Quote Originally Posted by Veloran View Post
It's true, and you know it's true. You yourself have stated that you think the potentiality of life is worth sacrificing lives, even innocent lives, for. Don't get squeamish just because it's uncomfortable. Again this isn't an indictment (on the topic I broached in specific anyway), I'd just like people to be more thoughtful and, preferably, consistent with the ideas they're talking about here.

Alright fine let’s have this convo. To you, believing that you can be justified in reducing the well-being of those around today, in order to protect the potential for any life of any kind to continue on, is equivalent to forcing a mother to die in childbirth rather than have abortion. Let me just offer two of the reasons I disagree.

First, let’s just point out the obvious distinction between the sustaining the potential for life and sustaining all potential life. One of these is about possibility, and valuing the existence of life on a general level. The other is enforcing a categorical duty in all circumstances regardless of the particulars of the situation. One can hold the latter of these and not the former.

Second, the idea that, even if it’s unavoidable, forcing others to bear a cost for the future is always equivalent to forcing a pregnancy, kind of falls apart when applied to just about any major moral dilemma facing humanity. A climate activist doesn’t haven’t to be pro-life in order to believe that taking drastic action against climate change is justified, despite the fact that such actions would have a demonstrable impact on industries and economic activities relied upon by numerous communities worldwide. Just look at former mining and industrial towns that rot away along with those left there, leading to substance abuse, mental health problems, worse health outcomes, and yes death. And for whose benefit? The next generation and those further on. Look at developing nations who often resort to cheaper and more environmentally damaging practices in order to try to improve living standards. Do you have to be pro life to think it may be necessary to adopt policies that lead to higher costs and less opportunity for those who want nothing more than a better life?

We can go even further. What about conscription? Forcing someone to put their life on the line for the safety and protection of others sounds like a good comparison to make no? What if you faced a genocidal enemy that desires the brutal and complete destruction of all life? Do I have to be pro life on abortion to think it necessary to institute that policy? I’m curious if you think those who hold those beliefs are inconsistent.