I don't know what the scientific definition of a "person" is, so I would regard it as a living fetus. I believe that a human starts at conception because it is a rapidly developing process. No one has been able to factually state that a fetus/baby/person starts at any other point than conception.
An abortion is the termination of a living fetus and morally needs to be regarded in that way.
so I would regard it as a living fetus. I believe that a human starts at conception because it is a rapidly developing process. No one has been able to factually state that a fetus/baby/person starts at any other point than conception.
Well that depends on your definition of rapidly. To start with it takes about three weeks before cell types even start to differentiate beyond basic cells. up till roughly four weeks you kill more cells scratching yourself than you do if an embryo is terminated. It isn't till roughly five weeks that organs start to develop so if you want to look at an absolutely earliest point where any nervous signals can occur you're lookin at ten weeks after conception. there are roughly 200 seperate biological stages in the development from conception to birth, Developmental biologists will tell you that at least 40 of these have just as good a claim to being the beginning of life as conception.
And I would argue that that is a completely artificial assumption forming a circular argument. Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
By your argument you would have to regard the fetus as not alive until when exactly?
Neurobiologically a fetus does not become a persson till Nine months after birth (18 months after conception) Humans are unique in that their young are born without their brains being fully formed, due to the size of the head and the pelvic canal
It is arguable (and has been argued by eminent biologists) that personhood is a continuum from non personhood that exists as a pile of cells to personhood where the individual exists. the argument that Morally we must consider personhood to exist fully formed at the point of conception is incredibly simplistic. Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
if your embryo has continued through all stages of development then its an adult. So how can there be an inevitability about an adult? as for
I am not a believer in legislating people's lives and choices and prefer that they make their own and informed decisions based on all information and access to all choices.
I think one of the underlying problems with this choice is how women are viewed who do get pregnant out of wedlock. When I ws growing up they were treated as virtual pariahs of society. Today there is much more tolerance but not entirely and particularly if they are involved in a career.
The inevitability is that when an embryo is created the process of human development immediately begins and does not end until we are much older. Unless something terrible happens along this path, the embryo will inevitably become a child and an adult and have a full life. Of course there is never any guarantee of any of that.
So far I think the best option has been given by Colman: perform a Caesarean section and if the fetus survives, give it up for abortion. Before the time that premature children are known to survive with any probability (currently 22 weeks) jus perform a simple abortion. It is already considered risky to perform an abortion in the second trimester (13 to 26 weeks?) anyway. Some other arbitrary threshold (say, 1/2 or 1/3 probability of survival to 1 year - these must be tabulated) could be used.
The thing is, we know from experience that if contraceptive/abortive methods are made illegal, women will find ways to procure them anyway, often at great risk to their own lives. To think the women approach these problems frivolously or that if they take a different decision from the one you think they should they haven't thought it through properly is borderline offensive.
But, ultimately, for you an I to discuss all this is academic since we're men, we don't get pregnant and we don't get abortions, and if our partners were to get pregnant or abort they would bear the brunt of the physical and emotional stress whatever they (we?) decide to do. Which reminds me of the battle cry of the abortion-right activists in Spain in the 1980's: nosotras parimos, nosotras decidimos (we give birth, we decide), and is why I think that those who argue that ultimately reproductive health issues are about patriarchal control of women's bodies have a lot going for them. Can the last politician to go out the revolving door please turn the lights off?
"give it up for abortion" - - - - you of course meant "adoption."
No one I know or myself is advocating the making of contraceptive/abortive methods illegal. So that is not the issue I have.
"we don't get pregnant and we don't get abortions" - - - but it takes two to tango and it is equally the men's responsibility for contraception as it is the women's. I think younger generations are far more responsible and knowledgeable in this area than prior generations have been. Someone mentioned that the epidemic of HIV/AIDS is one reason for that.
The battle cry of the abortion-right activists in Spain in the 1980's: nosotras parimos, nosotras decidimos (we give birth, we decide) - - - - and my response to that is why did you get pregnant in the first place? If you feel empowered and capable of making this decision where was that same empowerment and sense of responsibility when you decided to get pregnant in the first place? I believe that we have a fundamental responsibility to all levels of life and not just some arbitrary level for political expediency or for some lifestyle convenience.
Well, this is not necessarily true, not in the US and not in Western Europe.
In many US states "readily available" means you have to go to (the much vilified by yourself) Planned Parenthood to get condoms or the day-after pill. Doctors may refuse to prescribe birth control pills. In Spain there are several regions where abortion is not available through the public health system, and one in which it is not available at all, despite being legal. Lots of pharmacists claim conscientious objection to refuse to sell contraceptives.
it takes two to tango and it is equally the men's responsibility for contraception as it is the women's. I think younger generations are far more responsible and knowledgeable in this area than prior generations have been.
"Much more responsible" does not mean "universally responsible". More often than I would have thought possible or liked I hear stories of men telling women they knocked up that it's their problem exclusively because they're the ones getting pregnant. Can the last politician to go out the revolving door please turn the lights off?
In Spain there are several regions where abortion is not available through the public health system (source)
"Lots of pharmacists claim conscientious objection to refuse to sell contraceptives." - - - while I am sure there are some religious nut pharmacists in the U.S. I have never heard of one.
"Much more responsible" does not mean "universally responsible". More often than I would have thought possible or liked I hear stories of men telling women they knocked up that it's their problem exclusively because they're the ones getting pregnant." - - - I used to hear that 20 or more years ago. Young people today in the U.S. have been brought up with serious sex education, more open dialogue with parents and doctors, and are making better choices. The only situation I have heard of recently was a young man of 24 and a girl he dated who was a year older. She got pregnant through him. They decided they wanted to child but were not in love to get married. She had the baby and I am sure they have figured out how to manage the situation. I think one major difference was 30 years ago women were not of equal status with men and today they are (and then some).
What you find when you make something illegal (alcohol, abortions, etc.) is as you said people will find a way to do it but it will be in a dangerous way.
You are grossly uninformed. You should do some actual research on the topic (besides reading right-wing propaganda) before having further discussion on the topic.
btw, if you're not pushing for legislation or change in the law, then what is your point, exactly, in discussing this on a political forum? Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes
"if you're not pushing for legislation or change in the law, then what is your point, exactly, in discussing this on a political forum?" - - - - You speak of human right issues and I believe if progressives are humanitarians then it should not begin at birth.
And do yourself a favor and try coming up with an original idea of your own if you don't agree with something other than "besides reading right wing propaganda."
Honestly, try doing some reading. And I don't know what else to call it when you repeat right-wing propaganda that has no basis in fact. I'd say the same if you were pushing creationism -- it's simply made up. If you choose to believe it on faith, fine, but don't expect a good reception among people who value informed opinions and reasoned debate. Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes
The school of fish political commentary simply shows you are uninformed and like I said have no original ideas of your own.
I just get upset when people resort to political labels of any kind. It is worth replacing "republican propaganda" with what you actually mean. Particularly since I have never been a member of the Republican Party now or in any prior lifetimes (to my knowledge).
frankly that's fairly insulting, I've attended abortions, I've spent several months studying the morals and ethics of abortion during my degree, and you're more informed on the grounds of one half baked anecdote? Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
Heh. Don't flatter yourself by thinking you've done any more than repeat stale talking points poorly. At most, you've mildly annoyed some, and greatly amused me, for which I'll give you credit.
What I'm glad about is you've revealed yourself and I'll know in the future to take your assertions with a grain of salt.
I think one major difference was 30 years ago women were not of equal status with men and today they are (and then some).
Now theres a telling Misogynistic phrase and a half. Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
in developed western countries that is an outdated idea. Contraception is readily available nowadays and easily accessible to men and women - young and old.
I think you need to recognise that your ascribing life to the point of conception is as arbitary as any of ours. Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
As to the failure rate, like any product it does happen. We all know someone who had a defective contraceptive and suddenly he's a daddy.
"I think you need to recognise that your ascribing life to the point of conception is as arbitary as any of ours." - - - - Actually I do recognize that but would like other to recognize that as well, think more about it, as not just dismiss abortion as something just to be disposed of. Progressives are supposed to be humanitarians and that should not begin at birth.
The one incredible thing about medical science is how rapidly it has progressed particularly in the issue you raised about premature babies. I would imagine that there would be a time soon where they will have the ability to extract an embryo or fetus and have the means to incubate them to full term.
