Rape and morality in popular media

[MFauli]

Moderator note:
This post and the next six below it were copy/pasted from a recent discussion on another anime thread.

The gist of prior leadup is something like this:

-This character thought to be evil isn't all that evil.
-Sounds like they started off with good intentions and then did terrible things in the end.
-That's still evil.
-Evil is a subjective social construct. Some stuff is just immoral. (insert cloning, abortion)
-Immorality is a social construct
-Abortion is evil.

Note that the summary above is to provide context and not necessarily an accurate encapsulation of the respective poster's views.

-Buff.
-(Remainder of this post authored by MFauli)

----------------------------------------------------


Well, this is majorly offtopic imo, but abortion is pretty clear cut evil if you don't bullshit your way through it.

Unless you kill the zygote or later on the fetus, it will become a human being, accidents/diseases aside. Pro-choicers only get to claim moral superiority because they choose to ignore that fact, focus on societal issues (women's rights) over biological facts (the "cell clump" as they love to call it is a growing human being and you choose to kill it) and silence every opposition by screaching "misogynist!".

You can ignore all religious bs in all of that. From a scientific pov, pro-choice is evil, the villains being feminists here. But that can't be said in today's toxic society, so whatever.

[DarthEnderX]

You can ignore all religious bs in all of that. From a scientific pov, pro-choice is evil

From a purely scientific view, masturbating is evil. Cause every time you do it, you're killing millions of sperm that could have grown into human beings.

[MFauli]

From a purely scientific view, masturbating is evil. Cause every time you do it, you're killing millions of sperm that could have grown into human beings.

No, they couldn't. A sperm by itself would under no circumstances grow into a human being.

[DarthEnderX]

No, they couldn't. A sperm by itself would under no circumstances grow into a human being.

It would if you saved it and found a viable egg for it.

If you're not doing that for each of them, you're killing all of those people. You fucking monster.

Point being, your so-called "scientific" cutoff is actually has nothing to do with science and is just your own personal morality.

"This cell isn't a person. Okay, NOW it's a person."

[MFauli]

It would if you saved it and found a viable egg for it.

If you're not doing that for each of them, you're killing all of those people. You fucking monster.

Point being, your so-called "scientific" cutoff is actually has nothing to do with science and is just your own personal morality.

"This cell isn't a person. Okay, NOW it's a person."

No, what you're doing here is an argumentum ad absurdum. But it's easily refuted: A zygote *will* become a full-fledged human being, non-conditionally. A sperm requires lots of conditions, unless we lived in a world where women were readily available to allow themselves get impregnated by any guy who feels like busting a nut.

Again: Pro-choice supporters make up lots of bs definitions and terms to avoid the one central truth: abortion kills a human being.

I would have more respect for pro-choicers if they at least acknowledged that and then tried arguing from there. Of course, that's less pleasant to tell in public, "yes, it's murder, but I believe a woman's right to her body is more valuable than the life of a child".

[DarthEnderX]

No, what you're doing here is an argumentum ad absurdum.

So are you. You just refuse to see it.

But it's easily refuted: A zygote *will* become a full-fledged human being, non-conditionally.

Blatently false. Countless conditions still haveto be met in order for a zygote to become a fully formed human.

Again: Pro-choice supporters make up lots of bs definitions and terms to avoid the one central truth

Again: You're doing the exact same thing.