Late Term Abortion

[Lemur]

Both extremes in the abortion debate are illogical and unsupportable. "Life begins at conception" has serious holes in it, and in application quickly becomes unworkable. Note that the rhythm method, the only form of birth control approved by the Catholic Church, works by causing fertilized eggs to spontaneously abort. If the "life begins at conception" crowd believe what they say, then the Catholic Church is guilty of encouraging mass murder. Since the "life begins at conception" people are often Catholics, the cognitive dissonance is immediate and obvious.

On the other hand, the people who claim that a fetus is not human until fully born have painted themselves into a corner. "Life" is very hard to define, but a fetus one week from birth clearly meets the criteria.

As Poor Bloody Infantry pointed out, a logical compromise has been modeled by Europe, but due to Roe v. Wade, we are not free to make such an arrangement here. Honestly, I think Roe was the worst possible thing that could happen to both the pro-life and pro-choice camps. By creating a winner-take-all environment it really poisoned the debate.

[LittleGrizzly]

If Roe Vs Wade was to be repealed what would happen ?

would things just return to how they were previously ?

Im assuming before it was done on a state by state basis within similar limits to those currently in Europe, before Roe Vs Wade occured was this issue so big in US, im guessing they wasn't the huge pro choice pro life groups there are today....... what annoys me so much as well is that this issue is a single vote issue for so many voters!! what a waste!

[CountArach]

If Roe Vs Wade was to be repealed what would happen ?

would things just return to how they were previously ?

Im assuming before it was done on a state by state basis within similar limits to those currently in Europe, before Roe Vs Wade occured was this issue so big in US, im guessing they wasn't the huge pro choice pro life groups there are today....... what annoys me so much as well is that this issue is a single vote issue for so many voters!! what a waste!

If Roe vs Wade was overturned then Illegal Abortions would sky-rocket and there would be no protection for mothers who wish for a clean, safe abortion. That said I don't know how things were before it (Or admittedly much about what happens under it now), so feel free to correct me.

[LittleGrizzly]

Would there be no right to abortion without roe vs wade or would states revert back to laws before roe vs wade ?

[Craterus]

If Roe vs Wade was overturned then Illegal Abortions would sky-rocket and there would be no protection for mothers who wish for a clean, safe abortion. That said I don't know how things were before it (Or admittedly much about what happens under it now), so feel free to correct me.

They're not mothers! *facepalm*

[Lemur]

LittleGrizzly, if Roe v. Wade were overturned the most likely scenario is that the states would sort out the laws for themselves. Either that or Congress would rush through legislation. Neither, in my opinion, would be a disaster.

[Kralizec]

I'd say restrict it.

My opinion is that women shouldn't be forced to give birth. However in that same opinion waiting till the 8th month is just plain sick, and I'm disgusted by the ease with wich some people decide that completely developed fetuses aren't worthy of being called human because they haven't left the womb yet.
Before somebody makes mention of it, I find it hard to believe that any woman of normal intelligence would not notice for more than 3 months straight that they're pregnant.

[Ice]

I'd say restrict it.

My opinion is that women shouldn't be forced to give birth. However in that same opinion waiting till the 8th month is just plain sick, and I'm disgusted by the ease with wich some people decide that completely developed fetuses aren't worthy of being called human because they haven't left the womb yet.
Before somebody makes mention of it, I find it hard to believe that any woman of normal intelligence would not notice for more than 3 months straight that they're pregnant.

Uh huh. I'd agree.

[CountArach]

They're not mothers! *facepalm*

Hmmm, touché...

[KukriKhan]

A clarification, please:

Note that the rhythm method, the only form of birth control approved by the Catholic Church, works by causing fertilized eggs to spontaneously abort.

Are you very sure you're correct on this? If you are right, then I have seriously misunderstood the mechanics and intent of that method, lo these many decades. I thought the point of counting days and tracking menstrual cycles was to prevent fertilization in the first place.

My mother hated the rhytm method, because it didn't work. She bore 3 more children than she had originally hoped to have, she admitted in her 60's after all her highly-loved kids had grown. And her church's (R.Catholic) insistence on it as the only non-sinful way to not have children, eventually drove her from the church into the arms of Lutherans.

[Adrian II]

As Poor Bloody Infantry pointed out, a logical compromise has been modeled by Europe, but due to Roe v. Wade, we are not free to make such an arrangement here. Honestly, I think Roe was the worst possible thing that could happen to both the pro-life and pro-choice camps. By creating a winner-take-all environment it really poisoned the debate.

Interesting take. In an earlier thread I already referred to Woodward's The Abortion Papers to show how arbitrary a compromise Roe v. Wade really was, just like abortion law in any other country by the way. But the Supreme Court had to decide something, right? It's the American system that forced the SC to 'legislate by dictum'. So Lemur - could they have reached another solution, or am I just missing the whole point here? Please elaborate if you will.

[Lemur]

Well, I am not a lawyer, as the kids on Slashdot would say, so I'm not qualified to give a nuanced legal opinion. But from a prosimian point of view, Roe v. Wade was no sort of compromise at all, was it? It defined abortion as a right, full stop, without limits or constraints. By Supreme Court standards it was an extremely broad decision.

Personally, I think abortion is a classic case of one person's rights coming into conflict with another's, complicated by the fact that no thoughtful person can give a hard-and-fast rule for where exactly in the zygote->blastocyst->embryo->fetus chain a human being becomes a human being. To say that every fertilized egg is a human being is thoughtless and unconsidered. To deny the humanity of an eight- or nine-month fetus is barbaric, as Divinus Arma so dramatically points out.

Certainly the Supreme Court could have come to a more limited ruling -- they do that all the time. They could have defended Roe's ability to have an abortion without defining it as a universal right, which is where a lot of this trouble originates.

If abortion were not classified as a right, we would be having a much more interesting debate, and compromises would be sorted out state-by-state. And I do not believe that abortion would go away, far from it. As I said earlier in the thread, technology will someday accomplish what all of the protests and arguments cannot.

[Odin]

Well technically Roe V wade decision was made under the premise that restricting abortion ran counter to the 14th amendments diddy on due process (identical to the 5th amendment for the most part). It just made it applicable to the state at that time, and thats the problem with Roe V wade, it strikes right at the heart of states rights. I honestly havent reconciled this one completely because the constitution should supercede the state but the 14th amendement as the justification seems to be out of time (given it was written primarily an amendment dealing with slaves).

However Adrian has a point, the system we have mandated they do something, so they defaulted to due process in the constitution, its about as fair a compramise as our system would allow.