Abortion

[columbus]

No one has the right to conscript another person in furtherance of their own life.

Fetal humans don't conscript anything. They are human beings who are put in a dependent position by parents.
Tom​

 

[JRMcC]

You're simply confused.

I absolutely am confused, but I think you have to take on a little bit of the blame for that.

Law is always the authority. That's why its law.

Is smoking pot wrong? Well, it's against the law, so yes it's wrong. ?? As for changing bad laws, pointing to what the law is now shouldn't be part of the debate. That would be circular reasoning. And I think you and I are are indirectly discussing the validity of this law.

The fetus must have the female's body in order to continue developing. What do you think an umbilical cord is for? A born infant requires care, but it does require the care of its birth mother. A fetus will only continue to develop in a female's uterus. You're simply confused.

Yeah, I just don't understand. When the baby is in the womb it relies on its mother, when it's out of the womb it relies on its mother, only in different ways. A 3 year old relies on its mother in yet another way. Can you rephrase this quote? I think you made a minor typo and it kinda made things unclear.

 

[Marisa]

Fetal humans don't conscript anything. They are human beings who are put in a dependent position by parents.
Tom​

Now that's an emotive and untrue statement.

 

[Marisa]

I absolutely am confused, but I think you have to take on a little bit of the blame for that.


Is smoking pot wrong? Well, it's against the law, so yes it's wrong. ?? As for changing bad laws, pointing to what the law is now shouldn't be part of the debate. That would be circular reasoning. And I think you and I are are indirectly discussing the validity of this law.


Yeah, I just don't understand. When the baby is in the womb it relies on its mother, when it's out of the womb it relies on its mother, only in different ways. A 3 year old relies on its mother in yet another way. Can you rephrase this quote? I think you made a minor typo and it kinda made things unclear.

I'm happy to take responsibility if I'm not clear. But we're going to limit this conversation to the subject of elective, early term abortions. The key thing you're missing is that once born the birth mother is no longer required. Any human, of any relation or no relation, can deliver care.

 

[Mycroft]

My own stance is as follows: I find abortion acceptable in the cases that the pregnancy poses a threat to the longevity of the mother. For all other cases, there are many foster parents awaiting their turn to receive a child.

However. I also reject the ideas that 'life is life and abortion is never acceptable' because there has been no definitive benchmark for when a foetus becomes a 'life' and nature, it seems in 50-70% of cases, has no concern over whether a month-old foetus is 'life'.

However, we also live in Democracies. And whatever people choose to do is up to them, ultimately, in my view. I think it's a little unreasonable to go around saying 'I want to live in a democracy' and then in the next breath say 'But I this should be banned, that should be illegal, and I don't want this, this or this to happen!'

 

[columbus]

Now that's an emotive and untrue statement.

In what way? I'll stand behind the science and rationality.
But you'll have to be a good deal more precise to have any meaning.
Tom

 

[Eliab ben Benjamin]

Having been directly faced with this conundrum as the Anaesthetic Technician,
I came to the conclusion i preferred to opt out of these surgeries ...

My view is that termination is acceptable in the event of endangering the mother,
or if Rape was the cause ... I do not approve of termination as a form of contraceptive.
and in all cases only if performed before 21 weeks.... after which the foetus may be
viable ...

 

[Marisa]

In what way? I'll stand behind the science and rationality.
But you'll have to be a good deal more precise to have any meaning.
Tom

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The law states there has to be breath. Fetal tissue does not breathe. There is rudimentary life but it cannot be sustained outside the uterus. Iow, it is symbiotic or, to couch it in lay man's terms, parasitic. That is not independent life. It requires another to live. After birth, legally and biologically, then it is independent life.

The Hindu definition is a bit different.

Wait, is a sperm cell alive?

Yes, like any other living cell but it is not human. It is only half the part.

.. and in all cases only if performed before 21 weeks ..

I will consider about the mother first. There was a very recent case in Indian Courts where a 28 week rape pregnancy was denied abortion. The mother had a right but probably delayed it beyond reasonable time.

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.

Consent to sex is culturally available only after marriage here (legally it is after the marriageable age at 18).

 

[Willamena]

There are a lot of religious arguments (and general political ones) against abortion. But I think that the argument, generally speaking, demonstrates the scientific illiteracy of the everyman.

So you're against abortion for whatever reason, but consider this argument from Neil DeGrasse Tyson:

"Most abortions are spontaneous and happen naturally within the human body. Most women who have such an abortion never know it because it happens within the first month. It is very, very common. So in fact the biggest abortionist, if god is responsible for what goes on in your body, is god."

Now when he says 'very common' what he means is 50-70%. That's 50-70% of all pregnancies end in a spontaneous abortion that you 1) can't control and 2) are never aware of.

So how is the anti-abortionist stance tenable given this dataset?

It happens, but I"m against it.

So there.

 

[Sundance]

For me, as a believer in nonviolence, abortion gets three thumbs down.

 

[Vishvavajra]

Abortion is one of those things people are bound to find distasteful, and feeling concern for sentient life is not misplaced. (I.e. the extremely rare late-term abortions wherein the fetus is still alive, as the vast majority of abortions are terminations of non-sentient embryos that haven't even developed brains). On the other hand, attempting to ban it or impose harsh restrictions on reproductive choice does not lead anywhere good. In fact it creates more suffering in the long run. Better to regard abortion as an unfortunate choice that many women will have to make, but to let them make it themselves and not try to interfere with it.

If abortion bothers people, then they can work on getting more effective contraceptives to more people, eliminating wealth disparity, providing free and universal health care, and many other factors. Even then some people will find themselves unable or unwilling to carry a child to term, and we have to respect that. The alternative is forcing women to bear fetuses that they do not want, and that is massively psychologically damaging and puts them at increased risk of self-harm and suicide (deaths from DIY abortions plummeted in the US after Roe v. Wade). Nor are they likely to provide good care to a child they wanted to get rid of in the first place. Nor are there nearly enough people out there looking to adopt unwanted children. Nor is it true that one can carry a fetus to term without huge social, economic, and professional consequences.

Like many things, this will never be a black-and-white issue. We have to look at what causes the least harm to sentient beings in the big picture, and that means placing reproductive freedom in the hands of women.

 

[Marisa]

Consent to sex is culturally available only after marriage here (legally it is after the marriageable age at 18).

I'm assuming because there is a taboo on pre-marital sex? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Marisa]

For me, as a believer in nonviolence, abortion gets three thumbs down.

I respect your opinion and have no intention of suggesting it's wrong. But I am curious, do you make a distinction between abortion and Plan B?

"Plan B One-Step is not the same as RU-486, which is an abortion pill. It does not cause a miscarriage or abortion. In other words, it does not stop development of a fetus once the fertilized egg implants in the uterus. So it will not work if you are already pregnant when you take it."
Plan B (Morning-After Pill): Effectiveness and Side Effects

 

[JoStories]

The Hindu definition is a bit different.Yes, like any other living cell but it is not human. It is only half the part.I will consider about the mother first. There was a very recent case in Indian Courts where a 28 week rape pregnancy was denied abortion. The mother had a right but probably delayed it beyond reasonable time.Consent to sex is culturally available only after marriage here (legally it is after the marriageable age at 18).

Agreed that the Hindu definition is a bit different but regarding the woman who was raped, I find that her being denied is reprehensible. Who in the world would want to carry a fetus to term if the fetus was conceived via rape. I certainly would not.

 

[JoStories]

Fetal humans don't conscript anything. They are human beings who are put in a dependent position by parents.
To
​

perhaps, perhaps not. Birth control fails. Condoms fail. And in no way should a woman who was raped be required to carry the fetus to term. And the bottom line is that it is still the choice of the woman. ​

 

[JoStories]

I absolutely am confused, but I think you have to take on a little bit of the blame for that.


Is smoking pot wrong? Well, it's against the law, so yes it's wrong. ?? As for changing bad laws, pointing to what the law is now shouldn't be part of the debate. That would be circular reasoning. And I think you and I are are indirectly discussing the validity of this law.


Yeah, I just don't understand. When the baby is in the womb it relies on its mother, when it's out of the womb it relies on its mother, only in different ways. A 3 year old relies on its mother in yet another way. Can you rephrase this quote? I think you made a minor typo and it kinda made things unclear.

The difference, IMO, is that the fetus while inutero, is NOT alive. Not in the way that you and I are. Without the umbilical cord and the mother's symbiotic relationship, the fetus cannot survive. Therein lies the difference.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Are those religions against abortion as a concept 100%, regardless?
My religious views aren't.

 

[Mycroft]

I think this is one of those times when religion, or at the very least its believers, runs counter to the ideas of freedom, democracy, individual liberty and Self.

 

[McBell]

If there is no life at conception, how does the fetus develop?

If there is no life before conception there can be no conception.