Announcement: Your votes are in! The January 2019 Philosophy Book of the Month is The Runaway Species: How Human Creativity Remakes the World by David Eagleman and Anthony Brandt.

Abortion - Not as diametrically divisive as often thought?

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me
Post Reply

With which statement do you agree?

I want it to be illegal for a very poor teenager who was impregnated from being raped by an immediate family member to get an abortion even in the first week of pregnancy even if the doctors can and did detect the baby has severe genetic disorders and that the pregnancy if taken to term would have complications greatly risking the life of both the mother and would-be baby.
7
10%
I want it to be legal for a wealthy woman who is 5 days past her due date (of birth) to get an abortion even though doctors are sure that the healthy baby would be delivered safely and relatively easily otherwise and even though many safe, healthy, loving families are willing to adopt the would-be newborn immediately and even pay the woman significantly for that.
13
19%
I do not agree fully with either one of the above statements.
47
70%
 
Total votes: 67

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 3154
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Abortion - Not as diametrically divisive as often though

Post by LuckyR » September 21st, 2018, 11:32 am

ThomasHobbes wrote:
September 20th, 2018, 3:49 am
Voiceofwisdom wrote:
January 9th, 2016, 2:25 am
Abortion ought to be legal because I believe in the freedom of the individual to make decisions about their bodies, regardless of what society thinks about those decisions.
Even if the baby would easily survive outside the womb and could make a childless couple happy through adoption?
You would rather kill a viable foetus five days past due?
Wow, sounds scary. Please inform us of the place where such a practice is currently legal (or is that a couple of strawmen?)
"As usual... it depends."

User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Abortion - Not as diametrically divisive as often though

Post by ThomasHobbes » September 21st, 2018, 12:39 pm

LuckyR wrote:
September 21st, 2018, 11:32 am
ThomasHobbes wrote:
September 20th, 2018, 3:49 am

Even if the baby would easily survive outside the womb and could make a childless couple happy through adoption?
You would rather kill a viable foetus five days past due?
Wow, sounds scary. Please inform us of the place where such a practice is currently legal (or is that a couple of strawmen?)
DUh.
Read the bloody thread.
This is the second post you've made that is an irrelevant response.

User avatar
msieber
New Trial Member
Posts: 3
Joined: September 13th, 2018, 5:45 pm

Re: Abortion - Not as diametrically divisive as often thought?

Post by msieber » September 21st, 2018, 2:29 pm

hmm.. so does anyone have input that is relevant to the scenario given by the initial poster? maybe a solution you've concocted or an argument for/against someone else's solution/conclusion? looking for perspectives on the matter more than reactions of "Wow, sounds____" or "Really? even if: (reiterates original post question)?" Also preferably more than implying a lack of desire to give this scenario thought by reason of something like the member ThomasHobbes states:
"Take two ridiculously absurd opposing statements at the most banal and extreme ends of a idea and try to pretend that we all have the same opinion."
If you find extreme hypotheticals absurd that is fine by all means, I suppose this may not be the thread for you; however, I'm not sure we can conclude that we are pretending that we all have the same opinion...at least the poll indicates that I don't personally share the same opinion as the majority of responders and for the majority, which chose the option of finding a compromise between two extremes... there are nearly limitless possibilities between two extremes for people to come up with so how can we attribute "sameness" to the majority vote?

User avatar
Newme
Posts: 1184
Joined: December 13th, 2011, 1:21 am

Re: Abortion - Not as diametrically divisive as often though

Post by Newme » October 19th, 2018, 11:54 pm

msieber wrote:
September 13th, 2018, 11:41 pm
Newme wrote:
November 22nd, 2015, 12:11 pm
SpiralOut, The bottom line, foundation of basic ethics, is respecting what is best for all involved. "Ethics denotes the theory of right action and the greater good." The greater good is that we don't kill each other. This is so very basic, Spiral! How can you justify killing another human being?

A child is defined as a "developing human being." Just because a child is not finisted developing, you seem to assume their life is less valuable. And you ignorantly assume that children killed by abortion cannot feel their bodies ripped apart. Yet, by 8 weeks gestation, all body systems are intact, including the central nervous system (pain sensors), so by the time many abortions are performed, he/she can FEEL his/her body being ripped apart, limb by limb, leaving the head by itself. That is not the greater good, nor right action.

Obviously, you're not a doctor and likely did not rip a child apart yourself - but you may have paid someone to do it. If you hadn't, I believe you'd be more ethically reasonable about this.
Must we assume the only method to abort the pregnancy is by ripping apart the infant while it can still feel pain? Let me go ahead and clarify that in my conclusion on my post I was hypothetically using less torturous means of abortion...ie- injection of a substance into the amniotic sac resulting in death before you start ripping off body parts.
So, would you rather be poisoned to death - by who knows what horrendous poison... or have your body ripped apart? Either way would pretty much suck, wouldn’t it?

It reminds me of a quote (by Lincoln ?) about slavery but I’ll adapt it to apply to abortion... (paraphrasing) “Those who are so in favor of cruely killing a developing child in utero never volunteer themselves for the same treatment.”

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 3154
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Abortion - Not as diametrically divisive as often thought?

Post by LuckyR » October 20th, 2018, 3:39 am

Bottom line, you either believe women have a certain autonomy over their bodies or you don't. Reasonable people can disagree, but try to keep the theatrics to a minimum on such a serious topic.
"As usual... it depends."

User avatar
Newme
Posts: 1184
Joined: December 13th, 2011, 1:21 am

Re: Abortion - Not as diametrically divisive as often thought?

Post by Newme » November 10th, 2018, 10:02 pm

How much more dramatic can it be for a helpless child to be ripped apart without pain meds - after 8 weeks gestation when the central nervous (pain receptors) are intact? Some would rather we pretend we’re not talking about a human life being so cruelly killed. It makes THEM feel better if you refer to the child as a parasite or the murder as a surgical procedure. And as we know - it’s ok to discriminate based on age and kill a baby - when it comes to the feelings of a woman. Women’s rights trump those who have no voice. Don’t you dare discriminate against women - but babies - fine - kill them is fine - so they act.

Image

Unless on the rare occasion of rape, a woman has the choice to engage in sex or not. She also has the choice of whether to use birth control or not. Once she helps create a human life - she can kill that child or allow him/her to live. Everything has a consequence and many women regret having their child killed for the rest of their lives. After all, what kind of mother kills her own child?

The choice to have responsible sex - using birth control if you’re not ready for a child - is a more moral choice than killing a child you CHOSE to create.

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 7451
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Abortion - Not as diametrically divisive as often thought?

Post by Greta » November 10th, 2018, 10:24 pm

I did not know that a functioning nervous system was required for empathy.

What did everyone eat yesterday?

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 3154
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Abortion - Not as diametrically divisive as often thought?

Post by LuckyR » November 12th, 2018, 2:02 am

Newme wrote:
November 10th, 2018, 10:02 pm
How much more dramatic can it be for a helpless child to be ripped apart without pain meds - after 8 weeks gestation when the central nervous (pain receptors) are intact? Some would rather we pretend we’re not talking about a human life being so cruelly killed. It makes THEM feel better if you refer to the child as a parasite or the murder as a surgical procedure. And as we know - it’s ok to discriminate based on age and kill a baby - when it comes to the feelings of a woman. Women’s rights trump those who have no voice. Don’t you dare discriminate against women - but babies - fine - kill them is fine - so they act.

Image

Unless on the rare occasion of rape, a woman has the choice to engage in sex or not. She also has the choice of whether to use birth control or not. Once she helps create a human life - she can kill that child or allow him/her to live. Everything has a consequence and many women regret having their child killed for the rest of their lives. After all, what kind of mother kills her own child?

The choice to have responsible sex - using birth control if you’re not ready for a child - is a more moral choice than killing a child you CHOSE to create.
Everyone knows all birth control methods have a failure rate.
"As usual... it depends."

Fooloso4
Moderator
Posts: 3521
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Abortion - Not as diametrically divisive as often thought?

Post by Fooloso4 » November 12th, 2018, 12:55 pm

Newme:
The choice to have responsible sex - using birth control if you’re not ready for a child - is a more moral choice than killing a child you CHOSE to create.
Does this mean it is okay to kill a child in the case of rape?

Fooloso4
Moderator
Posts: 3521
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Abortion - Not as diametrically divisive as often thought?

Post by Fooloso4 » November 12th, 2018, 5:44 pm

Newme:
How much more dramatic can it be for a helpless child to be ripped apart without pain meds - after 8 weeks gestation when the central nervous (pain receptors) are intact?
What credible scientific evidence can you provide that a fetus begins to feel pain after 8 weeks? Anti-abortion advocates have published a great deal of misinformation on the subject, largely based on the erroneous equation of the development of pain receptors and stimulus response with pain.

But many doctors reject those claims, saying a fetus’s brain and nervous system are not developed at 20 weeks to feel pain. They cite a wide-ranging 2005 study [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... cle/201429] that found a fetus was unlikely to feel pain until the third trimester of a pregnancy, or about 27 weeks. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said in 2013 [https://www.acog.org/-/media/Department ... 2138545234] that no subsequent research had contradicted that study. (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/05/us/ ... hesia.html) links added)

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 7451
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Abortion - Not as diametrically divisive as often thought?

Post by Greta » November 13th, 2018, 12:08 am

Is pain the key issue? If that's the concern then what did everyone have for lunch today? Were pain and suffering to sentient (rather than unformed) beings involved?

Post Reply