[qsdf38100]

The people with usual pro-life discourse are also pro-guns, and generally are only pro-life when it comes to fœtuses…

So them insisting they care about life is just dishonest. It’s obviously to enforce their archaic views of the world. It’s not even written in their beloved Bible, it’s a made up concern.

If you buy into this pro-life bullshit, you’re either being manipulated or dishonest.

[Ancapistani]

This seems to be an obvious strawman of an argument.

First, you assert that being pro-gun implicitly means being pro-death. This is not the case. I and many others who are vehemently pro-gun feel the way we do because we believe that self-defense is a fundamental right of a human being, and that possessing and carrying the means to effectively defend one’s self is the practical implementation of recognition of the right.

Second, you assert that gun rights are about enforcing one’s view on others. This is also not true for anyone with whom I’ve discussed this issue. Gun rights advocates see this as about preventing people from imposing their will on others by force.

Third, you implicitly assert that all gun rights advocates are Christian. This is demonstrably false.

Fourth, after asking the reader to take the above assertions as fact, you accuse anyone who disagrees with you as being ignorant of their own biases or a liar.

People don’t have to agree. That’s fine. You may be surprised to discover that people who hold different views from you do so because they form those views from different lived experiences. All it takes is a little empathy.

[cycomanic]

Without getting too much into the argument, you make a couple of logical fallacies.

> First, you assert that being pro-gun implicitly means being pro-death. This is not the case. I and many others who are vehemently pro-gun feel the way we do because we believe that self-defense is a fundamental right of a human being, and that possessing and carrying the means to effectively defend one’s self is the practical implementation of recognition of the right.

The argument does not need to be that pro-gun means pro-death, but can mean self-autonomy/self-defense over being forced to do something. That same argument could be made for an abortion, e.g. the mother uses it as a last means of self-defense over being forced to care for a child for the rest of their lives.

> Second, you assert that gun rights are about enforcing one’s view on others. This is also not true for anyone with whom I’ve discussed this issue. Gun rights advocates see this as about preventing people from imposing their will on others by force.

Actually they said pro-lifers want to force their view onto others. He also said pro-lifers are typically pro-gun, however that does not logically imply that all pro-gun proponents are pro-life and want to force their view onto others.

> Third, you implicitly assert that all gun rights advocates are Christian. This is demonstrably false.

Again all (most) pro-lifers are pro-gun does not imply that all pro-gunners are pro-life. That's logically incorrect.

[qsdf38100]

If we were really debating the question of whether a fœtus is a person I’d be more open to "opinions".

But that’s not what’s actually going on with that debate on a national scale.

You can’t deny that it almost never comes genuinely because someone is curious. It’s not a philosophical question. we ever need to "debate" it because it’s pushed down Americans throat by people with an obviously reactionary political agenda. I don’t believe those who adhere to this political package and pretend to care about a feotus when they don’t care about his mother’s life. Could we stop pretending it’s not about controlling women?

[betwixthewires]

I wouldn't say that. To take another example, you might not think it's society's responsibility to house homeless people while also thinking it is wrong to kill them. So expecting people who think (what they believe to be) murder should be illegal to then want to take good care of the world is dishonest, the second does not follow from the first.

[fzeroracer]

But if society kicks out the homeless people during a particularly cold winter season and they happen to die of hypothermia, then that's deemed acceptable.

The reality is that the second often does derive from the first, it's just enough degrees separated that they don't feel the cognitive dissonance. It's the same reasons why the pro-life constituents are often against increasing welfare and aid for single mothers, as George Carlin once brought up.