For every argument by analogy, there is usually an equally compelling analogy from the other side. Analogous arguments get nowhere because both sides can sit there and make counter analogies all day long. Case in point, abortion in the case of rape is an analogy from the pro-murder-children-in-the-womb crowd.
Pro-life should be about the “willful disregard” for human life by using abortion as a method of birth control. “Culling” has its own set of arguments.
Start aborting babies because they have the so-called “gay gene” and let the hilarity from the left ensue.
No, it would undermine any moral position you had as you become a willful murderer.
Pro-life should be about the “willful disregard” for human life by using abortion as a method of birth control. “Culling” has its own set of arguments.
And that itself has an emotional aspect. (I didn't advocate ONLY appeal to emotion. I said that most effective discussion [read: argument] has appeal to ethos, logos and pathos.)
For every argument by analogy, there is usually an equally compelling analogy from the other side. Analogous arguments get nowhere because both sides can sit there and make counter analogies all day long. Case in point, abortion in the case of rape is an analogy from the pro-murder-children-in-the-womb crowd.
I didn't give any argument by analogy. Moreover, only a fool would say that argument by analogy is useless.