Subject:
|
Re: Population control -- was Re: Danish cartoons outrage some Moslem groups and nations
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 10 Feb 2006 18:50:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1647 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
if that baby (in utero) is considered a person, then the State has the
obligation to protect the rights of that person.
|
The question becomes “why must the rights of the embryo or fetus supersede
the rights of the woman?” I’ve never heard a compelling answer to that
question.
| |
Here are 2 extreme examples that I believe negate any position that is
completely pro-life or completely pro-choice.
1. If life begins at conception, then an abortion at any time would equal
murder. Now, murder is murder, whether someone kills a 5 year old child or
a 50 year old grandmother. Is anyone willing to equate those lives to a
“baby” that has been growing in a womb for 2 days?
|
It has been helpful for me, in discussions like this, to add the term
“viable” to “life.” “Viable life” most assuredly does not begin at
conception. Before the fetus is viable, it can’t be considered to be a
functional, independent human being.
“Viability” refers to pure, physiological criteria and shouldn’t be mistaken
for “independent.” A healthy newborn is viable but is not independent.
Heck, I know some healthy 20-somethings who are viable but not independent.
| |
2. A woman, who is 6 months pregnant, is on her way to the abortion clinic
to get a legal abortion. Before she gets there, she is mugged and assaulted
by a Right Wing Ant-abortion Protestor. She ends up in the hospital, her
fetus mortally wounded. The Whackjob is charged and convicted of
manslaughter. How can it be that he can get convicted of doing something
that she would have legally paid to do minutes later? Is this clearly not
an “equal protection” issue?
|
It’s manslaughter because the Whackjob took the decision away from the woman,
who could otherwise have changed her mind at the last minute.
Just my thoughts. Hardly ironclad, I know.
Dave!
|
See, I’m kinda with Dave! on this one--if it’s a black and white issue--i.e.
the second the sperm touches the egg it’s LIFE! then there would be no issue.
But people haven’t been able to come to a consensus for, well, ever yet as to
when life does begin. All of them state that when the baby is out and
breathing, then that’s life--no questions.
|
No questions? Some have decided that
post birth
abortions are fine. Again, I am not comfortable with someone deciding to
abort a baby that is literally seconds from birth, much less X minutes after!
It’s almost beyond belief.
So it appears that even your “out and breathing” parameter is in dispute!
| |
But between conception to birthing, there has been no consensus as to ‘this is
life’ and ‘that isn’t’ point.
Third trimesters, 20 weeks, conception... whatever...
So again, when there’s no consensus, I’m left to make the decision *for me*
and me alone. For me, any potential child of mine begins when I’m in a loving
committed relationship with someone and we want to have a kid.
There. That’s for me. Others may take the same approach, and that’s their
choice. However, I won’t push that choice on people, nor should I.
And quoting specific legal cases--well, there’ll be cases that won stating the
exact opposite. Until all of us can unequivocably state that “This point is
when life begins”, then we’re left with our own ‘belief’. If it’s a ‘belief’,
it’s something we can’t pawn off on others.
|
Okay, but certainly you wouldn’t argue that way for other activities such as
stealing or murder. I’m not equating abortion with those (unless we are talking
about post term abortions), merely pointing out that leaving decisions up to
individuals isn’t necessarily a Good Idea™.
| |
Should society protect someone who is helpless and can’t protect themselves?
Yes. But if we can’t agree when that life starts, then it’s left in the realm
of ‘belief’--that’s a personal choice and therefore society should butt out.
At least, that’s how I see it.
|
I believe we can’t decide because everyone is too concerned with their
particular agendas, not with solving the issue at hand. And not deciding is
actually in fact deciding.
| |
All this said, if I have a daughter and she comes home pregnant at 15 (as some
kids are prone to do these days), I’ll sit down with her and we’ll talk openly
about all the options, with my personal belief that she should carry the baby
to term, and either keep it (and me and her mom helping as much as possible)
or give it up for adoption (again, with me and mom there all the way).
But whatever her choice, it’s hers to make and I’ll support her.
|
Of course. That is what it is all about. And early enough, I would agree that
ALL options are on the table. But after a certain point, they should decrease
IMO. Killing a person for convenience shouldn’t be tolerated, in utero or out.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
109 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
