Yes, so long as there is also a continued exception for the life and health of the mother.
It has nothing to do with “emotional ties.” My argument is about the basic right to control one’s own body, including the contents of one’s own womb, so long as that control does not harm another human being.
Diogenes said, "Obviously you don’t believe a woman should have total autonomy over her body, at leat in the case of pregnancy…and you still haven’t made a case for why an “unborn life” should trump the rights of person. "
Because you`re not dealing with the same rights here. The right of the fetus to live verses the right of the mom to *terminate * is pitting LIFE vs. PERSONAL CHOICE. Not the same.
Diogenes also said,
A zygote isn’t a child and a woman does not require any better reason to terminate a pregnancy than that she doesn’t want to be pregnant.
My position is that getting an abortion is dealing with the consequences. You seem to think that abortion is some kind of dodge. It isn’t.
When exactly does the fetus become child, in your mind, and at what time does it recieve rights. Curious as to where you draw the line.
umm…contradiction?
Seems we have an impasse. You peg “person” at brain function and I peg it somewhere before that, probably at implantation. We agree that abortion should be only available if there is a danger to the mother. Good enough for me.
It has not been demonstrated that a fetus does have any right to life, be even if it does, that does not mean that it has a right to live inside of an unwilling host or that it has a right to live at the physical and financial expense of another person.
When it’s born.
I recently listened to a show about this on NPR, and one of the experts mentioned that a fair portion of women who had PBA were healthy and the fetus was healthy. Why on Earth would these women choose to abort the baby at such a late stage? That’s kind of sick.
And this is coming from me, probably the biggest abortion-rights supporter there is. But still, I just would like to know the reasons why a healthy woman would abort a healthy fetus at such a late stage?
However, I do not think we should band PBA, because it is very useful for fetuses that have profoud defects. Usually these defects cannot be detected until a later stage, when amniocentisis can be performed. If this were ever to happen to me, I would definetly want to have the right to abort.
And of course, regardless of how offensive it may be for a healthy woman to abort her health fetus, it’s her body, her life and her right. So please, “pro-life” people, stay the heck out of our business! But still, I am curious as to why these woman would do this…any thoughts?
You are getting further and further from sense.
So now the person who created this fetus has the right to just get rid of it arbitrarily? Why?
You have not given any kind of reasoning as to why a fetus is on the same moral level as a tumor. Your arguement is only from assertion. Plus, you beg the question.
Cite for the worthlessness of the unborn, please?
The point, ** nyctea scandiaca** is that it is not just your business anymore when you create a life. You have made it society’s business.
Sorry SnoopyFan, but I think the story is a crock. Too many things about it smack as embelishments made up to paint the providers as creepy crawly profit driven beasts. A tactic not too uncommon by the pro-life segment. Don’t get me wrong, the pro-choice segment is just as guilty when it comes to painting pictures of the other side of the debate. I have no qualms about calling a just as dubious claim from the choice side out on the floor. I just think the chances of a racist, cash on the barrell-head chargin, third tri PB&X licensed and practicing physician falls into the “slim chance” or “Fictional” column.
No. “Human” status is one consideration. Reproductive freedom and control of one’s own body are additional considerations. Life and health of the mother are further considerations. Some considerations are more or less imporant than others.
If pro-lifers are misogynists does that make me a self-loather? 
(I’m a woman, in case you didn’t know.)
And NurseCarmen, I figured you’d imply that I’m making the story up. It’s easier than addressing the possibility that some abortionists have no regard for the law and are in it for the cash, isn’t it?
I WISH I had made that story up. But you’ll believe what you want to anyway.
I don’t think she was implying that you made up the story, but rather that your friend did.
Good answer, now define born.
Some things to consider;
How soon after (your def. of born), one billionth of a second? One minute?
Is a very premature baby the same as a full term one?
Does a C-section count? What about an early term C-section?
Arent PBAs technically “born”?, in the same sense that a C-section baby is being born through a medical procedure?
Does the cord have to be cut?
Do the lungs have to draw air?
Does the baby have to nurse first?
Can you draw an exact line and then say that One-Billionth of a second before that the baby has Zero rights and then suddenly, Blam!, rights.
SnoopyFan, my best friend lives not far from where you do, from what you’ve posted. There are genetic factors on her and her husband’s side of their respective families which make it unlikely that any child they bore would be born without severe health problems, not to mention health factors which would make it risky for her to become pregnant. Since any act of intercourse has the potential to result in pregnancy and, by your standards, having an abortion is wrong, should she and her husband never have sex then? For the reasons I listed, they’ve decided not to have kids and they do, I assume, use the most reliable birth control they can, short of her having a hysterectomy – they’re both very sensible people, but the risk of pregnancy is there, however slight.
That to me is what it comes down to. If abortion is always wrong and should always be illegal, or even if we allow for exceptions for rape or incest, how do you respond to a situation like this?
Just as I believe divorce is almost always wrong, so I believe abortion is always wrong. However, given a choice between getting a divorce or remaining in an abusive marriage, I would encourage a person to get a divorce as the lesser of the two evils. I’d also point out, although not necessarily to the person involved, the greatest good would have been not to marry the abuser in the first place, but once that’s done, we’re left to working with what is. In the case of your acquaintance, surely her first sin was having sex with a man she was unwilling or unable to raise a child with. Yet, you’ve said you’d “like to see the bastard who killed that perfectly healthy baby . . . rot in jail for a while.” Why nothing about the act which led to her becoming pregnant?
I do appreciate your point of view, but I cannot agree with it. It’s just that I’ve spent too much time being aware that sometimes there are no right choices, and sometimes choices which seem wrong are the most right ones available. I wish it were otherwise.
Respectfully,
CJ
Siege,
If the couple were that fearful of pregnancy, there are outpatient procedures that can prevent the male from fertilizing the egg. Vesectomy.
I’m afraid even vasectomy isn’t 100% reliable either, from what I’ve read. 99%+, I think, but not 100%. Aha! Here’s acite, albeit from Planned Parenthood, an organization which some pro-lifers don’t seem to think much of. With (theoretical, I assume) perfect use, vasectomies result in 0.1 pregnancies per 100 women during first year of use; in actual practice, it’s 0.15 pregnancies per 100 women. Norplant, which I swore by while I was engaged, was lower at 0.05 for both theoretical and perfect. Nevertheless, my fiance and I did discuss what would happen if I were to become pregnant, before Norplant or anything else became necessary.
CJ
By the way, for more evidence that sometimes even one’s best efforts at birth control aren’t enough, you might want to check out this current Pit thread I’m not sexually active at the moment, and have no idea when I will be again, but this is one reason why I do strongly support keeping abortion legal, and why do have a discussion with any gentleman I plan on going to bed with which includes “What do we do if I get pregnant?” Engineer’s daughter that I am, I know full well that 0.0001% of something happening does not mean it cannot happen. Throw in Murphy’s Law, and I’ve been known to suspect it will. :rolleyes:
CJ
So that is the risk. You know what it is, and you have made precautions against it. But you still know that it can happen.
The way that I see it one of your options for dealing with it is not to kill it. You have made the choice to take an action that could result in you becoming pregnant.
I’d daresay if this couple w/the genetic problems got a tubal and a vasectomy, respectively, chances are they’re not gonna get pregnant and then have to face that decision. I don’t see why they wouldn’t do this, considering a pregnancy for the wife would be so dangerous to her health.
If it’s been removed from the womb and it can live on it’s own then it’s been born.
It’s an arbitrary line but we don’t have any choice but to draw an arbitrary line. As along as a fetus is dependant on a host for life it is not a person but a parasite and it has no more rights than a woodtick.
Your questions are kind od specious anyway since elective abortions are virtually never performed in the third trimester and certainly not at nine months. As I said before, if a woman wanted to terminate a pregnancy at nine months it could be done by simply inducing labor and delivering a live baby.
At what point do you think a fertalized egg becomes a person?
So if it hasn’t been removed yet, then it’s fair game? Whether it deserves protection or not is based on it’s mere physical location?
Great googly moogly.