Abortion: Putting A Face On The Issue

Love, do you understand what a logical fallacy is?

Did you know you spend much time making such errors in logic?

This post of yours is just another example, let me point out the logical fallacy you make in this post...

Description of Ad Hominem
Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:


Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on person A.
Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

Example of Ad Hominem

Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong."
Dave: "Of course you would say that, you're a priest."
Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?"
Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that abortion is wrong. Further, you are just a lackey to the Pope, so I can't believe what you say."

So, based on your "they are going to do it anyway" argument-why have any laws at all? Honestly, everything can be broken down to privacy of personal choice.

Rape: There's been laws against rape for years, but every year thousands of men and women get raped. So why not make rape safer?

You could say, "I don't like rape, I think it's horrible. If it were up to me rape would be legal, but expensive, shameful and public to the point where teens would live in
mortal fear of being a rapist."

Well, now. The decision to rape is a private one. It's a personal matter and we don't need the government interferring. What we need is to make it safe, legal, and rare.

How do we do that?

We could pass out condoms and tranquilizers to rapists. We could teach victims to not fight back thus diminishing the possible physical harm done to both participants. And then, after the act has been committed we can provide counseling in hopes that the victim can move on with his/her life and that the rapist would hopefully see the error of his/her (but mostly his) way.

Can anyone else come up with some safer ways to commit other crimes so we can get rid of more laws?

How about drugs?
Murder?
Burglary?
Arson?

-Kiamat Dusk

That paper is an amazing piece of work. Well thought out, clear, and sums up many arguements. It should be required reading for further posting on the subject. Thank you for linking to it.

This is the silliest justification for making abortion illegal I think I've ever seen.

Actually, it was an attempt at reductio ad absurdum, however it made the assumption that rape and abortion are equally "bad". While for many people, this is the case; it is not univerally accepted to be the case, as clearly evidienced by the debate within this thread. As a result the argument fails.

Thank you telling me what that is called. I couldn't remember.

*giggles*

We keep hearing that abortion must be legal or it will be less safe. I'm wondering when we started allowing crimes to occur because the one committing the crime might be harmed if it's not legal.

Surely legalized prostitution (hiv tested) and drugs (clean needles and drugs) would make it safer on those breaking those laws.

Stealing a car would be safer if it was legal. No one would need to die to police chases gone awry.

Prostitution is legal in my state of Nevada. And yes, it is much, much safer than in states where it's unregulated and a 'bad no-no.' The prostitutes are safer and in far less danger of being beaten or murdered, the customers are much safer than if they had visited an unregulated prostitute who may have STDs, deadly or otherwise. It is safer all around, and it's stupid to keep it illegal in other states.

Great, what about stealing cars?

What about it? Are you really, honestly comparing abortion to stealing cars, or are you just far too emotional about the issue to see it clearly and be able to draw comparisons?

Let me ask you something, sincerely, Kevn. How many children have you adopted? How many pregnancies and births have you personally paid for? How many unwanted, but birthed children have you paid for schooling for? How about just sitting down with them a few times a week and asking them how school went?

Does the concern for a child's welfare always end at the birth of that child, or have you actually, ever DONE anything to help a child?

Please don't change the topic. The red herring doesn't win debates, it gives cover.

Now, Is it better to make stealing cars legal because the law against it is causing people to be killed? Not only the criminal, but the police and by-standers are dying. Shouldn't it be legalized?

I can answer that question.

You need to reread the thread title. The topic is abortion, and the oh-so-overwhelming concern for children. That other shit you mentioned IS the red herring. How long does your concern for the unborn children last? How long into their precious lives are you willing to care for them?

Now, please answer my questions. If the answer is, "I've never done one single thing to save a child that's already been born, aside from pay my taxes." then just say so.

abortion isn't a crime.

If the thread is abortion, why do you keep bringing up caring for the child after birth. You want to have it both ways.

Also, my argument isn't defeated by your demands of what I should or shouldn't be doing.

If you want to argue abortion must be legal to make it safe, the car stealing point fit perfectly. You may dislike it, but that is where your logic leads.

FYI, here is the fallacy:

Also Known as: Smoke Screen, Wild Goose Chase.

Description of Red Herring
A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:


Topic A is under discussion.
Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
Topic A is abandoned.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.

It was before it was legalized, so it would be safer, remember?

Translated.. you've never done one single thing to help any of these precious children after they've been born.

Kevn has never worked in the real world of child survival. He honestly has no idea.

Translated: Can't debate abortion, must bring up red herring to save face.

Ah, yes, because I support actually saving the child from death, I've "never worked in the real world of child survival" yeah, your debating skills amaze me.

night all, save the babies!

a) I would never waste my time "debating" you. That would require an actual basis for debate.

b) What I said is the truth. You have never worked in the world of child survival and you truly don't have any idea.

I only wish I could show you the things I have seen. It would make your little "abortion horror stories" seem like a Disney film.

Your refusal to answer simple questions about your own commitment to children has shown your position more clearly than a debate about abortion ever could. You don't want women to have abortions on principle, but you honestly don't give 2 shits about the unwanted and un-cared for babies that result from not having them.

You should be ashamed of yourself. Not only for doing NOTHING to help these children you plea for the lives of, but for trying to play high-school debate coach on an issue as deep and emotional as the lives of women and children.