0:00 Intro
20:27 David-WA | Abortion in the Future
32:45 Andrew-ME | Only God Decides the Value of Human Life
58:53 Jay-FL | The Is/Ought Gap
1:07:09 Sal-OH | Abortion or Adoption?
1:27:42 Outro
SHOW NOTES
David’s up first, he supports abortion rights, but has a few what-ifs for our hosts to ponder. Is it ethical for parents to keep aborting zygotes until they get the perfect mix of chromosomes they’re seeking? Short answer, yes. Clumps of cells aren’t people, and the person with the uterus has the call. Does this decision approach eugenics? Not really. Keep asking questions David, this was an interesting chat.
Average Andrew has beef with our host’s determination of the intrinsic value of human life. His god assigns value, and our subjective morality can lead to genocide! Like the thing your god did multiple times in his manifesto Andrew? Yes, we want to avoid that. Our hosts illustrate the superiority of secular humanism using the example of euthanasia. Sucks to be dead, but sucks more to be suffering.
Our third caller is Jay, he wants to talk about the is/ought gap from the previous caller, and how that affects our use of the word “arbitrary.” Our hosts draw a metaphor with the rules of gaming, be it chess, volleyball, or anything else. The people playing have to agree on the rules before we can start playing.
Sal wants to talk more about how the rights of a fetus balance out with the rights of the person carrying it. Specifically, how adoption as an option might be a better choice than abortion. In a perfect world, sure, unwanted pregnancies might result in a loving adopted family, but this doesn’t get us past the right of the person with the uterus to decide. We discuss the flaws of the current adoption system before we move on.
No comments:
Post a Comment