I've been debating the issue of abortion on this forum and on others. There is one argument that I encountered that seems to be the strongest argument from the pro-life side. Here's an excerpt from a member on another forum:
This comes after I acknowledged that a woman's fetus is a human life...(convo took place on DebatingChristianity.com)
A similar point was made by conservative commentator, Ben Shapiro:
For debate:
1. What is your view on the above argument? Do you agree or disagree with it?
2. If you disagree, where do you draw the line? When does a human life have moral value or when does it not have it?
This comes after I acknowledged that a woman's fetus is a human life...(convo took place on DebatingChristianity.com)
RightReason said:Why? Like you said, if we recognize it for what it is – a human life, how can you say it has less value than a human outside of the womb, just because it isn’t yet out of the womb? That is suggesting the value of a human being is based on what he/she can do or “bring to the table” so to speak and not simply inherent in being a human being. It is precisely the kind of thinking that says grandpa is of less value than young strapping Johnny because he’s past his prime. It’s the same kind of mindset that says paraplegic Joe has less value than the football player Joe. That smarter people have greater value than someone with a lower IQ.
A similar point was made by conservative commentator, Ben Shapiro:
So the real question is, where do you draw the line? So are you going to draw the line at the heartbeat? Because it’s very hard to draw the line at the heartbeat because there are people who are adults who are alive because of a pacemaker, and they need some sort of outside force generating their heartbeat.
Okay, are you going to do it based on brain function? Well, what about people who are in a coma? Should we just kill them? Right, the problem is anytime you draw any line other than the inception of the child, you end up drawing a false line that can also be applied to people who are adults. So either human life has intrinsic value or it doesn’t. And I think we both agree that adult human life has intrinsic value. Can we start from that premise?
For debate:
1. What is your view on the above argument? Do you agree or disagree with it?
2. If you disagree, where do you draw the line? When does a human life have moral value or when does it not have it?