Abortion

User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Abortion

Post by Captain Seafort »

Deepcrush wrote:In recap, if there isn't a life or death factor. Then there is no reason for abortion. Again, this is all IMO.
Agreed, but this goes both ways. If the foetus isn't sentient, then it isn't alive, and therefore doesn't count.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Abortion

Post by Deepcrush »

Captain Seafort wrote:Agreed, but this goes both ways. If the foetus isn't sentient, then it isn't alive, and therefore doesn't count.
Something being alive and something being sentient are two different things. So no, it does not go both ways.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Mikey »

What if carrying to term threatens the life of the mother? In that case, I'd say abortion is called for. My faith teaches that an actual life takes precedence over a potential one.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Abortion

Post by Deepcrush »

Mikey wrote:What if carrying to term threatens the life of the mother? In that case, I'd say abortion is called for. My faith teaches that an actual life takes precedence over a potential one.
That falls under the life or death ideal.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
stitch626
2 Star Admiral
2 Star Admiral
Posts: 9585
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 10:57 pm
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by stitch626 »

Mikey wrote:What if carrying to term threatens the life of the mother? In that case, I'd say abortion is called for. My faith teaches that an actual life takes precedence over a potential one.
But the baby is alive. Unless its a miscarriage. The baby is alive as sperm and egg. Life is independent of its development.
No trees were killed in transmission of this message. However, some electrons were mildly inconvenienced.
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Tsukiyumi »

stitch626 wrote:
Mikey wrote:What if carrying to term threatens the life of the mother? In that case, I'd say abortion is called for. My faith teaches that an actual life takes precedence over a potential one.
But the baby is alive. Unless its a miscarriage. The baby is alive as sperm and egg. Life is independent of its development.
Technically, a tumor is alive.

I'm just saying.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Abortion

Post by Deepcrush »

But the tumor kills, that puts it in the "protecting life" range.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Mikey »

A tumor is alive only as much as my big toe; it is a part of an organism, not an orgaism of itself.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
Sionnach Glic
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 26014
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: Poblacht na hÉireann, Baile Átha Cliath

Re: Abortion

Post by Sionnach Glic »

As is a fetus for the first two thirds of its existance inside the womb.
"You've all been selected for this mission because you each have a special skill. Professor Hawking, John Leslie, Phil Neville, the Wu-Tang Clan, Usher, the Sugar Puffs Monster and Daniel Day-Lewis! Welcome to Operation MindFuck!"
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Mikey »

Sionnach Glic wrote:As is a fetus for the first two thirds of its existance inside the womb.
...and the circle is complete. Yes, the point I was trying to make is that my faith seems to attempt to erase the weird dividing line that cause people to say "it's sad" when children die but "it was his time" when old people die. A life is a life, irrespective of age; and in a case in which carrying to term threatens the life of the mother, halacha (Jewish rulings on practical life, rather than worship) demands that an actual, extant life be given preference to the unknown potential of a fetus.

IMO, that's out the window by the third timester; but often with the aid of vertical C-sections and incubatory devices, the choice doesn't need to be made at that point.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
User avatar
Laughing Man
Ensign
Ensign
Posts: 116
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:37 am

Re: Abortion

Post by Laughing Man »

Tsukiyumi wrote:Well, since I'm pro-choice I must naturally argue that we need more fetuses for stem cells and face cream.
:laughroll:


A fetus shows independent brain activity from as early as 20 weeks
The "Quickening" (I thought Highlander too!) when muscular and nervous system are complete being approx. 2 weeks before.

People in a Persistent vegetative coma are considered alive without brain activity,

The real issue,to my mind, is the life or potential thereof (all emotions and sentiment aside) worth the inconvenience and care until it can suitably take care of itself, and if not, should it be born?

I think with all the other options out there it shouldn't be necessary unless failing to do so would cause immediate death of the mother.
Heck Is Where People Go Who Don't Believe In Golly!
User avatar
sunnyside
Captain
Captain
Posts: 2711
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:35 pm

Re: There Must Be Something In The Water....

Post by sunnyside »

Sionnach Glic wrote:The difference between this child and a four month or so old fetus is that this child can think (to an extent) and feel pain. That does not hold true for a fetus, which does not even have a working brain.

The problem, Sunny, is that you're not acknowledging any middle ground here. What you're saying is that either you should be against both baby-killing and abortion or for both while not realising that there are perfectly valid reasons to accept one and not the other.

It isn't that I'm not acknowledging the existances of middle ground positions. I'm sure there are many, as this thread demonstrates. However the constant theme is putting a threshold somewhere dividing a lump of cells and a supremely precious life. From the first part of your post perhaps you'd put it when the child can feel pain, or wiggle it's big toe or somesuch. Does it just have to have the neurons in place, or does it actually have to wiggle a toe to be a life? Does there just have to be a pain receptor neuron in place that can fire to be considered life?

It isn't that I don't appreciate the arguments, or the desire, perhaps need, to balance morality with convenience by defining morality in such a way that it's convenient. But it always seems so silly to me once you define that final razor thin threshold between such great extremes, wherever you place it.
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Mikey »

sunnyside wrote:razor thin threshold
Here's the problem. In your initial resposne in this trhead, you blurred the distinction between and infant and a fetus. Calling birth a "razor-thin threshold" is ludicrous. It's as momentous a demarcation as is possible. I can't imagine anyone considering it to be any less than the Great Wall of China of thresholds.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
User avatar
sunnyside
Captain
Captain
Posts: 2711
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:35 pm

Re: Abortion

Post by sunnyside »

Mikey wrote:
sunnyside wrote:razor thin threshold
Here's the problem. In your initial resposne in this trhead, you blurred the distinction between and infant and a fetus. Calling birth a "razor-thin threshold" is ludicrous. It's as momentous a demarcation as is possible. I can't imagine anyone considering it to be any less than the Great Wall of China of thresholds.
So, if I understand you properly, if everything else is the same, such as time, location etc:

Situation #1 Doctor terminates child inside womb, then removes them = removal of unwanted extra cells

Situation #2 Doctor removes child from womb, then terminates child = horrible murder

This order of operations issue is the most stark for a near term child, which could be "born" any minute, but got whacked just before they managed to cross that magic threshold, perhaps even while they were starting on their path down the birth canal. But that's the situation to be considered if you take "birth" to be the threshold.
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Abortion

Post by Mikey »

sunnyside wrote: if I understand you properly
Which, apparently, you do not - or are being hyperbolic in order to make a point and not answer the meat of the matter. If you had read through the thread, you would have seen me profess my abhorrence for late-term abortion. You are extrapolating things from one argument wand using them in another which is tangential. I mentioned this:
Mikey wrote:Here's the problem. In your initial resposne in this trhead, you blurred the distinction between and infant and a fetus. Calling birth a "razor-thin threshold" is ludicrous. It's as momentous a demarcation as is possible. I can't imagine anyone considering it to be any less than the Great Wall of China of thresholds.
in response to your claim that there is little difference between a fetus and an infant. It was never said, intended, or implied to be part of any argument on the morality or legality of abortion.

I have made my opinions on the morality and legality of abortion perfectly clear. To mistate my position in an overly-simplistic and melodramatic manner as you did just above is both obnoxious and insulting. However, if you must have a definition to assuage something inside of you, here is the one I profess to use - with ZERO implication involved regarding anything to do with reproductive rights:

from conception to birth, progeny may be considered either zygote, embryo, or fetus, depending on length/stage of development.
after birth, progeny may be considered... well, someone who's been born. Trying to obscure the issue by claiming that birth isn't a clear demarcation is N-V-T-S nuts.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
Post Reply