Printable View
Let me ask a stupid question or two:
When is a kangaroo a kangaroo?
After climbing out of the womb or after coming out of the pocket?
What's the difference between not able to live on it's own and not able to live on it's own because the parents have to feed it?
The difference is that a baby born at full term will generally be able to survive by itself eventually, whereas a baby born at 20 weeks will need to be hooked up to an array of life support machines for the whole of its life, which will probably be short and full of suffering.
:looks at calendar:
Yep. It has been about six weeks since the last abortion topic here. Right on time.
Therefore, within 2 weeks: guns.
You love it Kukri! :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
How about these questions instead:Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
If it has a heartbeat is it alive?
If you terminate an animal with a heart beat that isnt able to defend itself, is that murder?
I always find myself refering to these simple questions when talking about abortion. My preference would be to allow individuals to make their own personal choices regarding bringing a child to term. Yet can see clearly the moral and ethical dilema's others might have based on their choices of mythology to adhere too.
I normally find myself answering yes to both of my stupid questions, and then ask myself a few more.
Something like
Is it ethical to impose ones personal views on anothers choice?
If it is, can I then inturn murder/kill those who choose to impose?
And the internal paradox continues, I prefer the killing/murder route myself but I am in the minority.
While a female having a mastectomy I guess could be considered a form of birth control, I believe the more common (and far less invasive) method of birth control is for the male to undergo a vasectomy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinus Arma
:yes:
:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Odin
People, a mastectomy is when a breast is cut off. I imagine you mean hysterectomy (where the uterus is removed); you might mean oophrectomy where the ovaries are removed.
~:smoking:
I know. I was just making a little joke at what I think was probably just a typo on DA's part in his original post.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
:yes:
IncorrectQuote:
Originally Posted by CountArach
I'm a conservative with many libertarian aspects. I would consider the being inside the woman a living a person. Thus, that person has rights. To kill that person would be murder. I'm not sure I'd also consider regular abortion murder too, but abortion after this length of time is just plain wrong.
By the way, there are plenty of libertarians who are pro-life.
I honestly can't see how killing a baby at this point wouldn't be considered murder to some people, but I guess each to his own.
It's very easy; no human, no murder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kush
What's the difference between a foetus and soem poor guy I cut the head of but keep the body alive?Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Does it make a diffference if someone comes up with a method to regrow a head or clone the poor guy from his body?
I've been dragging this up before, but it still leads to the question: What is a human?
And you cannot really be consistant in this issue. For example, if abortion is murder, then what is murder through neglect for a pregnant woman?
Then we also have the question of how much an outright ban would actually decrease the amount of abortions. Banning some things seems to work really great in making an reduction of use. :juggle:
While I agree with you that birth is no minor 'inconvenience,' and that giving a child up for adoption can be extremely traumatic, from what I understand, abortion is usually extremely traumatic as well. A mother simply parts with her child by giving it to another or simply parts with her fetus/child by ending its life. It's not an easy choice either way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poor Bloody Infantry
Generally I support a woman's freedom (with input from husband/boyfriend if he sticks around) to make such choices about her family and body over the government making such decisions for her, though I'm not a fan of abortion and would prefer women to choose against it, and though I'd definitely prefer she deal with the issue early in the pregnancy except in cases of late-term discovery of impending birth defects or danger to the mother's health.
Ajax
As I've brought up in previous abortion threads, what is alive? The answer is only obvious if you're not thinking very hard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
Once again, I'll never understand that rather simplistic justification. Like I said though, whatever floats your boat.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Certainly I wasn't trying to suggest that abortion is not traumatic, nor to suggest that the issue is in any way simple. Indeed, I would say that since I am opposed to late-term abortion (as I think most people are) that in such cases for the mother to have the baby and put it up for adoption is probably the best course of action. I was simply rather shocked that the idea of going through childbirth only to have to part with the child forever could be considered an "inconvenience".Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaxfetish
Having to stand on the train because there are no seats is an inconvenience. Giving birth to a child and then giving it away is an appalling trauma. The issue is complicated and difficult (as it is clear you appreciate from your post), but people trying to pretend it is obvious or straightforward is never going to convince anyone, it is simply rhetorical grandstanding .
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost
I would expect a bit of understanding towards my statement, given my background. No one can make a reasonable argument that I discount the sacrifice of my country's greatest citizens.
I will admit to a poor choice of words on my part. Allow me to clarify.
Comparing the tragedy of troop deaths in Iraq against the number of late term abortions provides a picture of just how severe the abortion problem is. 3,000 lives have been lost in this war and a near number of viable human lives are murdered annually via late term abortion. These numbers are lost on an apathetic population who is almost entirely fed the information they rely upon for political perspective.
I believe that better articulates my intent.
No. I meant mastectomy. That's a fairly efficient from of birth control in a way. And if you just remove one, it is even more effective. A one-boob lay would be... Well, never mind. :clown:Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
nyuk nyuk nyuk. :laugh4:
My views exactly. The question is whether the right of a mother to decide what is convenient to her should take precedence over the right of a human being to live - something that shouldn't be a question at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kush
Of course, if we're facing the right of the mother to live versus the right of the child to live, I'd have to go with the mother, but only if both could not be saved.
A foetus is not a human being. That implies sentience and it's a loaded word.Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
A foetus is a homo sapien larvae, nothing more. Whether you think they're worth saving is up to you but to bring emotive language to strengthen your point doesn't really say much.
Says you. :juggle2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Craterus
Well, it's not. What's the difference between a foetus and a cow, which I'm sure you have no qualms about not only killing, but also eating.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
Brain scans show that they have similar levels of brain activity so what is it, as Lemur asks, that makes a foetus a person or rather: worth saving, but an animal not?
Because they're different to us? Sounds like speciesism and isn't a valid argument.
Deciding when exactly a blastocyst becomes a human being is a tricky bit of business, and maybe impossible. Just to tease out how difficult this is:
PJ, do you consider a newly-fertilized egg to be a human being? If so, do you acknowledge that the rhythm method is genocide?
Craterus, is a fetus one day away from birth inhuman? What happens in the last 24 hours that turns the non-human fetus into a human baby? Please explain.
What makes a human being tick? What makes us capable of thinking? When does that change happen? Is there such a thing as a "soul"? If so, when do we get it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Well, you would first need to define what it is that makes us human. I don't have an answer for that. Quickening? Birth? It's hard to say unless you believe in things like souls but even then, it's not absolutely necessary that a soul has to exist from conception.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
I haven't quite made my mind up about abortion yet but I know the better philosophical arguments on both sides of the debate and I thought I'd play devil's advocate for this topic.
In a way, I feel third-trimester abortions are inexcusable because the foetus is so much more developed. For those that claim not to realise, surely a missed period or two is enough indication. And for others, it shouldn't take 6 months to decide you don't want the thing.
Ideally, people would choose to have unwanted children and simply put them up for adoption when they are born but 9 months is a long time and it's a huge inconvenience. The morality is, of course, questionable but abortion can not be proven to be morally right/wrong so I think it's probably best to allow women the right to do what they wish to their own bodies.
Way to dodge the question.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
You are equating the worth of a human being to a cow. Or to extrapolate your comment: You are equating the worth of a human being to an ant, or the HIV virus, or a plant. You yourself have just pointed out that to favor one form of life over another is "speciesism", which means you yourself must also consider all life forms equal. Including the common cold, leeches, black widow spiders, mosquitos, broccoli, and locusts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Craterus
Given that we are the ONLY species with the ability to do so, which species should we protect from other species?
Send in the UN to my gym sock for the mass graves of my conquest reside there, especially when Mrs DevDave's Aunt "Flow" is in town....Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Now that's a siggy.:yes:
A foetus isn't necessarily a human being. It is a potential human being and is comparable to an animal. I didn't equate the worth of a human to anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinus Arma
Why must we be the protectors? The animal kingdom manages just fine without human intervention. However, things have changed more recently which may require humans to do something about some of the problems we have created.
If the child can survive outside of the womb, even with help, it is a human. Just because it needs a bit of help does not mean its life is worth less, just like many of us outside of the womb need medical attention to survive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Craterus
Child: Hi, I'm Jenny. I'm only 5 months along in the womb.
Doctor grabs feet.
Jenny: Oh, I guess they want me out now. Yay! I can't wait to see the exciting world outside after hearing all the funny noises!
Doctor pulls Jennifer halfway out of the vagina, so the head remains inside.
Jenny: Hi! I'm ready! Why are you waiting? I'm hungry and I want to meet my mommy.
Doctor sticks scissors into the back of Jenny's head, spreads them open to widen the hole, and then sticks a vacuum inside to suck her brains out.
Jenny could have felt the warm sun on her face and enjoyed the rich fragrance of flowers in her yard. Jenny could have watched ants crawling on the ground and she could have loved swimming in the local lake with her friends. She could have fallen in love. Jenny could have been a loving mother and pursued a successful career. She may have been a proud grandmother and she may have died after a long and fulfilling life, watching her own children and grandchildren enjoy the things she so enjoyed.
Or Jenny might have had down syndrom, in which case despite her disability she still would have had much to be excited about as she began each new day.