Vox Day & co. don't get satire or basic decency | Preliator pro Causa
http://preliatorcausa.blogspot.com/2012/10/27-vox-day-co-dont-get-satire-or-basic-decency-3892.html
So, an underformed fetus is considered a "human being" now? I'd like to know what criteria Vox is basing that on. It can't be the physiology; most abortions take place before the fetus looks like anything more than a mutated gerbil. It can't be neurological or psychological attributes, either; most abortions happen long before the neural pathways necessary for any thought at all are even formed. It can't be the mere presence of Homo sapiens DNA; by that logic, any rock you spit or piss on would immediately be considered "human" by virtue of possessing the human genome. And any talk about "souls" or other oogie-boogie silliness would just defeat the argument altogether.
So, really, Vox, what makes a fetus not merely a developing human, but a full-fledged "human being" deserving of the same rights and protections granted to walking, talking and thinking persons? Be specific.
---SPSmith
No comments:
Post a Comment