The Philosophy Of Infanticide

[Tassman]

Why do you consider a baby which is born, a person? It can't think, speak, feed itself, or even help messing itself. Dogs are smarter. So why is that baby a person in your eyes?

This is the Jewish position, not mine: “The bible does not ever state that life begins at conception. In fact, it states that life enters and leaves the body through the breath. In with your very first breath, out with your very last. And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Gen 2:7. So breath is life, and when life is breathed into the earthen vessel that is a human body, it comes alive. "A living soul" as the King James Version gives it.”

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...Not-Conception

This was also the Evangelical position for most of its history.

[Sparko]

Very true! This is why the law states that an abortion should not occur (other than in the most exceptional circumstances), once the fetus can survive independently of the mother as a viable person...i.e. at the end of the second trimester. The vast majority of abortions occur during the first trimester.

So you just admitted your previous statement about what constitutes a person is invalid.

I guess we can conclude that you are not the person to ask when a person begins.

[Sparko]

Straight from the bible!

I would be interested in you showing me that section where it says to burn witches.

Just goes to show that one cannot obtain a universal moral code from scripture.

But we can.

Not in “my world”; my world went to war over it.

But your worldview is that morals are just group agreements on what is right or wrong. So yes, in your world, if a society determines a group of humans are not "persons" then it is perfectly moral to destroy them.

True! Just as this same society no longer accepts that it is perfectly moral to burn witches, stone women for infidelity, treat women like property in general and discriminate against LGBT folk.

But under your view, it would be perfectly acceptable for this very society to decide to do all of those things again if they change their minds.

[Cow Poke]

This was also the Evangelical position for most of its history.

Tassman, just repeating the same thing over and over and over and over does not make it true.

[Sparko]

This is the Jewish position, not mine: “The bible does not ever state that life begins at conception. In fact, it states that life enters and leaves the body through the breath. In with your very first breath, out with your very last. And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Gen 2:7. So breath is life, and when life is breathed into the earthen vessel that is a human body, it comes alive. "A living soul" as the King James Version gives it.”

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...Not-Conception

This was also the Evangelical position for most of its history.

You were the one arguing that birth is when a person exists. I don't care what you claim jews thought. We have already shown you multiple times that you are wrong. You can quote some moron on the dailykos all you want. They don't have a clue. His article is worse than your rationalizations. We even have shown you passages in the bible where Jesus and John the Baptist reacted to each other while still in the womb.

But I realize that nothing we say will change your mind. So you will continue to attack and burn your strawman, while we laugh at you and shake our heads, wondering what you think you are accomplishing.

[seer]

I would be interested in you showing me that section where it says to burn witches.

Not burn but execute...

Exodus 22:18

“You shall not permit a sorceress to live.

Leviticus 20:27

“A man or a woman who is a medium or a necromancer shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones; their blood shall be upon them.”

[Sparko]

Not burn but execute...

and it was the Old Testament. Not for Christians at all.

[seer]

and it was the Old Testament. Not for Christians at all.

I agree, now we have to let them live! Oh well... And of course in Tass' relative world it is no big deal anyway...

[Tassman]

You were the one arguing that birth is when a person exists.

I was never “the one arguing that birth is when a person exists”. Again: “According to Jewish law, human life begins at birth, not conception.”

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/art...fe-in-judaism/

This was the Evangelical position too until recently.

I don't care what you claim jews thought. We have already shown you multiple times that you are wrong. You can quote some moron on the dailykos all you want. They don't have a clue. His article is worse than your rationalizations.

See above.

We even have shown you passages in the bible where Jesus and John the Baptist reacted to each other while still in the womb.

Seriously!

Poetic license methinks.

and it was the Old Testament. Not for Christians at all.

Tell that to the good Christian folk of Salem.

[seer]

Tell that to the good Christian folk of Salem.

No big deal Tass, that was just the culture at the time. It wasn't good or evil - it just was...

[Sparko]

No big deal Tass, that was just the culture at the time. It wasn't good or evil - it just was...

Never ceases to amaze me how people who claim morals are just preferences or evolutionary adaptations keep trying to argue as if there is an objective good or evil we should agree on. They can't keep their story straight.

[Zymologist]

This was the Evangelical position too until recently.

Just repeat it until everyone else is too tired of your crap to call you on it, eh? An unusual strategy: we'll see how it plays out.

[seer]

Never ceases to amaze me how people who claim morals are just preferences or evolutionary adaptations keep trying to argue as if there is an objective good or evil we should agree on. They can't keep their story straight.

No, their God given intuition for universal moral truths keep peeking out...

[Tassman]

No big deal Tass, that was just the culture at the time. It wasn't good or evil - it just was...

It is always the "culture of the time" that determines our moral values. These values guide interpretation of the Bible.

No, their God given intuition for universal moral truths keep peeking out...

What's God got to do with it? The evolved instincts of altruism, empathy, and gratitude all underpin moral behaviour. They were built into us via natural selection because they are beneficial to the breeding and survival of our species as social animals.

[Tassman]

Just repeat it until everyone else is too tired of your crap to call you on it, eh? An unusual strategy: we'll see how it plays out.

No need to, the facts speak for themselves. "Prior to Roe v. Wade in 1973, evangelicals were, with a few notable exceptions, confused and uncertain about the question of abortion." So says: ‘Richard Albert Mohler Jr.,

https://www.onfaith.co/onfaith/2013/...al-issue/11238

‘Richard Albert Mohler Jr. is an American historical theologian and the ninth president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. He has been described as "one of America's most influential evangelicals". Wiki.