Read on Twitter
the corollary to this is that the "scientific" case against abortion is one of the greatest intellectual swindles ever carried out against the american public https://twitter.com/fedtanyl/status/1311689542538276865
if you have a moral objection to abortion, stop pretending it has anything to do with (e.g.) DNA and admit it's because
1. you think humans have souls (and hence moral value) from conception.
2. you think abortion is icky.
both are honest, but neither is particularly "scientific"
1. you think humans have souls (and hence moral value) from conception.
2. you think abortion is icky.
both are honest, but neither is particularly "scientific"
fertilized eggs don't do any of the things that could plausibly convey moral value, such as form memories, have experiences, or feel pain: they don't start to do these things until late in development (nociception, for example, starts around week 20-24, maybe later).
i've had people unironically tell me a zygote's "unique DNA" gives it moral value. identical twins don't have "unique DNA". do they have less moral value? sperm and eggs have "unique DNA". for that matter, so do tumors. do they have moral value?
i'd really love to see the convoluted ontology that gets you from "the DNA in this particular cell is sufficiently different from its environment but also falls under what scientists would classify as 'diploid human'" to "this cell has moral value equivalent to you or me"
