Because they have been capable of feeling before, making it more than plausible to say that they have fulfilled the requirements to have implied rights to life due to being capable of consent at any point in their life. A fetus cannot have consent, and does not have the capacity to feel at all to begin with. Waiting for a bit will make them able to feel, yes, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it will happen, nor is future possibility applied to present possibility because that same logic could apply to sperm or earlier forms that are even further away from feeling, hence why I allow it up until the approximate time a fetus can feel pain, which is why I have few issues with an abortion ban at 15-24 weeks, because that’s a sizeable amount of time to allow the parent to make an informed decision before the fetus can feel pain, which would therein allow implied rights.
I'm sorry, did we logically establish that "Feeling" is what makes it wrong to murder people? I don't recall doing that... it seems to be one of the points in question...
@9CJ6CB61mo1MO
The capacity to feel pain, yes, it’s a factor, alongside being capable of thought, being fully born, and the necessity or wants of the parent.
Why is it a factor? You're begging the question again. That's what I want to know. I already am aware what you believe, so you don't have to tell me anymore. Just tell me the LOGICAL REASONS why you believe it. That's all I'm asking for.
@9CJ6CB61mo1MO
It’s a factor because pain is generally a negative emotion, it makes the situation worse when someone feels pain rather than when they don’t. If I got shot in the foot, I’d find it much more bearable if that was completely painless. It’s bad, but I’d probably be less mad that way, and I’d likely sue the person who shot my foot for less if I didn’t feel it at all. Pain adds to the immorality of the situation, lacking it makes it less horrible. The fact that I have, or am usually capable of, feeling and thinking is what allows me a large chunk of my own… Read more