🔥 Popular | Latest

Apparently, Children, and Life: kristenmastora7 gallium-knight: Here's a test: I'm holding a baby in one hand and a petri dish holding a fetus in the other. I'm going to drop one. You chose which. If you really truly believe a fetus is the same thing as a baby, it should be impossible for you to decide. You should have to flip a coin, that's how impossible the decision should be. Shot in the dark, you saved the baby. Because you're aware there's a diference. Now admit it woah. <p><a href="https://prolifeproliberty.tumblr.com/post/162788244517/kelincihutan-embrace-your-insanity-true-is" class="tumblr_blog">prolifeproliberty</a>:</p><blockquote> <p><a href="http://kelincihutan.tumblr.com/post/155309422362/embrace-your-insanity-true-is-true-this-is" class="tumblr_blog">kelincihutan</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://embrace-your-insanity.tumblr.com/post/120890326550/true-is-true" class="tumblr_blog">embrace-your-insanity</a>:</p> <blockquote><p>True is true.</p></blockquote> <p>This is such bullshit.</p> <p>First off, OP has apparently never heard of the word “triage.”  Now, that word is usually used in a medical context, but it actually applies to any situation where a person has to choose to save one life at the expense of another.  Cops and firefighters have to do this too, sometimes.  Let me demonstrate.</p> <p>Imagine a burning building.  There is a child in one room where the door is behind a fallen beam.  In another room is an adult, unconscious.  You are a firefighter.  You can easily reach the adult.  It will take you at least ten minutes to reach the child.  If you get the adult out, you <i>will</i> save their life but the child <i>will</i> die.  If you attempt to reach the child, the adult <i>will</i> die and you and the child might also die.  You must choose who to save.<br/></p> <p>Awful, right?</p> <p>But, despite this being a horrible decision, it is not an impossible one.  Not because adults are more valuable human beings than children, but because in a situation like this one (and these kinds of things happen in real life, unfortunately), it is possible–important, even–to make a decision that will save the lives you are able to save.  That does not mean you are assigning more value to one person over the other.</p> <p>Second, OP has also apparently never understood the words “coercion,” “duress,” or “hostage taking.”  If OP is holding an infant in one hand, a fetus in the other, and threatening to kill one of them if I don’t do something about it, my decision is not a free one.  <b><i>The OP is a murderer, a hostage-taker, and is responsible for the whole situation.</i></b>  They created the situation, they are the ones at fault if either the infant or the fetus die.  They are the aggressor, they are the one threatening to kill people.  My actions, whatever they may be, are taken in response to them.</p> <p>Even if the OP ever acted out this fantasy, my choice wouldn’t mean I viewed infants or fetuses as morally different from one another.  It would mean OP is a terrorist.<br/></p> </blockquote> <p>Also, if a fetus (a preborn human 8 weeks from conception or later) is in a Petri dish, it is likely already dead. A zygote or blastocyst, maybe, if the right conditions are met in the dish, could still be saved. But OP clearly shows an embarrassing lack of understanding of prenatal development.</p> <p>Fetus is not a catch-all term for preborn humans. It’s a specific stage of human development, preceded by embryo and followed by neonate (colloquially known as “infant” or “newborn”). </p> <p>There is nothing wrong with choosing to save one life rather than letting both die. There IS something wrong with intentionally killing a human being when nobody has to die.</p> </blockquote> <p>*posits a ridiculous hypothetical that shows an embarrassing lack of scientific knowledge* </p><p>&ldquo;Checkmate, pro-lifers!&rdquo;</p>