Rapidcreek@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world · 10 months agoA dramatic rise in pregnant women dying in Texas after abortion banwww.nbcnews.comexternal-linkmessage-square30linkfedilinkarrow-up1333arrow-down14
arrow-up1329arrow-down1external-linkA dramatic rise in pregnant women dying in Texas after abortion banwww.nbcnews.comRapidcreek@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world · 10 months agomessage-square30linkfedilink
minus-squareDrusas@fedia.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down1·10 months agoDehumanization isn’t good no matter what side you’re on.
minus-squareyeahiknow3@lemmings.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·edit-210 months agoDo 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.
minus-squareDrusas@fedia.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up2·10 months agoDo I dehumanize a creature which is not human? No, dehumanization doesn’t work that way.
minus-squareyeahiknow3@lemmings.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·edit-210 months agoBy “human” you might mean an animal whose DNA falls within a specific probability distribution, or an animal that embodies various virtues or transcendental capacities, etc. We should acknowledge that countless creatures meet condition 1 but not 2. So what?
minus-squareDrusas@fedia.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up2·10 months agoYour second definition is usually referred to as “person”, not “human”.
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”.
deleted by creator