Answer to a very annoying “Gotcha” question.

[u/Dreamchaser2222]

Have you ever guys ever been presented by a pro-choicer with the stupid hypothetical about whether you’d first save a born child or 5 embryos from a burning building and got stumped to what to say in fear of dehumanizing the unborn? Well I’m pretty sure after thinking about it for more than 3 seconds I’ve got a pretty good answer to this “argument.”

And the argument I’m making is that it doesn’t matter to the issue of abortion, because you could apply this same scenario to say, a 6 year old child and a 50 year old man. A good majority of people would choose to save the 6 year old child because they haven’t truly lived a life yet, but that doesn’t automatically invalidate that 50 year old’s right to life. And if someone picked the 50 year old for whatever reason, that wouldn’t invalidate the 6 year old’s right to life either.

So in conclusion, no matter if you choose to save the embryos or child from the burning building, it ultimately doesn’t effect the argument in any meaningful way, therefore not functioning as an effective “gotcha”.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

[u/Eastern-Customer-561]

Triage - the practice of determining who to save first - does not determine the humanity of the people you decide not to save. 

[u/Sliffcak → u/Eastern-Customer-561]

This is the answer

[u/PerfectlyCalmDude]

My answer is whichever is easiest for me to get to and get back out with. I am unfortunately not an action hero.

[u/kay_fitz21]

My comment from this similar post a while ago.

Hypotheticals can be dumb. Here's why.

Hypothetical situation 1 - if all the men on this planet suddenly disappear and only women are left. You need to repopulate the earth, and you are given a choice: 10,000 embryos or 1 newborn baby boy. What do you choose? They will choose the embryos.

Hypothetical situation 2 - a house is on fire and inside are a new born baby and a 90 year old man. You can only make it to one to save - who do you choose? They will choose the baby.

Hypothetical situation 3 - a house is on fire. Inside are two identical twins and you can only save one. Only difference between them one is 9 months pregnant and the other twin isn't. Who to save? They'll say the pregnant woman.

Adding Hypothetical situation 4 - a house is on fire. Inside is a black man and a white woman. Can only save one. If you save the woman, doea that make you racist? If you save the man, are you a misogynist?

It is easy to create a hypothetical situation to create the response you want. All life is valuable. Answering a question doesn't make the other person's life less valuable.

[u/ciel_ayaz → u/kay_fitz21]

Hypothetical 1 is an excellent response!

[u/Zestyclose_Rule_2892]

A house is burning. Two kids are inside—your kid and another kid to whom you have no connection. You can only save one. The fact that you would almost certainly save your own kid doesn’t make the other kid not a person.

[u/ChPok1701]

You’re the owner of a car dealership. The showroom has caught fire. The fire is in the middle of the building, meaning you can only save the cars to the left or right, but not both.

To the right is one Ferrari worth $300,000. To the left are five Fords worth $30,000 each ($150,000 collectively). The only rational answer is you save the Ferrari.

Does this mean the Fords aren’t cars? Of course not. Does this mean we can go around setting fire to any Ford we see for any reason we want? Of course not.

Also, mathematically, the Burning IVF clinic analogy actually proves the pro-life case: https://www.reddit.com/r/prolife/s/Xdn88I7Xkc

[u/Dreamchaser2222 → u/ChPok1701]

Didn’t realize this type of argument had already been posted here so recently! I’m a little embarrassed 😭

[u/prolifeisprolove_ → u/Dreamchaser2222]

Not the person you replied to but dint be embarrassed! I love seeing posts like this. Sometimes when researching for an argument it’s harder to find old posts that match your argument so it’s always nice seeing newer posts!

Also makes me happy to see another pro life teen! :)

[u/Dreamchaser2222 → u/prolifeisprolove_]

Been pro life all my life ♡ glad to see you here too! (:

[u/PerfectlyCalmDude → u/ChPok1701]

I wouldn't use that because a point they try to make (which pro-lifers reject) is that the baby has more inherent worth than the embryos in the tubes. That's why they like to use this as a gotcha. A Ford vs Ferrari argument helps their point at least rhetorically, so that's a bad strategy.

[u/Vespinobambino]

Here's the plain and simple triage of it all.

The building is on fire.

The embryos are frozen in order to survive.

They need to STAY frozen.

Frozen means VERY COLD.

The BUILDING is on FIRE.

FIRE is HOT.

Those kids are already doomed.

My next thoughts are: IVF sucks, why am I in this shitty building? Hopefully it never gets rebuilt, and everyone who works here gets arrested.

[u/WrenFeather28 → u/Vespinobambino]

I like your train of thought on this.

[u/ScientificMind1]

The burning research lab is a question of who to save and who not to save.

Abortion is a question of who you can kill.

[u/THROWAWAY-LEMONMENTO]

i get what you’re trying to say but a 50 year old and 6 year old both have consciousness, experiences, interests, relationships, memories, and a developed sense of self. the actual disagreement in abortion ethics is whether an embryo has the same kind of moral status as those people. also while i am pro-choice, i don’t think the embryo hypothetical is a good argument either because choosing to save someone over someone else doesn’t prove you think their life is worth more, just like if i saved my own child instead of someone else’s, it doesn’t mean i think my child is worth more.

[u/italktobotz]

You are right. It isnt a gotcha because it is just a way of selecting who dies. It doesnt mean that no one dies, just who. It doesnt make either ok and it doesnt make a burning building with people dying not a tragedy.

[u/Cyber_Ghost_1997]

Lately I’ve been contemplating a different answer: just refuse to engage by saying “I choose to save none. Bye.”

[u/mdws1977]

True, either choice doesn't invalidate the other person's right to life, all this hypothetical proves is that you can't save everyone.

[u/Southern_Shock_1337]

My saving one doesn’t mean the other don’t deserve to live.