Abortion

Quote: Nareed

I've known no such people.

Oh, no. We've met:-)

Quote: rdw4potus

Oh, no. We've met:-)

I don't recall discussing abortion :)

Quote: Nareed

I don't recall discussing abortion :)

I suppose that's not really the sort of think that comes up at the craps table.

I would never personally go along with an abortion, but I also think that other people should be allowed to do so if they choose to.

Quote: Nareed

No offense, but you're pointing out the obvious. A person under anesthesia neither feels pain nor is self-aware (or at least is not conscious). But that has nothing to do with anything.

No offense taken, it just seemed like some people may have been thinking about using when a fetus is self-aware or feels pain to be a judge as to when abortion is allowed. I just wanted to remind everyone that it is obvious neither of those are good standards to use to determine if we can or cannot terminate someone.

Quote: Nareed

Except that's only a belief. You cannot impose your beleifs on others.

That is a good point. I have never been under the illusion that a change in law is going to solve the abortion issue. The real issue is to change people's beliefs about the sacredness of human life.

p.s. It also wouldn't hurt to change people's beliefs about the sacredness of sex too.

Quote: rdw4potus

I would never personally go along with an abortion, but I also think that other people should be allowed to do so if they choose to.

That just brings up the question: Why wouldn't you go along with an abortion?

Quote: FrGamble

No offense taken, it just seemed like some people may have been thinking about using when a fetus is self-aware or feels pain to be a judge as to when abortion is allowed.

The development of consciousness is a useful point. More important is: can the fetus live without being inside the womb with an umbilical cord attached? After all, it is making use of the mother's body.

Quote:

I just wanted to remind everyone that it is obvious neither of those are good standards to use to determine if we can or cannot terminate someone.

Now you're just twisting things. Never having had consciousness is vastly different from having such consciousness temporarily unavailable.

Quote:

That is a good point. I have never been under the illusion that a change in law is going to solve the abortion issue. The real issue is to change people's beliefs about the sacredness of human life.

Abortion is moral because human life is sacred. In this case because a woman has a right to decide what goes on in her body., rather than be reduced to an unwilling incubator.

Quote: Nareed

The development of consciousness is a useful point. More important is: can the fetus live without being inside the womb with an umbilical cord attached? After all, it is making use of the mother's body.

I thought it was obvious but do I need to point out that someone should not be killed if they are hooked up to a feeding tube or if they are going to need to be on a ventalitor for a time before they can be weened off of it?

Quote: Nareed

Now you're just twisting things. Never having had consciousness is vastly different from having such consciousness temporarily unavailable.

How so? and do you know for sure when this consciousness arrives?

Quote: Nareed

Abortion is moral because human life is sacred. In this case because a woman has a right to decide what goes on in her body., rather than be reduced to an unwilling incubator.

The life of the mother is indeed sacred but not more so than the developing child in her womb. We are all equal in the eyes of God and we shouldn't try to say whose life is more important. We without a doubt do not want to start asking whose temporary inconvience is more important than a human life.

Quote: FrGamble

I thought it was obvious but do I need to point out that someone should not be killed if they are hooked up to a feeding tube or if they are going to need to be on a ventalitor for a time before they can be weened off of it?

Abortion si one thing. End of life decisions is something different. The death penalty is also different. We're talking about abortion, not the other two.

Quote:

The life of the mother is indeed sacred but not more so than the developing child in her womb.

It is more so than the fetus developing in her womb. By life I don't mean merely the continued existence of the mother, but the whole of her life, including goals, career, circumstances, hopes, dreams, etc.

Quote:

We are all equal in the eyes of God and we shouldn't try to say whose life is more important.

Now, you see, to me that's completely arbitrary and a cop-out. We don't have to think about it becasue god already told us that to do. Sorry, that's not an argument, that's a white flag over your mind.

Quote:

We without a doubt do not want to start asking whose temporary inconvience is more important than a human life.

You can call it a "temporary inconvenience" after you either 1) carry a pregnancy to term or 2) spend 9 months 24/7 living with a pregnant woman. I've done neither, but I've listened to those who have. Calling that time a temporary inconvenience is like calling the Dark Ages a temprary setback.

All these things (Abortion, end-of-life decisions, death penalty) are life and death decisions. We are talking about whether or not someone lives or dies, I see them very similar. In every case we need to recognize the highest value is human life. There are no goals, career, hopes, or dreams that justify killing another human being. We can ask any mothers here or fathers who were with their loved one through her pregnancy what those nine months felt like after they held their newborn child in their arms. A temporary inconvenience might be too strong of a phrase to describe what the difficutlies of pregnancy mean when compared to the joy of a new child to love.

Quote: FrGamble

All these things (Abortion, end-of-life decisions, death penalty) are life and death decisions. We are talking about whether or not someone lives or dies, I see them very similar.

They're neither judged nor decided by the same criteria. You don't consider the fetus' actions, as you do in the death penalty. You don't consider a murderer's chances of recovery as you do in end of life decisions. You don't judge the value of adding a family member as you do in abortions.

Cars, ships and airplanes are all vehicles. The decisions on whether to acquire either of them are based on different criteria.

Quote:

In every case we need to recognize the highest value is human life. There are no goals, career, hopes, or dreams that justify killing another human being.

A fetus is not a human being until a certain point in the pregnancy. Prior to that it's only a potettial human being. Actual circumstances trump potentials.

Quote:

We can ask any mothers here or fathers who were with their loved one through her pregnancy what those nine months felt like after they held their newborn child in their arms

Yes, thats' part of the problem. A 14-15 year old girl is in no position to begin raising a baby, but if she carries it to term she may find it horrendously hard to give up once she gives birth to a daughter or a son. So either she gives up her child and regrets it for years, maybe dor the rest of her life, or she doesn't and ruins her prospects of having a career and a decent living the rest of her life. And this doens't event ake into account how the child will wind up. So you see the "temporary inconvenience" that can last for several years toa lifetime isn't as temporary as you think.

That's not to say every pregnant teenager shoudl abort. It might work out for some, after all. And ideally teenage girls should emply every method for avoiding pregnancy, too. But the option to abort should always be there.