But many people see the same evidence as you do and come to the opposite conclusion. Can I prove an embryo is a human Nope. Can you prove an embryo isn’t a person? I suspect not.
So in a situation where a human life might be at stake, I would suppose society ought to be very, very careful and err on the side of caution.
The embryo might be a human life.
The mother is a human life.
Society ought to be very, very careful and err on the side of caution as regards the mother.
So we are in perfect agreement? We ought to think carefully and protect all the lives (or potential lives) involved. It is good we could come together on this.
What happens when the maybe life’s interests conflict with the definite life’s interests?
I dunno. I suppose that is why we have judges, lawyers and philosophers. Much heavy thinking and compromise would be required I suppose.
True.
Unfortunately this issue devolves into an either/or decision. There is not a lot of compromise to be had which is why it is so divisive. Either we respect the mother’s choices or we make her beholden to her unborn child.
Or allow society (through laws and the courts) to have a word in the decision.
Well, society (through laws and the courts) absolutely will have a word in the decision. That’s how these things work.
Point is would you want others to have decision power over your body and life? What you want is of no concern?
Of course I can; it’s easy. An embryo doesn’t have the brain to be a person with; not even close.
“Erring on the side of caution” would be putting no restrictions on abortions until 6 months at the earliest. An embryo, much less conception goes far beyond “caution”.
Of course the power over your own body is important. It is not all-important however. What if you want to kill your own body? Society gets a voice in that. Heck if you want to dismember your own body society voices it opinion. I would suppose the same sort of thing is in play here.
If you want an abortion, society gets a voice in the decision because of the (potential) stakes involved.
[QUOTE=Paul in Qatar]
But many people see the same evidence as you do and come to the opposite conclusion. Can I prove an embryo is a human Nope. Can you prove an embryo isn’t a person? I suspect not.
So in a situation where a human life might be at stake, I would suppose society ought to be very, very careful and err on the side of caution.
[/QUOTE]
You know Paul, I might even be able to come around to your point of view if birth control (including Plan B - I assume we can agree that a single cell, even a fertilized egg, is not a person. If not, then IMHO you are a “fundamentalist whack job” and there is no compromise possible. Sorry, no offense intended, I have enjoyed your posts for years, but this position is extreme IMHO) was plentiful and inexpensive, sex education was ubiquitous, and there was no stigma attached to the act of sex so teenagers/young adults would feel no shame in seeking out help in this regard. Unfortunately, most pro-lifers tend to have the purely religious (IMHO) belief than any interference with procreation must be avoided at all cost. Thus the whole “the only moral abortion is my abortion” phenomena and the inability to minimize teenage pregnancy, which I believe is the main source of abortions in this country. Abstinence is a fucking joke; nature, or the lord if you will, saw to it that the sexual imperative in our species (and all species) is insatiable. Recognize this and let’s stop teenagers from getting pregnant in the first place, and then we can talk about getting rid of abortion.
Finally, since 3 members of my immediate family have been raped, I would still want an option for the poor unfortunates that have to go through this kind of agony. Preferably this would be a Plan B type solution (which, FYI, may or may not stop fertilization - in other words may not be an abortifacient), but if it is too late, I still don’t think a blastocyst can be viewed as a person, YMMV…
One final note: I find the whole abortion controversy very sad. 
We are talking about women, especially young women, who have in most cases made a mistake that they regret. No one, at least no one sane, joyfully gets an abortion. None of the young men responsible, at least none of the young men with morals, are happy about the situation. But to force these people to have children, or force the woman to carry a child to term only to give it up, is unconscionable in my mind. Until we can teach our children to play it safe if they cannot keep it in their pants, we need to have a solution, however distasteful it might be. I will not try to force my own morality down someone’s throat, especially if I have never been in their situation. I think that, in the main, people are good and do the best they can. Legislating morality is a bad idea.
Really? In all these 25 years you have never heard of pre-eclampsia?
This is actually not that uncommon. It’s one of those things where, the longer you can wait to deliver the baby, the better the chance that the baby will live. But the greater the chance that the mother will die, or have a stroke.
I believe in most of the cases the baby is delivered (because in the third trimester, and most of the second trimester, abortion and delivery are pretty much the same thing), but without massive intervention the baby has no chance, and even with medical intervention a low birth weight baby doesn’t have a great chance. The fact is that delivering the baby is not a lot better than killing the baby, but it’s a lot less expensive.
Oh, we need to be very careful before we go down this road. To follow up on societies voice into suicide: why should society get a voice in that? What about drinking alcohol or smoking cigarettes? I guess, since drinking and smoking are unhealthy and may lead to death, I guess society should get it’s say here. What about driving a motorcycle, or sky diving, or rock climbing? These are dangerous activities that can easily lead to death, what should society do about these?
But abortion, this is a whole different kettle of fish. Should we chain down women as soon as they get pregnant to protect the unborn? If you would argue that society has an unlimited responsibility to protect fertilized eggs, this would be a natural extension. After all, during the first trimester, when about 25% of pregnancies are miscarried, we need to limit activity to minimize termination due to the potential stakes involved. Right? If not, why not? Where should we draw the line?
Thank you for your kind words. I realize my opinion is a minority one, but I came to it honestly and slowly, over a number of years.
Some guy in my office is all upset. His (Korean) GF is off to the homeland to “take care of” her pregnancy. He did not even offer to marry her. “But her culture …” “But her parents …”
We often discuss the morality of women who seek abortions. Perhaps we ought to give equal consideration of the morality of the men involved.
As you said, abortion is never something someone feels good about. Sometimes it might be the best choice.
I am going to go listen to Car Talk on my iPod to cheer up.
Missed edit window: Killing is less expensive/
I can testify to this. Anecdotal maybe but I saw it on a regular basis when I worked for the women’s clinic.
I am not a doctor/nurse but I spoke with them daily. I asked them how women generally approached this and they said there were some few that were blasé about the whole thing and some few who seemed to view abortion as birth control. By far however they said the women who sought an abortion agonized about it.
We provided counseling (had a psychiatrist on staff not to mention extensive training of the workers) to lead women through the process. They were encouraged but not required to include a parent in the decision (which a surprising number, most actually, did…barring that they were encouraged to seek any adult they trusted for guidance).
In short this was not a la-de-da process for these women. They very much cared and very much thought about it and were clearly not happy with a damned if you do, damned if you don’t choice.
These women deserve our sympathy, it is not easy on them at all.
I doubt that palindromeemordnilap is a doctor or (s)he would know that 5 women out of every 10,000 get eclampsia and that about 2% of them die of it during or shortly after the birth of their children.
Hell palindromeemordnilap , come to think of it, I would hope that even non-doctors would know that women die in child birth sometimes. Do you think all of these fatalities were complete flukes? That the attending physicians had no idea that the mother’s life was in danger before the labor? Are you willing to legislate around this without knowing all the facts, just because you have never heard about a case? Who are you to second guess the experts in this regard?
This is a topic that has come up around here.
The unfortunate reality is the decision must reside with the woman. It is a lousy state of affairs that a man cannot have an equal say in the matter but biology being what it is there is no way to dodge it having to be the woman who has the final decision.
Ideally, and not infrequently, the woman will discuss this with the father and will take what he says into consideration. Yet any scheme I have seen that can co-opt the woman as the final decision maker on this tend to be horrid on a variety of levels.
Sucks for the guys who care I know but the alternative is far worse (making a woman carry a baby she wants no part of because you say she has to…smacks of slavery to me).
This is the basis of my morality about this issue. I feel very bad about abortion, but who am I to judge? How can I choose best for someone who is not me? I don’t want the power or the responsibility that would come with making the decision of outlawing abortion. Those who would outlaw it and not take responsibility for the consequences of this action are not very aware of the issues IMHO. I refuse to believe the converse, that they are aware of the issues but don’t care about the women who seek abortions, that would be monstrous and I believe people are mostly good.
It is not uncommon for pro-life groups to go on about the dangers of abortion.
What they never say is that carrying to term is a far more dangerous prospect (statistically speaking) than an abortion is.
The statistical danger is not an argument to get an abortion and one the pro-choice side never makes that I have ever seen.
The point is pregnancy is a serious task placed on a woman’s body and there are a host of things that can go wrong. As such it is not surprising it can happen that a woman’s life is put at risk to carry a baby to term.