Erroneous Precepts of Abortion Opponents

This is a Public Domain document.
It may be freely copied and posted anywhere.

There are a number of erroneous fundamental precepts held by abortion opponents. This is just a quick overview; for the full details on why the precepts are erroneous, see the main “Refutations” document. Any comments about this list will be deleted if it appears that the authors of those comments have not studied the main document.

  • “‘Human’ and ‘person’ are the same thing.” –NOPE, not if any non-human intelligent beings entities exist, somewhere in the Universe. Prejudice is Stupid.

  • “There is such a thing as ‘intrinsic value’.” –NOPE, because there is no evidence to support that claim. ALL valuations are actually Subjective, Relative, and Arbitrary.

  • “There is such a thing as ‘intrinsic right to life’.” –NOPE, as any unarmed abortion opponent will soon discover, upon encountering a hungry man-eating tiger. An “intrinsic” property is something that is UNIVERSALLY recognize-able!

  • “Human life matters.” –NOPE; the universe can get along just fine without us, and it cares nothing about our egotistical opinions of ourselves.

  • “There are plenty of resources.” –NOPE, at least not for an endlessly growing population.

  • “A human and a human being are always the same thing.” –NOPE, partly because of the well-documented existence of “hydatidiform moles“; not even abortion opponents are so stupid as to call those 100% human entities “human beings”. Also, there exist brain-dead adult humans on full life-support –and for them, the doctors and the scientists and the lawyers all agree that the person is DEAD. A human being is certainly a person, but in each of these cases a Death Certificate is filled out. So even though the human body is still very much alive (except for the 3-pound brain), it is Officially a corpse, not a “human being”/person.

  • “The word ‘person’ refers to a legal fiction, only.” –NOPE, because scientists are actively studying the topic in terms of Objectively Verifiable Data. Scientists started with the simple preliminary Fact that for thousands of years, humans have been imagining non-human person-class entities (from angels to aliens). Then they ask a very simple question, “Regardless of how possible types of persons might differ from each other, what can they all have in common, allowing them to be distinguished from ordinary animals?” As a result of their research, certain types of entities might in the not-distant future be widely recognized as qualifying as persons.

  • “Any human body qualifies as a person.” –NOPE, as any reasonably well-educated human can prove by Answering this Question: If you were visiting a modern well-equipped medical lab, and some madman with a machete cut your head off in an attempt to murder you, but rescuers arrived in time, would you want them to save your headless human body, or save your severed head, to save YOU-the-person? Because of facts about the first human head transplant, scheduled for about 2017, we have the technology to keep either a headless body or a severed head alive. Most abortion opponents don’t like that Question because it proves they actually do know what a person truly is, but don’t want to admit the fact that they know what a person truly is: A person is a mind, not a body.

  • “Unborn humans are people.” –NOPE, because the Constitution requires all persons be counted every ten years in the Census (except for Indians not taxed), and unborn humans have never been counted in any Census. The Founding Fathers set the Legal Precedent with respect to that in the very first Census, in 1790, and in more than 220 years since, unborn humans have continued to be ignored, just like other nonpersons (such as rats) are ignored by the Census. But you can bet that if extraterrestrial alien beings immigrated to the USA, they would get counted in the Census!
Meanwhile, scientific studies about persons show that plenty of ordinary animals, like pigs, are much smarter than unborn humans. We know this because we can test more-developed infant humans, and they always perform very poorly in various tests of mental abilities. Thus, for all who insist that unborn humans qualify as persons, those insisters should be even-more-strongly insisting that pigs and other ordinary animals be granted person status, too! But instead all the do is spout Stupidly Prejudiced blather about the word “human”, entirely ignoring the fact that according to all the scientific data ever gathered, persons are minds, not bodies. Tsk, tsk!

  • “Unborn humans are babies/children.” –NOPE, except in the imagination of the masses, and the dictionaries derived from those imaginations. Entirely because unborn humans have attached placentas as vital organs, while ordinary babies and children don’t.

  • “‘Human rights’ is a concept that should be applied to the unborn.” –NOPE, except to the Stupidly Prejudiced. Remember that more than 50% of human egg-fertilizations Naturally fail to survive, despite any imagined “rights”. Meanwhile, the concept of “person rights” can equitably apply all across the Universe, for uncounted numbers of intelligent beings, regardless of their appearance or manner of existence.

  • “There is no significant difference between an about-to-be-born human and a recently-born human.” –NOPE, because unborn human organism includes a placenta as a vital organ, which works to steal nutrients from another human’s body, dump toxic biowastes into that other human’s body, plus infuse addictive and mind-altering substances into that other humans’s body. The recently-born human is very different!

  • “Unborn humans are innocent.” –NOPE, not in the slightest, with respect to their actions.

  • “Sex obligates in a particular way.” –NOPE, not so long as creative people are allowed to destroy their creations.

  • “Deliberate abortion has no equivalent in Nature.” –NOPE, since “fetal resorption” exists, and a bird will sometimes eject a viable egg from its nest.

  • “Potential persons should be treated like actual persons.” –NOPE, not unless potentially-dead abortion opponents want to be treated like actually-dead abortion opponents (get embalmed and buried).

  • “Abortion only prevents positive outcomes.” –NOPE, since potential serial killers get aborted, right along with potential saints. Not to mention, why should the opinion of an abortion opponent, regarding the concept of “positive outcome”, be superior to the opinion of a woman seeking an abortion?

  • “Unborn humans are members of a unique kind of entity, capable of becoming persons.” –IRRELEVANT, since that focuses on the “potential” and not on the “actual”. Plus, the notion can be reduced to an absurdity. For example, when the goal of modern “stem cell” research has been achieved, every cell in the body that possesses a full set of human DNA would qualify as the kind of entity capable of becoming a person. Also, the precept
ignores the future development of of True Artificial Intelligences –an appropriately upgrade-able desktop computer would qualify as an entity capable of becoming a person!). Next, when “regeneration technology” is perfected, any accident that cuts a human into two or more pieces would yield pieces such that each piece would qualify as an entity capable of becoming a person (just put them into individual regeneration vats, and see!). Finally, there is the fact that the precept is exactly as “true” for the offspring of intelligent “R-strategists” as it is “true” for “K-strategists” like humans, yet most R-strategist offspring MUST die (the precept would insist on providing K-strategy care for trillions of R-strategy offspring, a thing that is literally physically impossible).
As a result, it is more appropriate to think about minds than mere physical bodies, when it comes to talking about personhood. A True Artificial Intelligence is no such thing unless it has a person-class mind. An intelligent extraterrestrial alien being can only be identified as such through the mental abilities it can exhibit. The brain-dead on life-support can have their “plugs” pulled exactly because their minds are dead. So, since cells having human DNA are mindless, as is an upgrade-able desktop computer, or any chopped-off body-part except the head, or any young-enough offspring of either intelligent K-strategists or intelligent R-strategists, all those entities are not persons, and need not be treated right-now like persons, any more than abortion opponents need to be right-now treated like corpses.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s