is not a living human being.

 

[Avatar4321]

The hypothetical is nonsensical.

The embryo is only viable if it is growing in the womb.

If a pregnant women and a child were both asking for help and I could only save one......Now that is a dilemma!

I would probably go for the child

And would that make it alright for us to start murdering pregnant women ?

 

[Doc1]

So you admit your entire thread was about trying to gotcha people with a far fetched scenario and that was your goal, got it. Weird.

You do understand that a "gotcha" only works if a person is engaged in dishonesty, right? if one holds an honest position, they can't be "got by a gotcha". Congratulations for admitting that you know that you position is dishonest.

Sorry pop, you're a plagiarist.

yeah, you can deflect with accusations, stupid sidebars, and bullshit all you like. You are still just doing exactly what I said you would.

You do know that it is against the rules not to post a source?

You do know I didn't plagiarise, right? And by the way, I didn't plagiarise. Here. Here is a link to his argument. I took it, and expanded on it, because I recognised a flaw that duplicitous fucks like you would take advantage of. So, I fixed that. He made no mention of the size of the room. I knew that left the "I run really fast, and get both" cheat open. so, I altered the parameters to not allow for that.

Guess what altering it did? Made it mine, and not plagiarism. But it does make all of you still guilty of deflection to avoid your own dishonesty.

You got caught plagiarizing kid, deal with it.

 

[Zander]

As I said, cannot answer the question, as it destroys this silly argument.

Actually you destroyed your own argument by trying to draw a false equivalents of a child in the womb compared to a frozen embryo in a test tube. Saving the living child in your scenario is not equivalent to actively preforming an abortion.


.

It is not his "own" argument. He stole it from someone else, without attribution. He's as dishonest as they come!

Guess what? It's not Patrick's argument, either. The thing has been around for a while. I just thought it would be fun to bring back, and expose the duplicitous pricks for who they are. And you're all doing a great job of proving me right. Not one of you will answer the question. Just like I predicted.

Like you predicted? You mean like Patrick (or whomever he stole it from) predicted......

At any rate, lots of people, myself included, have answered the question. You fail.

Dismissed.

No you didn't. You said it was stupid, and started asking a lot of irrelevant questions. Those who did answer I responded to.

But you just said "Not one of you will answer the question. Just like I predicted."



Anyway, read your own plagiarized thread son......I did answer.

Hypothetical no anti-abortionist will honestly answer

 

[flacaltenn]

Save the boy...alert the staff to save the embryos. The boy is asking for rescue. The embryos are cool with the situation. They will go straight to heaven, without having to endure the stupidity of your hypotheticals.

There you go. The embryos die, and you decided that the child was of more value than the embryos. So, please cease referring to embryos as children.

False choice. ---- Let's extend it --- Save a thousand old men or one child? Just because the benefit of the moral greyness goes to the child in SOME cases -- does not make it the MORAL decision in others.

Nope. Let's not extend it. The thought experiment is what it is. Either you honestly believe that an embroy is the moral equivalent of a child, in which case it only makes sense to save a thousand children, or you don't in which case it only makes sense to save the actual child. It is a simple moral calculation.

Then you can't claim a UNIVERSAL "moral" basis for this. Because the "relative value" of life DOES matter and it's a decision that sane rational folks DON'T WANT TO MAKE..

 

[Czernobog]

Save the boy...alert the staff to save the embryos. The boy is asking for rescue. The embryos are cool with the situation. They will go straight to heaven, without having to endure the stupidity of your hypotheticals.

There you go. The embryos die, and you decided that the child was of more value than the embryos. So, please cease referring to embryos as children.

False choice. ---- Let's extend it --- Save a thousand old men or one child? Just because the benefit of the moral greyness goes to the child in SOME cases -- does not make it the MORAL decision in others.

Nope. Let's not extend it. The thought experiment is what it is. Either you honestly believe that an embroy is the moral equivalent of a child, in which case it only makes sense to save a thousand children, or you don't in which case it only makes sense to save the actual child. It is a simple moral calculation.

Then you can't claim a UNIVERSAL "moral" basis for this. Because the "relative value" of life DOES matter and it's a decision that sane rational folks DON'T WANT TO MAKE..

Except when one refers to fetuses as children they are not making a relative value judgement, they are attempting to make an equivalent value judgement. And the only person who should have the authority to determine the relative value of a fetus, is the person pregnant with that fetus.

 

[Avatar4321]

First, nice going poisoning the well right off the bat.

Second, I saw this on twitter last week. The idiot who posted it had thousands of honest responses immediately. Best by far was matt Walsh and Ben Shapiro over at the daily wire.

Third, let's do the same hypo, but instead of a canister of embryos, its a choice between saving the child and saving you. Does the fact that I'd still save the child mean your life has no value? Or that you aren't alive? According to the logic of the op it proves you aren't human. Does that make any sense whatsoever?

So this thread is plagiarized as well as idiotic?

Unless the op is the idiot on twitter that matt and Ben responded to last week probably.

It was funny. They demolished his argument then he was like "no one ask for your opinion" well yes you did.

 

[Borillar]

Save the boy...alert the staff to save the embryos. The boy is asking for rescue. The embryos are cool with the situation. They will go straight to heaven, without having to endure the stupidity of your hypotheticals.

If that's the case, aren't you doing the embryos a favor by aborting them or in this case letting them burn?

 

[Fueri]

Is that the choice offered to pregnant women with an already born child?

bring your kids and we'll off one of them or the new one in the oven. your call.

oddly enough it isn't.

not to mention that it's an absurd example of the slippery slope logic of these people.

see? it's not really a kid then now is it?

well, a sperm in my tube sock isn't either, and still wouldn't be if you threw an egg in it and shook it around, but one in the oven that has fingers, toes and a beating heart that would survive to term if you didn't suck it out through a tube sure as fuck is, no matter how you'd like to paste over it....