|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:52 pm
So I've seen this argument many times while debating on this website which I moderate... and honestly it annoys me because they call the fetus, an innocent, unknowing human being a PARASITE!
Why would you even think, so we were all parasites before we were born?
In short... I would like some help arguing it off, I know how to, but it'd be a logical fallacy...
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 5:39 pm
My breastfeeding sister calls my nephew a leech but in the most loving way possible.
People who say that don't see a fetus as a person. If everyone who was pro-choice valued a fetus the same way they do an infant, there would be a lot less people supporting abortion. Not completely, but there'd be a definite drop.
It's easy to argue off by simply stating that scientifically a fetus is not a parasite. The relationship is arguably parasitic but it could be commensalism or mutualism as well. Regardless, a parasite must be a different species from the host. Call them out on using emotional appeals and avoid using emotional appeals yourself (like the word innocent, though a fetus is certainly an unknowing human with no control over its situation).
It's nice to disassociate and dehumanize what you are about to kill or support killing; it's a time-tested strategy that allows humans to feel perfectly fine about harming others because "they're not really human." To call a fetus a parasite is just an emotional tactic meant to demonize a fetus and victimize a woman, to take the entire burden of her situation and choices off of her by pretending it is akin to catching a disease. The poor dear just couldn't help it, that parasite is attacking her!
It's pretty much one of the most idiotic arguments on the books, not to mention the misogynistic undertones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Haha, I concur 100%... honestly, the definition they give often can apply to those who are paralyzed, or even a child. You know, I was talking with my father about this... I really do not see how they cannot view it as an equal. Usually my "logical fallacy" I get caught using is Appeal to Authority... it consists of the following Quote: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Then I go on to say that using our English knowledge Men becomes Mankind becomes Humankind Human is defined by the DNA, as any other way to define it could lead us to be the same as another animal. Therefore, since all humankind, or mankind, or men, are given these inalienable rights, then a fetus, with human DNA is given the right to this as well. Of course I know realize that was completely off topic. But, anyways, yes, the paralyzed human, or child is what I usually use to fight it off, but I'm not sure, I swear it's like we go from one story to another with Pro-choicers... they won't stick to the one argument, they'll change it when I start to win, for example PL: Abortion is Murder, as all humans are equal PC: A fetus is a parasite, not a human PL: Define parasite: PC: *defines* PL: So what about children and dependents? PC: The mother deserves a right as it is her body PL: o.0;; ... *thought to self* What does that have to do with my question? It's honestly quite annoying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 7:30 pm
Oh yeah. It's why I quit debating a long time ago. It always goes in this spiral. Where a week later, you're arguing with the same arguments you started with, and it just starts again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 7:34 pm
It's a horrible spiral of demise, and to mean, it seems as if some logical fallacy would prevent it, but whenever I pull the "Red Herring" card, they deny it, then start somewhere else, yet when I make a mistake with a fallacy it's the death penalty for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 7:38 pm
Well honestly, I don't use fallacies. They're silly and typically are just a way to ignore what your opponent is saying in debate, and saying they're wrong because of some perceived fallacy; And often they don't even know how fallacies work. I've had people basically say I was building a strawman because I disagree with them. And I've had people call Godwin's law on me more times than I can count because of reasonable comparisons of abortion to the holocaust.
So I don't use them, and I ignore them when other people use them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 7:48 pm
xd Well that one's easy. "Huh. No mention of the word 'Women' here. I suppose I can kill you?" Except that the Declaration of Independence is not a legal document as such, more of a historical document. The phrase comes almost directly from John Locke, a philosopher (I believe he was Jefferson's contemporary, but I'm rusty on history). While philosophically that argument can be made, a fetus isn't protected usually. Sometimes it is, like the third trimester. Easy to get around as long as you can find a doctor willing to do it that far along, but still.
It is annoying. And I've found that with most people on Gaia it just keeps going like that, but there are some people who actually listen and actually debate. If someone's a waste of time, there's no shame is stating, "You won't answer my questions, you won't interact with me, you keep changing the subject, and I'm not going to waste my time. If you'd like to actually discuss this, I'll be happy to, but until then I'd rather talk to other people who will." To which they will scream, "You're running away!" but anyone who's actually reading it and isn't already so far gone that they would think negatively of you anyway will see that you're just refusing to let them continue the cycle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:25 pm
lymelady xd Well that one's easy. "Huh. No mention of the word 'Women' here. I suppose I can kill you?" Except that the Declaration of Independence is not a legal document as such, more of a historical document. The phrase comes almost directly from John Locke, a philosopher (I believe he was Jefferson's contemporary, but I'm rusty on history). While philosophically that argument can be made, a fetus isn't protected usually. Sometimes it is, like the third trimester. Easy to get around as long as you can find a doctor willing to do it that far along, but still. It is annoying. And I've found that with most people on Gaia it just keeps going like that, but there are some people who actually listen and actually debate. If someone's a waste of time, there's no shame is stating, "You won't answer my questions, you won't interact with me, you keep changing the subject, and I'm not going to waste my time. If you'd like to actually discuss this, I'll be happy to, but until then I'd rather talk to other people who will." To which they will scream, "You're running away!" but anyone who's actually reading it and isn't already so far gone that they would think negatively of you anyway will see that you're just refusing to let them continue the cycle. @I.Am. --- I don't try to, I don't even realize what most Logical Fallacies are until they are called on me, I'm not educated well in the area of debate, although I am the leader of the school's new debate team... too bad it's my senior year @Lymelady --- Well, a lot of times their excuse is the "pursuit of happiness" when I get argued with... but yeah, you're right ^.^
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 6:13 am
Sooooo...my little unborn sister is a parasite...or a leech.
I define this is as untrue. Even my stepmother (who is the pregnant one) is a pro-choice, but she would scould anyone that said that. Anyone that says a baby is a leech is a leech-unless they don't understand(like a baby or maybe someone mentally retarded).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 2:55 pm
Ridiculous. Parasites are not intentionally concepted. Babies are, in fact, a choice... you can choose to have sex or not. After that, it isn't a choice. It's a life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:09 pm
Rainbow Field Mouse So I've seen this argument many times while debating on this website which I moderate... and honestly it annoys me because they call the fetus, an innocent, unknowing human being a PARASITE! Why would you even think, so we were all parasites before we were born? In short... I would like some help arguing it off, I know how to, but it'd be a logical fallacy... They think that because they do use and depends on the women's body in order to survive (having the placenta attached to the uterus and having oxygen and nutrition brought to them though that and the umbilical cord and the waste taken out also). It's much easier for people to see it as a parasite then a human when they support, had or planning to have an abortion (which why people cry emotional ploy when someone says baby). I suggest using a medical dictionary and explaining everying, including the different between an actual devolping human being and a real parasite (worms, which is a totally different species and always harmful and dangerous when inside your body with no benefits or reason that we should let them live inside us). I would say if we can't call it an unborn baby then they can't say parasite as that isn't the correct medical term for fetus and also messes with peoples emotions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:44 pm
sachiko_sohma Rainbow Field Mouse So I've seen this argument many times while debating on this website which I moderate... and honestly it annoys me because they call the fetus, an innocent, unknowing human being a PARASITE! Why would you even think, so we were all parasites before we were born? In short... I would like some help arguing it off, I know how to, but it'd be a logical fallacy... They think that because they do use and depends on the women's body in order to survive (having the placenta attached to the uterus and having oxygen and nutrition brought to them though that and the umbilical cord and the waste taken out also). It's much easier for people to see it as a parasite then a human when they support, had or planning to have an abortion (which why people cry emotional ploy when someone says baby). I suggest using a medical dictionary and explaining everying, including the different between an actual devolping human being and a real parasite (worms, which is a totally different species and always harmful and dangerous when inside your body with no benefits or reason that we should let them live inside us). I would say if we can't call it an unborn baby then they can't say parasite as that isn't the correct medical term for fetus and also messes with peoples emotions. Precisely. Thank you. smile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
