Shamar is a user on mastodon.social. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse.
If you don't, you can sign up here.
Did you know: until the early 80s, the religious position was that life began at birth, and specifically with the newborn's first (unaided) breath.
It wasn't until the Right realized that the sexual revolution wasn't just a phase and needed a new way to limit the sexual agency and freedom of people who weren't cis men that the current "life begins at conception" rhetoric settled in.
@Shamar@noelle Would that mean that: - if another species was equally intelligent to humans, but its DNA was very different from that of a human, it wouldn't be a person? - if a non-biological creature, eg. an electronic one, was as intelligent as humans, it wouldn't be a person? - if you uploaded your mind to a computer, the copy of your mind wouldn't be a person?
@Shamar@Wolf480pl@noelle The ugly truth is that a human can indeed become something that is no longer truly a person. The even uglier is that a fetus can have genetic defects that would just cause them and/or others suffering. If you can detect these defects soon after conception then it is acceptable to choose not to bring such a child into the world. 1/2
@Shamar@grainloom@Wolf480pl@noelle I believe this views are based on the fact that humans are very expensive to produce. It takes ~20 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to grow a self-sustaining and contributing individual in western countries. I suppose this could change some day, if we could create or copy human beings at will. This would also make murder less of a crime and more like a minor inconvenience.
@Shamar@newt@grainloom@Wolf480pl@noelle this is a nonsense. Abortion and other forms of birth control are a technical progression, not capitalist per se. They simply replace the previously-widespread (and pre-capitalist) practice of infanticide with something tidier.
As for the rest, you're imposing a duty to reproduce, not protecting a right to. Reproductive choice is enhanced by technology, but more so by the end of notions like you or I deciding whether someone must bear a child
@Shamar@newt@grainloom@Wolf480pl@noelle fortunately, the idea that a fetus has moral equivalence is losing favour everywhere. This makes your nightmare scenarios less likely, as we can focus on the real distinctions between aggregates of human meat with moral standing, and those without.
Although we shouldn't make the mistake of thinking that bigotry needs an internally-consistent worldview to thrive. It does perfectly fine without one.
@Shamar@newt@grainloom@Wolf480pl@noelle sexual control is distinct from reproductive control, and many people do not have it. So yes, abstinence is not 100% effective. But it's by the by, since "oops" abortions have moral equivalence. There's no reason to avoid abortions in general.
I am definitely human meat, just like an embryo. Being human meat does not generate moral standing - that way lies absurdity, and as noted at the very start of this thread, is a modern invention
Noëlle the 8-Bit🏳️🌈🎄
abortion Show more
@Shamar @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle sexual control is distinct from reproductive control, and many people do not have it. So yes, abstinence is not 100% effective. But it's by the by, since "oops" abortions have moral equivalence. There's no reason to avoid abortions in general.
I am definitely human meat, just like an embryo. Being human meat does not generate moral standing - that way lies absurdity, and as noted at the very start of this thread, is a modern invention