Doesn't really work as far as convincing pro-choicers, whose entire reason for being pro-choice is their belief in a different sense of logic, that being that things aren't one and the same with what they WILL be.
Essentially, pro-lifers are futurists at best, or perhaps to some extent individuals (like TC) for whom the concept of time is...a little less rigid. Pro-choicers on the other hand are by and large devoted presentists, and so TC's argument isn't really one that proves them wrong. It's merely an entirely different sort of logic from that with pro-choicers use....the problem is that it's DAMNED hard to prove one logic as being entirely correct, or better than the other, hence the impasse we're at. TC makes no attempt at even making this argument, merely throwing one logic in our face without even mentioning the other.
For TC and many pro-lifers, an appleseed (planted, mind you) is absolutely the same thing as a fully ripe, plucked, cleaned, and ready to eat apple, because that's what the seed would be eventually, and time is not something by which to separate objects.. For the pro-choicer, there's the appleseed and there's the apple, two entirely different objects. You eat an appleseed, and it sure as hell doesn't taste like an apple.
TC's argument takes the apple = appleseed argument even further. He's basically now saying that appleseed = apple tree = apple = apple sauce = apple pie. All are exactly the same simply because one can lead into another. There is no difference between the appleseed (first pic) and the apple pie (last pic), whereas for the pro-choicer, all that's going to elicit is a "wtf?" Different logic....
Also, saying appleseed = apple pie is also troubling since there's no guarantee that the apple from the apple seed will be MADE into an apple pie (basically, what i'm saying is that TC's assumption that she WILL be a "bride" is a bit too much).
Log in to comment