close

Discovered in

Densin

Densin
460 Favs

Find other sites about

Related Sites

  • False Premise: Human Life is Sacred. | Psychology Today

    From the page: "Let's just examine the premise that abortion is wrong because human life is sacred. To believe this, one really has to ignore just about every aspect of human life. If human life is so sacred, why not protest avoidable poverty, tens of thousands of unnecessary infant... more

    Reviewed by thisismebecca Jun 02, 04:36pm ( 40 reviews ) • psychologytoday.com

    25K views
  • Showing 27 of 40
  • Reviews of the site
  • Join StumbleUpon or login to add a review! default avatar

  • Rated by rumbaguy on Jun 06, 7:04pm

    Makes sense to me. Either all human life is sacred or it's not. You can't pick and choose.

  • Reviewed by brentg426 on Jun 06, 2:09pm

    sick of abortion and gay marriage shit. abortion will continue to be legal for a long time and gays got a few states they can get married in, california not being one of them. end of discussion. no more. lets get to the real issues, not this bullshit distraction.

  • Rated by truetool on Jun 06, 8:46am

    The "sacredness" of human life is debatable and is to a large extent influenced by a person's cultural upbringing and the religious philosophy he follows. Justifying abortion under the pretext that kids in developing countries need to be fed does not make much sense. Following this logic, one might conclude that the world should stop doing anything till every person on earth is free from poverty. Yes, kids in Guatemala need to be fed, but that does not give the author the license to kill unborns in your own country. Besides, his rejection of sacredness of human life implies that we should stop all humanitarian work and start justifying our ill-considered logic through blogs as idiotic as his.

  • Rated by rajerino on Jun 04, 9:58am

    word

  • Rated by Xzizor on Jun 04, 7:53am

    These are the weakest arguments I've ever heard. This author doesn't seem to understand anything about the human concepts of justice or of the philosophy of human rights. He needs to study the Enlightenment and crack a few philosophy books. I' pretty sure I wrote better arguments when I was twelve. EDIT: I'm completely atheist, and support abortion rights. But the foundation of democracy, and our nation, is that human beings are "special" (or "sacred" in a humanistic way)....this is the entire basis of all government! Without this notion, there exists no purpose behind protecting rights at all, or of helping anyone, or of progress. The nihilistic can of worms this author is opening is completely useless. Furthermore, if human beings are not treated as "special" insomuch as that they can make their own rational choices and are responsible for their actions, then there is no basis for the legitimacy of any ruler (because how can we trust that he is making decisions any better than a grapefruit?) or society (because how can we maintain agreements if people are not expected to uphold them?). The reason the author is wrong is not because he is not logical, it is because his idea has been debated at its roots for thousands of years, and much more intelligent people have laid the groundwork for moving forward from the debate. Not only that, but he conflates disparate relationships. For the sake of argument, murdering a specific human being by active choice, and being the indirect cause of a non-specific human death by choice are fundamentally different. Just look up some philosophers! Also, the pursuit of justice is not about fairness and equal response (that would be revenge, not justice), it is about maintaining the legitimacy of power. If a powerful entity charged with protecting justice can't do so convincingly, then the people will (and have a right to) create one that will. This is a foundation of the United States. As you can see, the problems with this dumb author are way too philosophical to address properly on StumbleUpon, which is why he just needs to go back to college and try again.

  • Reviewed by scott-torino on Jun 04, 6:52am

    Dear Shit for Brains. Your right human life is not sacred. So why do you just take your own. Why doesn't the Gautamalan govt. fix the situation in Gautamala? I on the other hand pay to taxes in order to ensure that impoverished Americans eat and drink clean water. I also give to not for profits, run a not for profit, and give to homeless beggars despite my misgivings about doing so. I am doing everything I can to help as many people as I can, but charity always starts at home. If you can't help yourself, how can you help anyone else? I do not condone murdering abortion doctors. I do not condone murdering anyone: if we do not act as if all human life is sacred what is to stop us from destroying one another on a whim.

  • Rated by truemper on Jun 04, 6:39am

    Straw man. Try and understand someone's views before you devote the time to arguing against them.

  • Rated by xcrissxcrossx on Jun 04, 6:05am

    I agree completely, and not one person that gave a thumbs down actually gave any reason to why it is "illogical." It is a completely logical idea.