Feminism

[luiz]

that it is not necessarily a moral imperative to suffer in order to save a life - is entirely valid.

It's also a valid point that if you're responsible for the existence of that life then indeed such moral imperative may exist.

Let's not threadjack, but ultimately all the debate about abortion centers on whether or not the fetus is a human life with rights. If it is, the whole pro-choice argument is very very weak, and quite immoral. If it's not, there is no pro-life argument.

 

[Rashiminos]

Because comparing what is essentially a clump of cells to actual human beings isn't offensive or demeaning whatsoever.

You're still a clump of cells now, useless.

 

[Crezth]

And particularly if you had generated the unconscious violinist by partaking in an act that had the widely-known potential for generating unconscious violinists.

And thus we come full-circle back to rape, and now you know why feminists get so frustrated.

 

[Senethro]

but ultimately all the debate about abortion centers on whether or not the fetus is a human life with rights.

No it doesn't. Autonomy clearly takes priority as there are very few people arguing for communal organ sharing.

If it is, the whole pro-choice argument is very very weak, and quite immoral. If it's not, there is no pro-life argument.

If it is then we are presented with new problems. We would also be morally obligated to offer up our organs to those that require them. Given the technical difficulties and expertise required I doubt this could be achieved except by a state health service, especially as it is unlikely to be profitable.

Similarly, if I thought that personhood began at the zygote then I would be liberating all the embryos from fertility clinics, banks and research labs and implanting them, forcibly if necessary. It would be the biggest prisonbreak in history. We're talking about people in the tens of thousands imprisoned in freezers with little hope of reprieve.

If you consider the above scenario stupid, which it obviously is, then you have taken a position on personhood.

So it looks like pro-lifers are selective about personhood or are giant hypocrites.

 

[Gori the Grey]

And thus we come full-circle back to rape, and now you know why feminists get so frustrated.

Your reaction to my post would seem to require as its assumption that all acts of intercourse are rape. If so, and I know it's McKinnon's position, that would bring us full circle to why, to some, feminism has seemed to have overplayed its hand.

 

[luiz]

No it doesn't. Autonomy clearly takes priority as there are very few people arguing for communal organ sharing.



If it is then we are presented with new problems. We would also be morally obligated to offer up our organs to those that require them. Given the technical difficulties and expertise required I doubt this could be achieved except by a state health service, especially as it is unlikely to be profitable.

Similarly, if I thought that personhood began at the zygote then I would be liberating all the embryos from fertility clinics, banks and research labs and implanting them, forcibly if necessary. It would be the biggest prisonbreak in history. We're talking about people in the tens of thousands imprisoned in freezers with little hope of reprieve.

If you consider the above scenario stupid, which it obviously is, then you have taken a position on personhood.

So it looks like pro-lifers are selective about personhood or are giant hypocrites.

The organ sharing argument is completely ridiculous. People may be responsible for the lives they had a direct role in creating, not for every person on the planet. What's more, being pregnant is not analogue to giving a kidney.

 

[Zack]

Perhaps Godwin should have made his law about abortion, rather than Hitler.

 

[Senethro]

The organ sharing argument is completely ridiculous. People may be responsible for the lives they had a direct role in creating, not for every person on the planet. What's more, being pregnant is not analogue to giving a kidney.

Do people voluntarily generate ova?

 

[Perfection]

Your reaction to my post would seem to require as its assumption that all acts of intercourse are rape. If so, and I know it's McKinnon's position, that would bring us full circle to why, to some, feminism has seemed to have overplayed its hand.

I'm unaware that MacKinnon views that, can you provide a citation please?

 

[luiz]

Perhaps Godwin should have made his law about abortion, rather than Hitler.

I agree!

Do people voluntarily generate ova?

Do ova automatically become a fetus without any further action? Stop being silly.

 

[Senethro]

Do ova automatically become a fetus without any further action? Stop being silly.

And here we find the primary interest of the pro-life crowd - the regulation of a particular action.

The hypocrisy on related issues starts to make sense. The personhood argument is purely of convenience.

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, I think it's pretty immoral to not donate blood when you are capable and healthy. Though the increased gain/loss of being hooked to a violinist is paired with the increased investment required. Hence my not being sure.

And here we find the primary interest of the pro-life crowd - the regulation of a particular action.

The hypocrisy on related issues starts to make sense. The personhood argument is purely of convenience.

Now that I can disagree with entirely, full-throated, and with zero reservation.

 

[Senethro]

Well, I think it's pretty immoral to not donate blood when you are capable and healthy. Though the increased gain/loss of being hooked to a violinist is paired with the increased investment required. Hence my not being sure.



Now that I can disagree with entirely, full-throated, and with zero reservation.

You can disagree but can you relate why the pro-life crowd are discriminatory among embryos?

 

[Farm Boy]

Perhaps you mean something different with the words I quoted than I read them as, as "discriminatory among embryos" isn't a question that's flowed from the exchange for me. Expound please? I had read is as concern about abortion is actually a clandestine and duplicitous desire to regulate sexual intercourse.

 

[Crezth]

Your reaction to my post would seem to require as its assumption that all acts of intercourse are rape. If so, and I know it's McKinnon's position, that would bring us full circle to why, to some, feminism has seemed to have overplayed its hand.

Well, no, and I don't know why you are so insistent on reducing things to brass tacks anyway. The point is that it is not infrequently the case that the pregnancy did not occur through the woman's conscientious engaging with understood risks. Since that is so, you can't wave off the life-support argument with "well, they knew the risks." It simply ceases to apply, unless you start applying different standards for rape and non-rape pregnancies, which in turn undermines the whole sanctity of life argument, etc, etc.

Alternatively you could say that abortion is always wrong, even in cases of rape - and if that is your position, well, very well. However, it's a pretty sexist edifice you've constructed. No matter if it's a morally ironclad one, it's unfair to women, and you better believe people will resist such a position.

 

[luiz]

And here we find the primary interest of the pro-life crowd - the regulation of a particular action.

The hypocrisy on related issues starts to make sense. The personhood argument is purely of convenience.

It's not about regulating an action, it's about taking responsibility for possible consequences of those actions.

Nobody wants to regulate running on the park, but if you run over some small kid there might be consequences. And so on and so forth. In fact, the only way to leave activities unregulated is to make people take responsibility for the consequences of their activities!

The personhood argument is really the only one...

 

[Farm Boy]

unless you start applying different standards for rape and non-rape pregnancies

Alternatively you could say that abortion is always wrong, even in cases of rape

Abortion can be a wrongness, and forcing raped women to bear young resulting from sexual violence can be a greater wrongness. We can make meaningful choices between bad options without degenerating into puddles "oh woe, I can't think for the horror."

 

[Senethro]

The personhood argument is really the only one...

Except that the pro-lifers ignore it when it is convenient to do so.

Perhaps you mean something different with the words I quoted than I read them as, as "discriminatory among embryos" isn't a question that's flowed from the exchange for me. Expound please? I had read is as concern about abortion is actually a clandestine and duplicitous desire to regulate sexual intercourse.

Sorry I stepped back to a previous point there - that the pro-life crowd only assigns personhood to emybryos they care about and not to others.

 

[Senethro]

Abortion can be a wrongness, and forcing raped women to bear young resulting from sexual violence can be a greater wrongness.

No, it can't. If abortion is murder then you don't kill person B because person A was raped.

This reveals another aspect of the pro-life sides interest in regulating action. They "forgive" a woman if her sexual activity was involuntary.

 

[luiz]

No, it can't. If abortion is murder then you don't kill person B because person A was raped.

This reveals another aspect of the pro-life sides interest in regulating action. They "forgive" a woman if her sexual activity was involuntary.

Depends on the person and the angle he takes his pro-life position from.

The Catholic Church, for instance, opposes abortion even when it's the result of rape. Agree or disagree, it's a consistent position.