05-16-2019, 07:49 PM
(05-16-2019, 07:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Only because 1 mean is possible. Brad presented a scenario where both were. And I thought his example of women actually trying to make their child disabled was corollary. We can award points in a debate and still not agree with the premise. In his way he made sense. We're Ok with killing it. but we'd most likely be opposed if there were a procedure where a DR could go in there and remove limbs at the mother's request.
As I said I find both to be repugnant regardless of the means
Arguing over "can someone do something that harms or destroys a fetus in them" is not the same as arguing over "Can someone have sex with someone if they know their offspring could inherit a genetic disorder".
And bringing up the latter in no means validates or defends using an absurd example for the former.
![[Image: ulVdgX6.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/ulVdgX6.jpg)
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)