# Should abortion law be based on morality, technology or something else? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 25, 2006, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259 "2006-05-25T23:47:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/221 "2006-06-02T07:04:28Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > So, you’re okay with restricting acts where there is a victim who has not, or who is incapable of, giving assent? Well, yes, because not restricting the act serves the interest of another entity that I have determined has an overriding interest - it’s a clear dichotomy. There will be an act, either the woman is forced to undergo a pregnancy and birth she doesn’t want, or a foetus has its life terminated. There’s going to be a victim either way. I choose that the victim be the party that will suffer least. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/222 "2006-06-02T07:18:15Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Well, **yes** , because not restricting the act serves the interest of another entity that I have determined has an overriding interest - it’s a clear dichotomy. There will be an act, either the woman is forced to undergo a pregnancy and birth she doesn’t want, or a foetus has its life terminated. There’s going to be a victim either way. I choose that the victim be the party that will suffer least. My bolding - that should read “Well, **no** ,” ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/223 "2006-06-02T14:58:19Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Well, yes, because not restricting the act serves the interest of another entity that I have determined has an overriding interest - it’s a clear dichotomy. There will be an act, either the woman is forced to undergo a pregnancy and birth she doesn’t want, or a foetus has its life terminated. There’s going to be a victim either way. I choose that the victim be the party that will suffer least. So…you think that pregnancy & delivery causes more suffering than death/elimination/being wiped out of existance? That is an interesting point of view, but I’ve been pregnant, and had a natural delivery, and I can assure you I would take it over death any day. And, of course, this was a wanted baby, so the psychological aspect of it is not the same, but even so…stating that the baby/fetus is suffering less is a huge leap. ---
**Author:** ![rwjefferson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a6a055/32.png) [@rwjefferson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rwjefferson)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/224 "2006-06-02T15:08:21Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > And…you are making specific exceptions…you are specifically excluding pre-born babies. I am not. Pre-born babies also have the right to remove life support that is dependent on them; pre-born babies also have the right to expel those that overstay their welcome. You are the one that would make specific exceptions to these rights for the pregnant. > [@Stratocaster](#): > > So, your passion for liberty is as enthusiastic when it relates to illegal drugs? How do you react to all the other restrictions on your liberty? (Can’t jaywalk, can’t breach a contract, can’t steal from your neighbor, etc., etc.) How do you stand it? Your posts show you do not know the difference between morality (e.g. prostitution and drugs and other vices), and crime (e.g. fraud and stealing). What is worse is that your kind tends to believe that a crime is whatever they say is crime. It is not. A crime is an act that denies peaceful pursuit; even if that act is a law you support. r~ ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/225 "2006-06-02T15:18:25Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > So…you think that pregnancy & delivery causes more suffering than death/elimination/being wiped out of existance? That is an interesting point of view, but I’ve been pregnant, and had a natural delivery, and I can assure you I would take it over death any day. And, of course, this was a wanted baby, so the psychological aspect of it is not the same, but even so…stating that the baby/fetus is suffering less is a huge leap. Not to speak for **MrDibble** , but I have seen no evidence that an early term fetus is self-aware or feels any pain at all. On the contrary, I’ve seen both scientific studies and anecdotal evidence with my own preemie and other preemies in the NICU that a fetus/preemie does NOT feel pain before 27 weeks. There is other evidence that babies become self-aware between 6 and 18 months of life. So I would state that the pain and suffering of pregnancy, childbirth, raising an unwanted child or even suffering the moral pangs of adoption are far greater than the pain and suffering of an aborted fetus, which is zero. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/226 "2006-06-02T15:29:51Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > Not to speak for **MrDibble** , but I have seen no evidence that an early term fetus is self-aware or feels any pain at all. On the contrary, I’ve seen both scientific studies and anecdotal evidence with my own preemie and other preemies in the NICU that a fetus/preemie does NOT feel pain before 27 weeks. There is other evidence that babies become self-aware between 6 and 18 months of life. > > So I would state that the pain and suffering of pregnancy, childbirth, raising an unwanted child or even suffering the moral pangs of adoption are far greater than the pain and suffering of an aborted fetus, which is zero. I’m sure you are right about all of the preemie stuff…you would certainly know better than I would! 🙂 My point was just that whatever physical & mental difficulties there are on the part of the mother, it can’t be as bad as being wiped out of existence. If I was to die tomorrow, with no prior knowledge that it was going to happen (and I mean, not even a second before…say, something fell on my head that I never saw coming, and killed me instantly, so I did not feel anything, then I really didn’t “suffer” in any way. I still would rather go through child bearing than experience death. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/227 "2006-06-02T15:50:48Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > …whatever physical & mental difficulties there are on the part of the mother, it can’t be as bad as being wiped out of existence. This is where we’ll have to agree to disagree. I have no fear of death. I have a great fear of pain and suffering - emotional and physical. My living will states that food and water should be withheld if I become unable to communicate with others and there’s a good chance I won’t be able to again. I’d much rather starve to death than not be able to tell my kids I love them. This is simply one more example of differing weights to ethical principles leading inexorably to different conclusions of what is moral. I think pain and suffering is worse than insensate death. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/228 "2006-06-02T15:58:38Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > This is where we’ll have to agree to disagree. I have no fear of death. I have a great fear of pain and suffering - emotional and physical. My living will states that food and water should be withheld if I become unable to communicate with others and there’s a good chance I won’t be able to again. I’d much rather starve to death than not be able to tell my kids I love them. > > This is simply one more example of differing weights to ethical principles leading inexorably to different conclusions of what is moral. I think pain and suffering is worse than insensate death. That is totally fair. I still dispute, though, that the “pain & suffering” someone goes through, bearing an unwanted child is anywhere comparable to what you describe. in terms of being on life support. Oh, and BTW…I don’t think you ever mentioned the end of the story with your preemie…is everything ok now, I hope? ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/229 "2006-06-02T16:00:34Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > So…you think that pregnancy & delivery causes more suffering than death/elimination/being wiped out of existance? That is an interesting point of view, but I’ve been pregnant, and had a natural delivery, and I can assure you I would take it over death any day. And, of course, this was a wanted baby, so the psychological aspect of it is not the same, but even so…stating that the baby/fetus is suffering less is a huge leap. No huge leap, but you left out the fundamental bit: being **forced** to be preganant and deliver = years of suffering, both psychological and physical. Others have already spoken about all the physical pain and changes of being pregnant, and I know the scars on the psyche do not go away quickly either. abortion = seconds, _maybe_ minutes of suffering, strictly physical pain, then nothing. I’ll say it again. It’s not just the pregnancy that’s the issue, it’s being forced to stay that way, and then deliver. Comparing it to your _wanted_ pregnancy is just irrelevant. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/230 "2006-06-02T16:08:18Z")
> [@rwjefferson](#): > > A crime is an act that denies peaceful pursuit; even if that act is a law you support. So killing an innocent human being would be a crime, then. Right? ---
**Author:** ![rwjefferson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a6a055/32.png) [@rwjefferson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rwjefferson)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/231 "2006-06-02T16:13:33Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > So killing an innocent human being would be a crime, then. Right? A human being that threatens the health or liberty of another is not “innocent”; whether it is on purpose or not. r~ ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/232 "2006-06-02T16:21:39Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > Oh, and BTW…I don’t think you ever mentioned the end of the story with your preemie…is everything ok now, I hope? [Yep!](http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/rhiannon_dreamsnake/detail?.dir=3e83re2&.dnm=db0are2.jpg&.src=ph) ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/233 "2006-06-02T17:33:06Z")
> [@rwjefferson](#): > > A human being that threatens the health or liberty of another is not “innocent”; whether it is on purpose or not. Even if that human had no volition… no choice in the matter whatsoever? Even if that human being was created – through no fault of its own – by the woman whose health and/or liberty is allegedly being infringed upon? ---
**Author:** ![rwjefferson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a6a055/32.png) [@rwjefferson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rwjefferson)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/234 "2006-06-02T17:49:00Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > Even if that human had no volition… no choice in the matter whatsoever? Even if that human being was created – through no fault of its own – by the woman whose health and/or liberty is allegedly being infringed upon? There are no just exceptions to “all are equal under law”. r~ ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/235 "2006-06-02T18:06:49Z")
> [@rwjefferson](#): > > There are no just exceptions to “all are equal under law”. Well then, why are you making an exception for the unborn? Y’see, in all other aspects of law, the accused can only be convicted if he or she is deemed to be either directly culpable or negligent – in other words, if there is _something_ that they could have done to avoid committing the misdeed. In what way are the unborn deliberately culpable? In what manner are they guilty of criminal negligence? Are you suggesting that the unborn should not have chosen to be conceived? If a party is considered guilty, this suggests that there is _something_ they should have – and could have – done differently. If a human being had no choice in the matter – none whatsoever – then how can that being be considered “guilty”? ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/236 "2006-06-02T18:11:27Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > No huge leap, but you left out the fundamental bit: > being **forced** to be preganant and deliver = years of suffering, both psychological and physical. Others have already spoken about all the physical pain and changes of being pregnant, and I know the scars on the psyche do not go away quickly either. > abortion = seconds, _maybe_ minutes of suffering, strictly physical pain, then nothing. There is actually a lot of evidence that shows that women suffer much psychological pain from abortion. That it is indeed NOT “nothing.” Some women feel bad about it for the rest of their lives, and have no psychological comfort, such as “well, at least my child is out there somewhere, living a good life with a good family.” This is something that is not talked about much, but it is out there, and I know it is true, because I have a good friend who has this problem. And she is not religious, so it has nothing to do with her church telling her that she “sinned” or otherwise did something wrong. She just knows that she had a maternal obligation to protect that child, and she let the baby down and she let herself down. So don’t assume that abortion doesn’t cause scars to the psyche. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/237 "2006-06-02T18:34:16Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > [Yep!](http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/rhiannon_dreamsnake/detail?.dir=3e83re2&.dnm=db0are2.jpg&.src=ph) OMG is she cute!!! Congratulations! How old is she now? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/238 "2006-06-02T18:44:32Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > So don’t assume that abortion doesn’t cause scars to the psyche. Amusingly, I recall a public-service commercial a while back that touched on this exact subject, showing a woman sadly reflecting about how old her aborted child would have been. It was pulled fairly quickly, I think because right up until the last second, it looked like a pro-_choice_ ad (or at least that’s how I interpreted it), with the message of “don’t hassle women who’ve had or are considering abortions by calling them irresponsible sinners and whatnot. For them, abortion isn’t an easy, casual choice. They may have some regrets, as anyone could after a hard decision, but it’s important we let them _make_ that decision.” Anyway, it’s a nonstarter. Decisions about whether or not to go to college, or join the military, or what foods to eat, can have long-term negative psychological effects for some people. That doesn’t mean we should take the decisions out of their hands. ---
**Author:** ![rwjefferson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a6a055/32.png) [@rwjefferson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rwjefferson)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/239 "2006-06-02T20:03:37Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > Well then, why are you making an exception for the unborn? > > Y’see, in all other aspects of law, the accused can only be convicted if he or she is deemed to be either directly culpable or negligent – in other words, if there is _something_ that they could have done to avoid committing the misdeed. In what way are the unborn deliberately culpable? In what manner are they guilty of criminal negligence? Are you suggesting that the unborn should not have chosen to be conceived? > If a party is considered guilty, this suggests that there is _something_ they should have – and could have – done differently. If a human being had no choice in the matter – none whatsoever – then how can that being be considered “guilty”? You are confused, the unborn are not on trial. [repeat] No one has the right to take of the body or health or liberty of another. You would make exception for the unborn. There are no just exceptions to “all are equal under law”. [/repeat] r~ ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2006, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259/240 "2006-06-02T22:11:47Z")
> [@rwjefferson](#): > > You are confused, the unborn are not on trial. Wait a minute. You’re the one who said that they’re guilty, and that “There are no just exceptions to ‘all are equal under law’.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-abortion-law-be-based-on-morality-technology-or-something-else/358259.md?page=13)