Abortion
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-08-2012, 10:46 AM
RE: Abortion
(23-08-2012 10:34 AM)N.E.OhioAtheist Wrote:  
(23-08-2012 10:33 AM)Chas Wrote:  I think it's a little more nuanced than that.

The complicated part is late term pregnancy when the fetus is viable.

What if you are 'due' tomorrow? Is it really OK to abort today?
Due next week?
Due next month?

Pre-viable, no problem.

still none of your business!

Human rights issues are everyone's business.

I am not arguing against abortion, I am arguing for humanist ethics.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
23-08-2012, 10:46 AM
RE: Abortion
(23-08-2012 10:41 AM)N.E.OhioAtheist Wrote:  I think it's a little more nuanced than that.

The complicated part is late term pregnancy when the fetus is viable.

What if you are 'due' tomorrow? Is it really OK to abort today?
Due next week?
Due next month?

Pre-viable, no problem.

What a red herring! that never happens unless it can cause the death of the mother. This is just another tactic by the right to life people. I was one of them and know all the tricks.
[/quote]

Not a red herring, an attempt to bring reason to bear.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
23-08-2012, 10:53 AM
RE: Abortion
(23-08-2012 10:27 AM)Seasbury Wrote:  NEOA, Dom,

I agree by the way, completely - this is simply an opinion and not one that I would advocate making policy.

But I did note the rise in public opinion over the last decade in support of Pro-life - it indicated that Pro-choice advocates are losing the public argument on the issue and have already moved significantly down the slippery slope by ceding ground on late term abortions, viability outside the womb, etc., etc.

My intent was to focus the issue with regard to making a clearer case in the defense of Pro-choice, which I think will end up being eroded in the near future...

Wasn't a personal reply (no quote) just a general statement.

Chas, stay out of my womb. If you want to volunteer to raise a kid that would otherwise be aborted, go ahead and do so. That would be constructive. Making an innocent kid live with someone who doesn't want it just creates misery in the world. If you want to truly help, volunteer to adopt. The more adoptive parents, the less abortions.

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2012, 10:56 AM
RE: Abortion
My view on abortion is a bit of an extreme one, and not widely shared. But I'm not unique on this.

First off, above and beyond everything else, I share the above views. If you're against abortion, don't have one. That's all that matters.

Where I differ to most people (and to Seasbury) is the issue of morality. I don't see the transmission of pain as the moral cut-off point. Pain signals have to go somewhere and it is the receptor that is more important than anything else. We should be looking at the brain, not the spinal column.

Pain is a signal to an organism, instructing it to stop doing whatever it is currently doing, because it is having a negative effect on the organism's chances of survival. And that's all that it is. In that regard, "pain" can exist in all sorts of agents... including synthetic intelligence.

Moral values must concentrate on the agent that is receiving those signals. For me (and where I am in the vast minority) that extends up until the point of self-awareness. In humans, that would be around the age of 2. Yes... infanticide.

Of course, that concept fires all sorts of alarm-bells about the right to life and, oh my gawd, babies are so cute, you evil fuck! These are all hard-wired within us (to protect infants) and the human brain is meant to find babies cute. It is an altruistic survival mechanism.

Now, because the stage of self-awareness is a gradual thing that isn't uniform, finding a cut-off point is a hideous (and very unpopular) task. For that reason (and all of the potential problems that would follow the idea of the acceptability of infanticide) my own view is that the morally-acceptable termination date is that of the delivery of the baby.

In that regard, I support the right to choose... all the way up until the point where the foetus is still a foetus, and not a baby. Out of the womb, society must protect the baby's right to life... even if it is morally "inferior" (in regards to self-awareness) to non-human animals for the first couple of years of its existence.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2012, 10:57 AM (This post was last modified: 23-08-2012 11:25 AM by Chas.)
RE: Abortion
(23-08-2012 10:53 AM)Dom Wrote:  
(23-08-2012 10:27 AM)Seasbury Wrote:  NEOA, Dom,

I agree by the way, completely - this is simply an opinion and not one that I would advocate making policy.

But I did note the rise in public opinion over the last decade in support of Pro-life - it indicated that Pro-choice advocates are losing the public argument on the issue and have already moved significantly down the slippery slope by ceding ground on late term abortions, viability outside the womb, etc., etc.

My intent was to focus the issue with regard to making a clearer case in the defense of Pro-choice, which I think will end up being eroded in the near future...

Wasn't a personal reply (no quote) just a general statement.

Chas, stay out of my womb. If you want to volunteer to raise a kid that would otherwise be aborted, go ahead and do so. That would be constructive. Making an innocent kid live with someone who doesn't want it just creates misery in the world. If you want to truly help, volunteer to adopt. The more adoptive parents, the less abortions.

You either didn't read or didn't understand my post.

And, by the way, I have been a foster parent, though not an adoptive one.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2012, 11:09 AM
RE: Abortion
(23-08-2012 10:56 AM)Red Celt Wrote:  My view on abortion is a bit of an extreme one...my own view is that the morally-acceptable termination date is that of the delivery of the baby.

Wow! You really are a sick fuck! Laughat

Joking!

Great point to make!

At this point in my life I can be more reflective - my kids are grown and I ain't having any more! My wife will be appalled by what I wrote (even if it just an opinion) - her and Dom share the same view lockstep.

Where I was going with this is, from a Pro-Choice standpoint - it's either the woman's choice all the way through, or it is not. Unfortunately, the law has already been established that says it is not her choice after a certain period (late-term abortion is illegal), and Pro-Lifers are successfully promoting an agenda that would make abortion illegal in all cases. Where on the slippery slope of the issue can Pro-Choice advocates clearly articulate where it will remain permissible to let a woman decide? Is it already too late to make that effective argument?

"Like" my Facebook page
Brain Droppings Blog
[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT16Rq3dAcHhqiAsPC5xUC...oR0pEpxQZw]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2012, 11:21 AM
RE: Abortion
(23-08-2012 11:09 AM)Seasbury Wrote:  Where I was going with this is, from a Pro-Choice standpoint - it's either the woman's choice all the way through, or it is not.

Have a read of this: The Famous Violinist.

Judith Jarvis Thomson's article was (and remains) a hugely influential position on the woman's right to choice. I've seen this text published in several collections of philosophical writings. In one such volume, the very next article was on the suggestion that infanticide was a morally defensible position. Which allayed my fears (however briefly) that I actually was just a sick fuck. Undecided
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2012, 11:24 AM
RE: Abortion
(23-08-2012 11:09 AM)Seasbury Wrote:  
(23-08-2012 10:56 AM)Red Celt Wrote:  My view on abortion is a bit of an extreme one...my own view is that the morally-acceptable termination date is that of the delivery of the baby.

Wow! You really are a sick fuck! Laughat

Joking!

Great point to make!

At this point in my life I can be more reflective - my kids are grown and I ain't having any more! My wife will be appalled by what I wrote (even if it just an opinion) - her and Dom share the same view lockstep.

Where I was going with this is, from a Pro-Choice standpoint - it's either the woman's choice all the way through, or it is not. Unfortunately, the law has already been established that says it is not her choice after a certain period (late-term abortion is illegal), and Pro-Lifers are successfully promoting an agenda that would make abortion illegal in all cases. Where on the slippery slope of the issue can Pro-Choice advocates clearly articulate where it will remain permissible to let a woman decide? Is it already too late to make that effective argument?

I don't think that defining a certain point, that is viability, is at all slippery.
But it can't be absolute, either. The mother's health is crucial to the discussion.

One can come up with all kinds of scenarios, but let's simplify.
If a woman has passed the 'certain point', how did this happen? By not aborting sooner. If it is legal to abort up to that point, then she could have done so. If a woman chooses to go past that point, she has made a choice. She has committed to go all the way.

There really isn't any difference between aborting one day before birth and killing the baby one minute after the birth. The only feasible line to draw is viability of the fetus.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
23-08-2012, 11:41 AM
RE: Abortion
(23-08-2012 11:24 AM)Chas Wrote:  One can come up with all kinds of scenarios, but let's simplify.
If a woman has passed the 'certain point', how did this happen? By not aborting sooner. If it is legal to abort up to that point, then she could have done so. If a woman chooses to go past that point, she has made a choice. She has committed to go all the way.

Many things can change. It is too harsh to say that the mother has given up her right to choose. What if, as an example, she discovered that her husband has been cheating on her and is now leaving her, to live with his mistress? A pre-nup agreement means that she will be destitute. If she lives in a country that pursues neglectful fathers, her options are a little better, but if she had no career and no means of providing that support on her own... then she must still have the right to termination. Of course, if it is very late-stage, adoption would be a better alternative... nothing like a visit in 18 years from a resentful and hateful teenager, asking why they were abandoned, eh? Undecided

(23-08-2012 11:24 AM)Chas Wrote:  There really isn't any difference between aborting one day before birth and killing the baby one minute after the birth. The only feasible line to draw is viability of the fetus.

My above post was really dealing with the issue of morality (and the concept of the human mind in its earliest developmental stages). I'm basically at the extreme opposite of Pro-Lifers.

However, if a doctor is asked to abort a foetus one day before it becomes a baby... I agree, that it is too unconscionable an act to ask of any physician. Viability should be the ultimate consideration, unless the mother's life is in danger. An actual person must always take priority over a potential person.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2012, 11:58 AM
RE: Abortion
(23-08-2012 11:41 AM)Red Celt Wrote:  
(23-08-2012 11:24 AM)Chas Wrote:  One can come up with all kinds of scenarios, but let's simplify.
If a woman has passed the 'certain point', how did this happen? By not aborting sooner. If it is legal to abort up to that point, then she could have done so. If a woman chooses to go past that point, she has made a choice. She has committed to go all the way.

Many things can change. It is too harsh to say that the mother has given up her right to choose. What if, as an example, she discovered that her husband has been cheating on her and is now leaving her, to live with his mistress? A pre-nup agreement means that she will be destitute. If she lives in a country that pursues neglectful fathers, her options are a little better, but if she had no career and no means of providing that support on her own... then she must still have the right to termination. Of course, if it is very late-stage, adoption would be a better alternative... nothing like a visit in 18 years from a resentful and hateful teenager, asking why they were abandoned, eh? Undecided

(23-08-2012 11:24 AM)Chas Wrote:  There really isn't any difference between aborting one day before birth and killing the baby one minute after the birth. The only feasible line to draw is viability of the fetus.

My above post was really dealing with the issue of morality (and the concept of the human mind in its earliest developmental stages). I'm basically at the extreme opposite of Pro-Lifers.

However, if a doctor is asked to abort a foetus one day before it becomes a baby... I agree, that it is too unconscionable an act to ask of any physician. Viability should be the ultimate consideration, unless the mother's life is in danger. An actual person must always take priority over a potential person.

I did say that there shouldn't be absolutes, and that we can spin many scenarios.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: