A dramatic rise in pregnant women dying in Texas after abortion ban
Exclusive analysis finds the rate of maternal deaths in Texas increased 56% from 2019 to 2022, compared with just 11% nationwide during the same time period.
You're viewing a single thread.
Opinions on abortion are strong indicators of psychopathy. Nobody against legal abortion has a functional moral sense. Some are just incredibly morally stupid. Others are religious zombies. But they’re all dangerous and fundamentally animalistic. We can coexist with these creatures, obviously — we already do. But the widespread delusion that they’re just like us has been incredibly dangerous and possibly world-ending. It’s no coincidence they’re the same “people” who support pollution and celebrate ecological depredation.
Out of pure curiosity, is your statement linking abortion opinions and psychopathy based on any studies you can link?
I’m not sure if that research’s been done, but it would be highly surprising if psychopaths were not the ones in favor of limiting women’s reproductive freedom.
What I can tell you is that abortion rights are an “easy” moral issue. Every year or two there’s a survey among professional philosophers, who of course disagree on basically everything. However, the item with the most consensus is abortion. That’s because there are simply no good arguments against abortion rights. The only reason someone might be against reproductive freedom is… well… moral imbecility.
We already know that moral reasoning exists on a spectrum of competence. That some people are so bad at it that it’s pathological, and that some percentage of these people are also narcissistic enough to be called “psychopaths.” It’s a disorder; it’s on a spectrum, and anti-abortion zealots are on that spectrum.
Dehumanization isn't good no matter what side you're on.
Do you dehumanize bears when you acknowledge that they lack certain abilities? I like bears. They’re great! Doesn’t mean I have to pretend that they’re civilized or intelligent.
Do I dehumanize a creature which is not human? No, dehumanization doesn't work that way.
By “human” you might mean
We should acknowledge that countless creatures meet condition 1 but not 2. So what?
Your second definition is usually referred to as "person", not "human".
