Conversation

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Not really? My mind doesn't change, but it does freak me out a little bit how good people were at rationalizing things then (and by extension, probably today too)
5
51
Replying to
Like, pro-slavery arguments were 'sane'-sounding. Most of what I've read relies on two main points - 1., if you're gonna be anti-slavery you have to change how you treat women/children/animals which is absurd, and 2., we're actively helping the enslaved, this is best for them
3
18
This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
Replying to
Ah I understand. Still though, you could take that exact same argument and reverse it - you're arguing for the evil of "removing agency from a woman's body" and everything you say about it is just rationalizing.
4
This Tweet is from a suspended account. Learn more
Replying to
Right. I mean, I used to believe this - I used to protest planned parenthood even. I think your view is a logical extension of some type of philosophy about 'murder' and 'person' and 'rights'. I think the issue lies in the underlying philosophy, not in the logical extension.
Replying to
As in, it feels really weird to say that upon the moment of conception, the thing is a full person with the right to live. Like, there's plenty of animals with way more cognitive capacity and ability to feel pain that pro-life and pro-choice people alike are fine with killing.
2
5
Replying to
We seem to collectively have an idea of 'right to llive' with something something humanity, or pain-feelingness, or 'surviving-ness. It's pretty unclear where the border is. The religious pro-life view imbues humanity with Special Soul-ness from the get-go, which is complicated
1
3
Show replies