View Poll Results: Please Read the First Post

Voters
44. You may not vote on this poll
  • The woman in fact pattern one

    10 22.73%
  • The store owner in fact pattern two

    9 20.45%
  • They both have the right to kill

    17 38.64%
  • Neither has the right to kill

    8 18.18%
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 53 of 53

Thread: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

  1. #51
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by atrasicarius View Post
    The difference is, killing the guy is homicide and killing the zygote isn't.
    In this context, it's merely a legal distinction that really has no bearing on who - morally - has the stronger case.
    Last edited by StillBallin75; 09-10-11 at 03:08 PM.

  2. #52
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by BillDaley View Post
    I voted no one has the right to kill - first of all the baby isn't part of the woman's body, it's INSIDE her body (if I sent a wrecking crew to demolish a house with people inside and they died, I couldn't use the argument they were part of the house and in my way) with how far science has come in the last 40 years there is no more denying the baby is alive and human. And in the second one there was no threat made on the owner's life, therefore he has no right to kill either.
    Your analogy, a woman’s body to a house, begs to be extended ”if I sent a wrecking crew to demolish a house with people inside and they died, I couldn't use the argument they were part of the house and in my way.” So the people inside the house don’t have to leave. It is now their house and you no longer have any rights to the house for your purposes, but you must continue to maintain the house so the people in the house can have everything they should have. And this is at your expense and your risk. Yup, your analogy models this case very well.

  3. #53
    Advisor GreenvilleGrows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    My version of reality
    Last Seen
    10-05-12 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    566

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by OhIsee.Then View Post
    Your analogy, a woman’s body to a house, begs to be extended ”if I sent a wrecking crew to demolish a house with people inside and they died, I couldn't use the argument they were part of the house and in my way.” So the people inside the house don’t have to leave. It is now their house and you no longer have any rights to the house for your purposes, but you must continue to maintain the house so the people in the house can have everything they should have. And this is at your expense and your risk. Yup, your analogy models this case very well.
    Actually, the poll posed the comparison of the woman's body to a house. Basically, the question is "do you have the right to kill whatever you find in your own personal property?"

    I'd like to compare the body to a boat. I'm on a 9 month sailing trip on a small vessle to another continent. I find a 1-year old who's been left there without my permission. The infant is going to inconvenience me greatly (crying, hassle, food, fellow shipmates making fun of me for having to care for it). And, while the chance is very slim, the child could put my life at risk at some time if I want to keep it safe (not yet, but it could happen on a long trip). I think everyone would agree that I'm completely in the right to throw the 1 year old to the sharks, correct? I mean, what kind of fool would suggest that I have an obligation to try to get the kid to safety?

    I don't say any of this to try to prove that a mom shouldn't have a choice (not the appropriate poll). But, the idea that the rights and discussion considered with abortion revolve around property rights doesn't hold up under meager scrutiny - it's only supported by the most militant pro-choice supporter (oh, yes, including the Supreme Court).

    If you want to say it's not life - that makes sense. If you want to say life itself isn't particularly important, that could make sense, too. But to say that abortion is the same as an eviction is ridiculous (my humble opinion).
    The US is an odd ship. The captain yells out when he sees obtacles , but 535 individual propellers do the steering.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •