I think you said “name one prochoicer who —- “. This was my one prochoicer 😂
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Conversation
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
18% of people who took this poll voted “yes”. It’s not just him.
1
1
Replying to
I'm willing to steelman this thing if yall are down for lots of twitter words
1
Replying to
Uh, "try to give the strongest possible argument for". Opposite of 'strawman.'
2
1
Replying to
OK cool!
So before I start I want to make it clear that I'm pretty sympathetic to the pro-life position, in general. I don't think yall are insane, or women-haters, or against rights. I myself used to protest abortion clinics. I think your viewpoint absolutely makes sense if-
1
1
Replying to
you follow certain assumptions. I don't want to come across as disrespecting your position. I'm going to present my (or a steelman of this) position not as an attack on you, but rather as an example of what happens if you tweak base assumptions that are *also* equally reasonable
2
1
Replying to
So, pro-life often operates on the base of "ending a human life is wrong." This makes sense and is very useful for most things. Ofc we have exceptions - war, self defense. Maybe you're ok with euthanasia? capital punishment? The law isn't absolute. I know there's good reasons
Replying to
for the exceptions, but my point here is just that the 'rule' *requires* exceptions in order to function.
Human life is also a kind of weird boundary. Even when I was super pro-life I felt some kind of intuitive stretch when identifying "life at conception" as a human.
2
Replying to
and again - I know you can logically argue this, e.g. "Human is individual living thing with dna and fetuses are different dna from parents". But the first cell union thing isn't recognizeably human to me and I suspect to you either. If hypothetically, deep into the future, we
2
Show replies