Abortion: not a debate here.

Great Debates
21

I think what was meant by this and is along my thinking:

If a fetus is able to sustain life without the means of a womb and an umbilical cord; such as in the first trimester or so a fetus, without the aid of any technology, it is unable to maintain vital growth and development without the environment that is crucial to its existance. Much like a fish out of water, it can not live without these elements.

My question therefore is, when does technology take over for the human womb and the artificial womb becomes reality? What then happens to the children? As I know it, babies develop an extreme bond with their mothers during the months in which they exist within the womb and no form of technology can substitute that. Without this and the use of technology we may end up with a class of children unable to bond and create meaningful relationships.

So, when life begins could possibly mean the time in which a baby is able to survive outside of its mother’s womb without the aid of technology. Could a 13 week baby survive outside the womb? No. Could a baby in the third trimester survive? Possibly, but usually aided with the sciences.

My questions stem from my background as an adopted child and research has shown that a good majority of us (not all) have difficulty with maintaining or even having relationships in our lives. We spent time in the womb but after the womb we were ripped from our only emotionally involved ties we ever knew…

I will assume that at some point this will go to GD because of the nature of this topic. I realize that the question may be a GQ but the topic, in its self, is enough to evoke a debate on when life actually begins.

Yes I am pro choice. Unless a person has had a scare or actually been there one should never make a judgement call as to what the outcome should be regardless of your moral stance.

22

I’m a woman, and I am pro-choice. Would I have an abortion? No. But it’s not my place to tell anyone else that they can’t have one, either.

Why do women have abortions? Well, contraceptives can and do fail. There’s only 2 ways a male can be responsible for birth control (vasectomy or condom) and TBH the vast majority of the guys I’ve known leave birth control entirely up to the woman. Not all guys do this, but a fair amount do.
Abortion is a bad thing, but an unwanted and unloved child is far worse. Until every child is a wanted child, abortion will continue to exist, and I for one would much rather it be safe and legal than dangerous and illegal.

–tygre

23

Let me tell you why I don’t think you should get to decide these things. It’s not because you’re a man - it’s because it’s not your responsibility. If I suddenly went insane and decided to have a child, it would be my responsibility - mine and the person who contributed the other half of the zygote - not yours, and not the state’s. We - my partner and I - would be the responsible parties, and therefore any life and death decisions should also be our responsibility, and ours alone.

Furthermore, I don’t believe that death necessarily equates to murder. Take my cat, for example, (I wish you would, he’s shedding something awful). If Pumpkin were hit by a car or contracted a horrible disease, I could decide to end his suffering and have him put to sleep. This is not a decision I would make lightly or without consultation with the vet and Pumpkin’s other feeder, Mr. Mayo - but it would still be mine to make because I am responsible for him (Pumpkin, that is - not Mr. Mayo). You could call it murder if you like, perhaps it is - but as long as the welfare and happiness of my cat (and myself) is my concern and not yours, I will make the best decision I can, regardless of how distasteful it is to you.

If you take away the power of women to make these decisions for ourselves, if you make us less responsible for ourselves, you diminish us as human beings. I’m not willing to let that happen, so I am resolutely pro-choice. And I think any woman who isn’t is simply a fathead.

BTW, just how many medical procedures that are solely performed on men are legislated?

24

I’ll try to stay objective here, at least until this gets inevitably moved. I was about to post something very like what APB9999 said, but with one other point: Is it a person? Note that this is not the same question as “Is it human?”. An individual sperm cell, for instance, is undeniably human and alive, and it has a different genetic makeup than that of the man who produced it, but it’s very hard to say that it’s a person. A newborn baby, by contrast, is very difficult to consider as anything other than a person. Where is the dividing point? This one’s not so clear-cut.

To those who maintain “it’s a moral issue” or “it’s none of my business what others choose”, how does this view extend to other moral issues? For instance, if someone gets mad at a year-old baby for crying, and slams it’s head against a brick wall, is that “just” a moral issue? Ought this action to be legal, since the perpetrator will have to live with the decision himself or herself? Not only is it possible to legislate morality, it’s not possible to legislate anything else.

Oh, and aseymayo, could we lay off the ad hominen attacks, please? I don’t think that the amount of cranial corpulence has anything to do with this issue.

25

Figuring out what exactly is “human” is the real trick here, I think.

“someone whose body operates under the organic presence of a human . . . someone whose body is human flesh”

This is obviously recursive and doesn’t clarify things at all.

Of course, the idea that a zygote is human simply because it is alive and genetically human strikes me as false because any ordinary cell of the human body is both alive and genetically human.

I truthfully do not know of any really good definitions of “a human”.

For the record, I too dislike it when people tell me that I can’t decide things about this issue because I’m a man. If people who say this allow women who have never been pregnant to decide such things, why not allow men?

I also dislike the line of argument that goes: “We might not approve of abortion but we don’t have the right to tell other people what to do with their bodies.” First off, although I don’t claim to have a strong opinion one way or another on this, there is quite possibly more than one body involved. Secondly, society has every right to tell people that they can’t use their bodies to murder, or embezzle, or run accross the freeway, etc.

Although I am undecided on this matter, I think most people agree that in a perfect world, abortion wouldn’t happen.

26

Unless you’ve got a scientifically-produced zygote there - one made without sperm, you’ve got at least one man/guy/whatever whose responsibility it is, according to your argument, along with you. So let me pose this question to you:

Are you willing to be held accountable for your own actions? You could, in my opinion, and if I’m understanding your argument, use the same reasoning behind killing or maiming your own child, inside or outside the womb. In the legal sense, yes, the child is the responsibility of those who care for him or her. If that means that child is the responsibility of an older sibling who cares for the child in lieu of a dying or otherwise incapacitated parent or other relative, so be it. At the same time, I reserve my right to believing that killing a person - no matter their stage in development of any sort - is not right.

Except that you can be - and are - accountable for your actions legally. In this country, that means that if your child is born and you decide to kill him or her, you can be - and are, in many cases - held accountable for that death.

I think we need Michi’s help here . . . is there a way to decrease Pumpkin’s suffering so he can die as painlessly as possible? Morphine comes to mind, though I don’t know as to the applicability of it to animals other than humans and similar primates.

  1. I’ll let my mother know you think that about her based solely on her opinion of abortion, not based on anything else.

  2. And it is my opinion that by telling a woman that if she is responsibly for the life of another person living inside her, she isn’t allowed to kill it . . . that’s giving her a hell of a lot of responsibility. Maybe it makes her more careful when she’s having sex, or maybe it causes her to decide not to have sex. I have never seen not allowing someone else the power to kill another human being as diminishing in any way.

  3. Are you sure you want the power to be able to kill people?

How many of them involve killing an organism some believe to be human?

Tygre: “But it’s not my place to tell anyone else that they can’t have one, either.”

Do you consider it your place to tell someone “You’re not allowed to kill your best friend?” If not, who is allowed to tell you you’re not allowed to kill anyone and everyone?

Techchick, as for your point about being there of having a scare, I’m minus one possible living cousin because of an abortion. My aunt called my mother almost literally the night following her abortion asking for moral support. This while my parents were trying to conceive. Does that count as me being there? Yes and no. From what I know of the situation, it would have been quite possible for my aunt to carry this baby for seven months or so and give him or her up for adoption. Maybe it would have given her incentive to stop cheating with a married man.

27

Nice try, iampunha, but as you can see, this subject very quickly moves beyond the Question and into the debate, especially on the “opinion”-style questions which you have posed.

Off to GD.

28

Well, there are scientists who have injected viruses and bacteria with human DNA to make, among other things, insulin (I think) and to try to make preventative measures to counter against various pathogens. So I’m trying to distinguish between those viruses and, for example, me.

BK: "Of course, the idea that a zygote is human simply because it is alive and genetically human strikes me as false because any ordinary cell of the human body is both alive and genetically human.

What is your problem with human cells being human cells? I’m not seeing anything wrong there.

BK: Although I am undecided on this matter, I think most people agree that in a perfect world, abortion wouldn’t happen.

In order to validate that premise, would you also agree that unplanned pregnancy wouldn’t happen either? I think that’s what it would take for a lot of people to agree with you on the perfect world idea.

Manhattan: figured as much, but you can’t blame me for hoping, can you?

29

But iampunha, you are getting into a debatable and moral issue here thereby making this a debate with this: “Maybe it would have given her incentive to stop cheating with a married man.”

My main point was the idea of a fetus or zygote (sp) being able to survive otuside the womb without the aid of technology, does this make the “baby” a human or not? – even if I threw in this:

I believe that unless a person has actually been there or been close to experiencing such a thing that people should not make a judgement call on whether or not something is warranted or not. No, most men have no idea what emotions or feelings a woman goes through when this issue confronts you; even the man who is involved directly when the subject is brought up, men don’t give birth, men don’t deal with the changes to their bodies, men have a stake in the matter but it’s far less involved than what a woman deals with.

I also explained that as an adopted person, I am not exactly pro life. I personally lost a lot of self when I was taken from the only person in my life that meant the most to me, the woman who carried me for 9 months and I created a bond with.

As it is I could give you a zillion reasons as to why it may be better for a child to be aborted than to go to term but your OP was about a GQ, a few of us are trying to give you some insight but it’s turning into a GD.

30

Pro this, anti that.

I think the real moral decision which affect human lives should be made by human beings, not institutions. I don’t think lawyers and judges are equipped to make their judgments with compassion, and commitment to the life long individual consequences. The state cannot be compassionate. The state can only follow statutory instructions. So mark me down on the pro-human side of this debate.

The willingness of the conservative spectrum to surrender their rights whenever they perceive a majority concurrence to their view is frightening to me. I don’t trust government nearly as much as the religious right does. I don’t want my every preference made a matter of statute. I want the Government to keep its hands off my body, and out of my faith. I expect others to make their own moral choices, and I know I will find those choices at variance to my own.

Tris

31

Bravo Tris!
I agree with this wholeheartedly. I’ve never felt comfortable with the overreaching certitude on the abortion issue that both sides of the debate have. Mark me down as Pro-Human as well :).

32

You are, of course, using a different definition of the word “survive” than Derleth was. If you’re going to argue with someone, don’t put words in their mouth.

33

Oh? This is news to me. How many definitions of “survive” are there? I was under the impression it meant “to live,” but you say there is some other definition. Pray tell, what is it?

The “mass of cells” Derleth referred to would die if removed from the womb. A newborn baby left somewhere for a few days would die too, it might just take a little longer. (Or it might be quicker. Noboby can say for sure) Either way, they don’t “survive.” And neither does your point.

34

Okay Drain Bead, sorry for the sarcasm. It’s late, I’m tired, and still at work.

35

Well, I would die to defend MY mom’s right to an abortion.

36

Why is it legal for a mother to have her unborn child chopped up into little bits and sucked out of her, but a pregnant woman addicted to crack cocaine that delivers her baby stillborn due to the addiction can be charged with murder? If anything the former is more premeditated than the latter.

As far as the argument that no one should make the decision for someone else is just flat wrong. I agree the decision to end a pregnancy is not an easy one. Most moral decisions are not easy ones. But we do and should in certain cases legislate morality. Especially in instances dealing with the sanctity of life.

Otherwise don’t call the police the next time your neighbor comes over with his shotgun to settle that neighborly dispute, he’s just exercising his ability to make a moral decision of whether to blow you away or not. And by the way, I’m sure it’s a real tough decision for him too!

37

But do all of you who are pro-choice believe that the father of the baby (fetus, whatever) should have any input on whether there is an abortion or not? Assuming he is willing to take full responsibility for this child once it is born, do you believe he has the right to ask the mother to go through the 6 or 7 months remaining of the pregnance so that he will not be deprived of the child he wants? Of course, on the other side of the coin, if he is not going to take full responsibility, that is another story, I would suppose…

I’m just asking. I’ve never had a pro-choice person discuss that aspect with me before. Only pro-life people who insist that OF COURSE he has a right…

38

Whoops, I meant “pregnancy” of course…

39

Has anybody else notice that the “roght-to-lifers” are not relly “anti-abortion”? They are really anti-sex (for recreational purposes). Why do i say that? Well, mostly, they are also against birth control. They are also agianst the “morning after pill”, and if any thing can be said to NOT be a “human” it certainly is a “pre-fetus” mass of a fertilized egg, which has not even differentiated yet. So, why are they against abortion? Because, without abortion, they think folks would have less sex, outside of marriage.

Now, I am not happy with abortions, especially with late term ones. But I am very against the government legislating one religous groups morality on the rest of us, which is what “anti-arbotion” laws do. On the other hand, “iam” I am also against any woman being forced to have one. Note that any government that has the authority to make abortions illegal, also has the authority to require them.

40

Personally, I don’t like abortions… I don’t think anyone does, I don’t think there’s a (mentally healthy) woman alive who thinks, “I’ll go get knocked up and have an abortion! Goddamn, that’ll be a hoot!” I wish the NEED for an abortion didn’t exist, but realistically, I know it’s going to happen anyway.

I agree that things like abortion shouldn’t be banned by the state. However, I do believe that there should be better regulations on the act… not so much on part of the mother, but on the “doctor” performing the abortion. However, that’s more an issue of “following proper guidelines” than anything else…

Should the father have some say as to what happens to his unborn child? Well, ideally, yeah… but ultimately, the decision rests with the mother, who SHOULD take her partners’ (I’m not referring to instances of rape, here) advice and give heed, but again, she doesn’t HAVE to (it’d just be nicer of her to do so). But, of course, after all is said and done, the mother (ideally) has the final say in whatever happens.