A not unreasonable, if minority opinion. As I mentioned you describe a coherent and understandable (to me) rationale for it. Though any discussion on this topic that does not acknowledge that it involves conflicting, legitimate "rights", is somewhere between incomplete and misleading.rose-30 wrote: ↑March 6th, 2022, 9:44 amI made it a big deal because it is a big deal. People don't realize it since they can call it "an accident". But if you are raped it's different and obviously is not your choice. But it's also not the fault of the baby and I don't think it's our decision to take his/her life.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 5th, 2022, 3:54 amSeveral things. Early in your comments you make a big deal about choosing to have sex and the consequences of that choice. Later in the rape section (an area without choice) you gloss over what you had previously made such a big deal about. Thus your "reasoning" sounds more like rationalizations to fit the pre-determined conclusion you finally reveal the source of in your last paragraph.rose-30 wrote: ↑March 4th, 2022, 9:41 pm I think that I soon as we start having sexual relations we know that there is a risk of getting pregnant. Therefore, it is our responsibility to face the consequences of our actions. When you get into a car and don't buckle your seatbelt, you crash and get injured. You are judged as guilty. Because you were responsible for the choice that you made by not protecting yourself.
However, even if you wear your seatbelt, you know that there is an 80/90% chance that you can get into a car accident. Because it is a fact.
So, at the end of the day, if you choose to have sexual relationships, you should face the consequences of that decision. Sex is not a hobby, it's the only way to create life. And we all know that, so how can you be surprised and want to kill the baby because it was an "accident"?
There are no such things as having a baby by accident. An accident happened to you when you did not do anything about it (I accidentally fell from the stairs). YOU choose to have sex, it's a choice, it's not an accident. Even if you don't plan a baby, you planned to have sex and the baby is just the proven result of that choice.
Finally, for rape. I think that it is much more complex BUT I still think that we should first think about the baby because unfortunately, the baby can't take his own decision. So if he/she is here, a human shouldn't be the person to decide his/her destiny. If you can't have the baby, there is adoption. But at least, you give him/her the chance to exist and (potentially) be great!
My mom had me when she was 16. You can call it an "accident" I call it stupid. My grandma wanted her to abort, BUT, here I am. I love my life. And I'm happy that she let me have an opportunity to live this life.
Understandable but far from a coherent argument.
Is abortion wrong?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Is abortion wrong?
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Is abortion wrong?
We make the decision to take lives constantly. Every health budget effectively condemns some to death. Every war. Every budget cut. Every meal stems from deaths for which we are responsible. Life is harsh and every one of us kills to live because the society on which we depend kills very, very freely.
The deaths of unwanted foetuses is less tragic than most deaths. It has no mind, with a consciousness far less cohered than the animals we happily kill and eat without even a moment's thought. Abortions are suboptimal, but so is killing animals to eat or killing pest animals. Life itself is suboptimal and, ideally, deaths are inflicted on those with the least to lose.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Is abortion wrong?
The "we're all going to die, it's just a timing issue", observation is, of course valid. Though few concentrate on it in the moment.Sy Borg wrote: ↑March 6th, 2022, 4:43 pm I see no reason to reward rapists by propagating their genes.
We make the decision to take lives constantly. Every health budget effectively condemns some to death. Every war. Every budget cut. Every meal stems from deaths for which we are responsible. Life is harsh and every one of us kills to live because the society on which we depend kills very, very freely.
The deaths of unwanted foetuses is less tragic than most deaths. It has no mind, with a consciousness far less cohered than the animals we happily kill and eat without even a moment's thought. Abortions are suboptimal, but so is killing animals to eat or killing pest animals. Life itself is suboptimal and, ideally, deaths are inflicted on those with the least to lose.
Having said that, your first line is a phrasing I have not seen before, and I follow this issue very closely. Kudos to you.
- Consul
- Posts: 6038
- Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
- Location: Germany
Re: Is abortion wrong?
QUOTE>
"We hear it argued that a woman has the right to abort her unborn baby because she has a right to choose what happens to her own body. This is a bad argument. First, it begs the question: an opponent will insist that the fetus is not part of the mother’s body—it is someone else’s body that happens to be inside hers. The case is not like the organs of the mother’s body, which really are parts of her body. It is easy to imagine an intelligent conscious being living inside the body of a human: this would not be simply a part of the host’s body over which he or she has complete dominion. Second, the fetus is quite unlike the organs of the mother’s body in that it can be removed without causing harm to the mother—it isn’t part of her normal physiological functioning. Third, there is no absolute right to do with one’s body whatever one chooses to do: a mother could not choose to have all her limbs amputated because of some bizarre religious belief given that this would disable her from performing her maternal duties—she needs to stay able-bodied in order to raise her children. Fourth, if the fetus were part of the mother’s body, it would still be so when removed from it—just like any other part of her body. But no one argues that infanticide is morally permissible because the child is an erstwhile part of the mother’s body: she doesn’t have to right to do with this removed part whatever she chooses. The logic of bodily part-hood is completely different from the logic that governs the relation between a mother and her child, whether born or unborn. Is it to be supposed that the baby was once a part of her body but at birth ceases to be a part of her body? No, it was once inside her and now it is outside her: but that isn’t the same as once being a part and now not being a part (like a removed appendix). The rhetoric of “my body, my choice” is conceptually flawed, and only leads opponents of abortion to think that nothing better can be said to address their concerns. After all, the fetus remains inside the mother for nine months, but surely no one thinks that for this entire time there is no moral question about whether abortion is acceptable. Yet this “argument” is trotted out all the time as a defense of the legitimacy of abortion."
Colin McGinn: Abortion and the Body
<QUOTE
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Is abortion wrong?
Not that babies don't become conscious until birth (and then, only in a very simple way) and even then, their self image is a combination of mother and baby.
-
- Posts: 4696
- Joined: February 1st, 2017, 1:06 am
Re: Is abortion wrong?
Well, that itself if a bad argument. While it's true that a fetus is not part of the mother's body, the "right to choose what happens to her own body" embraces not only the right to its parts, but the right to decide to what uses it will be put, including hosting and nurturing another being. So the fetus not being part of her body does not refute the "right to her body" argument. The classic examination of that issue is J. J. Thomson's:Consul wrote: ↑June 8th, 2022, 10:20 pm
"We hear it argued that a woman has the right to abort her unborn baby because she has a right to choose what happens to her own body. This is a bad argument. First, it begs the question: an opponent will insist that the fetus is not part of the mother’s body—it is someone else’s body that happens to be inside hers.
https://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phi ... homson.htm
If she has children she does have a duty to provide for them. But she can fulfill that duty in other ways, such as placing them for adoption. As long as that obligation is met she has a perfect right to amputate her limbs, or commit suicide.Third, there is no absolute right to do with one’s body whatever one chooses to do: a mother could not choose to have all her limbs amputated because of some bizarre religious belief given that this would disable her from performing her maternal duties—she needs to stay able-bodied in order to raise her children.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Is abortion wrong?
Abortion is 100% about patriarchal control of women via their bodies. I have no time for feminism and even I can see this fact as plain as day, it's so blatant. It's simply one more chapter in an ancient power struggle between males and females that long predates humans.
It can't be about harming sentient beings because a foetus lives in a vague dream state until its is born, while many animals that "pro-lifers" eat without the slightest thought are just as sentient as the children they drop off at kindergarten.
-
- Posts: 4696
- Joined: February 1st, 2017, 1:06 am
Re: Is abortion wrong?
Thomson's violinist is connected to the donor via an IV tube. That doesn't make him part of her body.
Now you're zeroing in on a valid argument.It can't be about harming sentient beings because a foetus lives in a vague dream state until its is born, while many animals that "pro-lifers" eat without the slightest thought are just as sentient as the children they drop off at kindergarten.
- Consul
- Posts: 6038
- Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
- Location: Germany
Re: Is abortion wrong?
First of all, I myself am not an anti-abortionist.Sy Borg wrote: ↑June 8th, 2022, 10:58 pm A foetus is connected to the mother via placenta. A pregnant woman is one organism, unless you believe that her eggs are not part of her either. No, a woman's eggs - fertilised or not - are a part of her until they are not.
Abortion is 100% about patriarchal control of women via their bodies. I have no time for feminism and even I can see this fact as plain as day, it's so blatant. It's simply one more chapter in an ancient power struggle between males and females that long predates humans.
McGinn's point doesn't seem to be that abortion is morally wrong, but that the "my body, my choice!" argument is a bad argument for its not being morally wrong.
Connection is not the same as parthood, so that "a foetus is connected to the mother via placenta" doesn't necessarily mean that it is part of its mother's body. A foetus is an organism itself rather than just an organ of another organism.
Note that being inside something isn't the same as being part of it either!
- Consul
- Posts: 6038
- Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
- Location: Germany
Re: Is abortion wrong?
- Consul
- Posts: 6038
- Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
- Location: Germany
Re: Is abortion wrong?
"Abortion, clearly, is a serious matter, not to be undertaken lightly. It is certainly no substitute for contraception. It is, I have suggested, morally acceptable to abort early, but very strong reason is needed to justify late abortion."
(McGinn, Colin. Moral Literacy, or How To Do The Right Thing. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, 1992. p. 39)
- Consul
- Posts: 6038
- Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
- Location: Germany
Re: Is abortion wrong?
Again, that the foetus is physically connected to and physiologically dependent on the mother doesn't necessarily mean that it is part of her body.
If consciousness means phenomenal consciousness (= subjective experience/sentience), then babies do become conscious before birth. What foetuses and born babies lack is personal self-consciousness.
- Consul
- Posts: 6038
- Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
- Location: Germany
Re: Is abortion wrong?
For example, when you are under general anesthesia, you are physically connected to and physiologically dependent on a medical ventilator; but the machine isn't part of your body.
- Consul
- Posts: 6038
- Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
- Location: Germany
Re: Is abortion wrong?
But it invalidates that kind of "right to her body" argument according to which abortion is permissible because an embryo/fetus is a body part of its mother.GE Morton wrote: ↑June 8th, 2022, 10:52 pm Well, that itself if a bad argument. While it's true that a fetus is not part of the mother's body, the "right to choose what happens to her own body" embraces not only the right to its parts, but the right to decide to what uses it will be put, including hosting and nurturing another being. So the fetus not being part of her body does not refute the "right to her body" argument.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Is abortion wrong?
It's just fiddling around the edges, given that all agree that abortion of at least non-viable foetuses should be legal and safe. If people don't agonise over pigs, cows and sheep, then it's not rational for them to agonise over a non-sentient foetus - except for the pregnant woman and SOs. It is entirely their private business - or should be.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023