Abortions guarentee that a fetus won't delvoulp, but wasting some food doesn't. You can waste food and still give birth.
Dude, you're completely missing the point of what I'm saying. There is no dichotomy between things that can 'become humans' and things that are inherently 'non-human' when you follow the logic you're presenting. There is something in nature called the carbon cycle, which is where carbon is transferred between the ocean, the atmosphere, plants, and animals. If it was possible to end this cycle, there would be no plant biomass for humans to consume and we would all die. Under the assumption that plenty of carbon will eventually become part of human tissue, 'not' burning firewood prevents carbon from being released back into the atmosphere and put back into the cycle. This carbon could eventually end up as a part of a child some day, but you're preventing that from happening by trapping it as plant biomass. Within your logic, this should be immoral.
I know you're going to say 'but that doesn't guarantee that that a fetus won't delvoulp[sic]!. I would argue that it does. If you treat fetuses as the embodiment of what will become a human, then you can treat carbon as if it's an embodiment of virtually every organic molecule in the human body. So why not treat that firewood like it's a human ear, or a chunk of fat on someone's stomach? In my understanding of biology, a person cannot survive with a massive chunk of their brain missing, or part of their heart muscle removed. I don't know about you, but if you're going to treat inhuman objects as if they are human, then 'not burning firewood' or wasting food, or doing anything that prevents matter from being turned into human tissue is murder. Sure, the carbon may never end up as a human being, but
are you really going to risk killing a potential osteocyte or chunk of human fat by not burning that firewood?
Poll