Unless there are elevated health risks to the mother, or unless the fetus is non viable, then no, I don’t.
I might be open to making legal exceptions in cases of rape- I’m not entirely sure what I feel there- but I think that no matter what the manner of conception, you have a your duty not to kill your unborn child.
Which part of “the kid does not carry the blame for the rape and does not deserve the death sentence because of it” was unclear?
So, a father rapes his child, and abortion is not an option in your opinion.
Answer that clearly. Not with reference to a previous post.
The answer is clear. The kid does not carry the blame for the rape and does not deserve the death sentence because of it. Abortion is not an option.
Do you think the kid carries the blame for the rape and deserves a death sentence for it? Answer that clearly.
If the minor child is young enough (say 15 or under) I’d allow an automatic health exception, as there are elevated risks for mothers of that age .
Otherwise, no. Is that clear enough?
The answer is clear.
It’s not a kid. The only blame is on the rapist.
There is no reason in the world to push a rape victim through additional hell. Or in your words an ‘inconvenience’
The gulf here is about as wide as it can get.
Garbage.
I realise that ‘it isn’t a kid’ makes some people feel better about what it is they’re doing, but that’s no reason for the rest of us to humour you.
If you think it is not a kid, the answer is clear. Now: for a moment, just for the sake of argument, accept that it is a kid. Then tell me if your answer is clear.
At conception there is no full person hood, And the law only allows abortion up to a certain point When one can see it is a child. I had 2 miscarriages and there was no child yet. Yes, it would have become one Just as a fertile Chicken egg is considered a chicken, once it matures to a state that is is indeed a chicken.
There is a big difference between a fertile egg and a full being. I wonder how many of the Pro-birth people will give up some unnecessary thing to be wiling to pay the taxes necessary to pay the necessary money to make sure the egg comes to full term and until it is an adult human.
I guess if you were having a big dinner party and ordered 30 chickens, you would be satisfied that you now can serve your guests an egg? in the biological sense a fertile egg is not a child, anymore than the being it will become.
How does this notion that a fertilized egg is a person square with the medical fact that 13% to 20% of all pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion (approximately 900,000 per year)?
Biology 101 and most of the civilized world disagrees with you. I afraid that since science and law is on the pro-choice side, you are going to have to continue to ‘humor’ us.
I can’t think of it as a kid any more than I can think that a set of blue prints is a home. Or a seed is an apple. So I can’t answer this.
I’m not sure the possible relevance of this.
Ninety-year-olds have an unusually high natural death rate compared to thirty year olds, does that mean we cease to be people when we turn eighty-five or something?
You keep asserting that ‘there is a big difference between a fertile *[sic]*egg and a full being’, and ‘there is a big difference between conception and full personhood’. you need to realise that your assertions don’t make something true, and it is exactly those premises that many of us flatly deny.
enipla:
Biology 101? Oh, this is rich. You do realise that I’m a biologist, right? Biology tells us exactly that the embryo is a distinct human organism, and that a ninety year old person and a nine minute old fertilized egg represent nothing more than two points on a continuum of that individual’s lifespan.
I don’t think biologists much use the term ‘person’- that’s a term best left to philosophy and theology- but biologists do concern themselves quite a bit with how to define individual organisms (which isn’t always easy, think clonal plants) and with how to define species. and I don’t know any scientifically informed person who would deny that an embryo is a distinct individual, of the human species.
Out of curiosity, where would you put the dividing line between an apple seed and an apple tree, since you appear to believe they are different in kind? When the cotyledons emerge? when some particular metabolic or developmental process starts happening? When the plant emerges from the soil? when it starts photosynthesizing? When?
A sign of extreme narrowmindedness.
Can you see a new born as an adult? What is fundamentally different in seeing a fetus as a baby?
Science isn’t on either side of what is, at it’s root, a philosophical debate.
No, I had know idea that you’re a biologist. Why would I. Did you mention it? In what field? What do you do for a living? I’m curious. I’m a GIS programmer if that matters. Spatial analysis.
The disconnect IMHO, is how those that are anti-abortion, and not pro-choice think that forcing a woman or a young girl to carry a pregnancy to term is not a big deal. That stuns me and speaks of misogyny.
I would rather see a world where children are cared for, wanted, and can be taken care of.
The first step of this is of course education. Men (sadly) have too much control of what a woman can do. That is changing. That’s good news.
And to try to answer your question. No, I don’t know at what point that an abortion should be alowed. I’m thinking the first tri. There is a point that the woman should know that it should continue or not. That’s a very personal choice. It’s the womans choice. Not yours.
A question for you. You agree that If the pregnacy endagers the health of the mother it would be OK to end it. Does that also extend to an opinon by a psychologist?