Abortion!!!!!!!!!

[capslock]

I would hold the rapist responsible if the woman chose to have an abortion.

You can't make the poor woman carry the baby, there is no logic in that. She is not a slave.

 

[Elrohir]

I would hold the rapist responsible if the woman chose to have an abortion.

You can't make the poor woman carry the baby, there is no logic in that. She is not a slave.

So, you're saying that rape does justify the murder of an innocent third party? One vicious crime allows the victim to morally and legally commit an even more vicious crime?

I'm not saying it wouldn't suck a lot to be raped and get pregnant from it. I'm just say making abortion illegal, even under those circumstances, is the lesser of two evils.

 

[GinandTonic]

It just seems obvious to me, from what I've learned in science class and common sense, that a zygote/embryo/fetus is a human life. Not part of a human life, as a skin cell is, but a new human being at the earliest stages of existance. How else could you define it? Like another poster said, there is no magical metamorphosis where a zygote becomes a human. It is a human from the get go.

This is significant because it means the life has certain rights, you know, human rights, specifically the right to life.

Given this thread excludes a dualist universe, explain why a zygote is a human life despite not having any differentuated tissue.

Why is a fertilised egg different to a drop of blood belonging to a dead man, where the blood cell is still alive?

 

[capslock]

So, you're saying that rape does justify the murder of an innocent third party? One vicious crime allows the victim to morally and legally commit an even more vicious crime?

I'm not saying it wouldn't suck a lot to be raped and get pregnant from it. I'm just say making abortion illegal, even under those circumstances, is the lesser of two evils.

I explained it already. Forcing the mother to use her body and her resources to care for the baby is not reasonable. Its unfortunate in this case that there isn't a way to free her of the burdon and save the life of the baby, but thats how it is. How would you like it if you were abducted and forced to care for another individual for 9 months of you life with no consent, discussion or anything? I guess you would have no problem, if that person would die without your help?


@GinandTonic

Its different from a blood cell because..... its not a blood cell?

Its human the same way an infant, child, or adolescent is a human. Conception seems, to me, like the most logical, obvious, and easiest spot to define the start of life.

 

[Stolen Rutters]

We could always have the government cover the prenatal care during term, then give the woman the option of giving the baby up to adoption.

 

[StarWorms]

Until the baby develops nervous tissue and can actually feel things, abortion should be legal. Killing an unborn child before it can feel anything is no different to peeling off some of my skin and throwing it in a bucket of acid.

What's the difference between the prevention of life and an abortion? When my grandmother died, 8 years ago, the funeral was meant to be a celebration of her life. Things can always be seen in 2 ways: Is it the gift of life or the grief when someone dies? The same can be applied to children: Would it be better to have a child and for it to die or not have it at all?

Personally I think abortions should be legal. The human population is far too high. Our earth is building up an ecological debt because of it. There will come a point when the human population will reach the brink and starvation will kick in. By disallowing abortions, it allows populations to increase more which just means that we'll reach starvation earlier and more people will die. Populations are always a balance. By saving a life you prevent the life of another, even if it is 500 years in the future. Isn't it selfish to decide that those who would rather have an abortion should have to have the child? Why does that birth matter more than another in the future? People should have the freedom to do what they choose to in their life (within reason). It's wrong for people to inflict their beliefs on other people - If they want an abortion then they shouldn't be stopped by someone who doesn't believe in it.

 

[Gogf]

I dont see how it being a new life is particularly significant? I dont even know if it IS a new life, could someone with more medical/scientfic knowledge elaborate? Is "new DNA" your only criterion for defining life? El Mac did a good job explaining how that isn't a very good criterion above (post #85 IIRC)

It's not new life. The sperm and egg cells were both alive before contraception. Life is an unbroken chain of cell divisions going back billions of years. There is very little if any "new life."

 

[ktsk]

Legislation against abortions has never been successful. If they can't have an abortion in a hospital, women end up trying to do it themselves or travelling abroad (the wealthy ones). It just makes the women's lives more difficult and illegal, in some cases. And no, adoption is not an option here (try to imagine keeping up with your job during a pregnancy you don't want or explaining it to your relatives).

Some of the birth control pills (and post-coital pills, whatever the right term is) work in a way that can be described as early abortion. Are they to be banned, too?

(I guess you don't have to guess what my opinioin about the issue is...)

 

[El_Machinae]

So, you're saying that rape does justify the murder of an innocent third party? One vicious crime allows the victim to morally and legally commit an even more vicious crime?

I'm not saying it wouldn't suck a lot to be raped and get pregnant from it. I'm just say making abortion illegal, even under those circumstances, is the lesser of two evils.

I hinted at this the last time we discussed embryo death. No, rape does not warrant the murder of a third innocent party, clearly not. But we've decided that freedom from being a slave is a right that's great enough that we're allowed to kill to maintain it. The rapist (and fetus, er, kinda) collude to enslave the woman to a fetus, and the woman's only options are to be enslaved or to kill.

The womb is the only place where some people in society feel that a criminal can foist an innocent on a single person, and make the person completely responsible (in the end) for that innocent.

It's not new life. The sperm and egg cells were both alive before contraception. Life is an unbroken chain of cell divisions going back billions of years. There is very little if any "new life."

Well, an embryo is certainly new life, in my opinion. I mean, a sperm and egg are living organisms that have a distinct definition. Their combination creates something new and something unique.

Morally, though, even though this cell is alive and would continue to be so if nurtured - that means very little. Again I can go back to the skin cell. If my body produces a new skin cell, the skin cell is alive (and continues to be so while nurtured). The aliveness of a cell is insignificant (or maybe it's not, in a cosmic sense, but humans certainly don't care about skin cells)

 

[EdCase]

I am not female and have never been in the situation where this choice came up.
I am neither pro-life or pro-choice (such stupid terminology).
What I am is....aware the technology exists to perfom the procedure safely.
Therefore my opinion is. Leave the decision to individual (s) involved. Afterall if a female (or in some situations couple) decide to abort a pregnancy for reasons they can live with, so be it.
Their choice will have no impact on my ( and my wifes) ability to choose our own path. It won't affect yours either.

The problem is not the fact of abortion itself. But indeed the fact that others believe they have the power to inflict their choices on others.