So when someone gets blackout drunk at a party, they are no longer a “person”? Just a mass of partying cells?
Your attempt at equating my statement with that of an intelligent, self-aware person who is temporarily disabled, is patently absurd.
There are such occasions as @RitterSport notes, but they are extremely rare, and have obvious reasons when they happen. One would be a fetus that is non-viable, whether already dead or having some disease that would cause them to die shortly after birth no matter what kind of care is provided. I’m thinking of things like anencephaly or other such obvious deformities. The other would be in an emergency where the life of the mother is at risk and attempting to deliver the fetus alive would lead to the mother’s death.
Outside of those two situations, however, as @Babale says, such abortions are not provided by legitimate medical providers.
Goooot it, so the problem is only being temporarily disabled?
So people humans with severe Alzheimers are no longer “people”?
The OP asked for an opinion with a question. I answered HIS QUESTION. Your attempt at citing totally unrelated and irrelevant “examples” designed to somehow refute my opinion is ridiculous because, drum roll, THEY ARE TOTALLY UNRELATED AND IRRELEVANT.
Moderating:
You’ve pushed into dishonest debating here. Basically whataboutism. It is taking the debate off-topic and putting words in other poster’s mouths.
Pull back from this and stick to the fetus question.
Right, I brought up both of those situations above. In one, the fetus is already dead or otherwise nonviable, so that obviously makes things really simple because there’s only one human life to consider, the mother’s.
And in the second case, if we had the ability to take the fetus out and incubate them without posing risk to the mother, I think it’s obvious that given those two options - transplanting the pregnancy or terminating it - transplantation is obviously the more moral choice once the fetus is beyond a certain level of development (probably around 20-24 weeks).
Right.
Now, do we also need a law telling those providers that they must behave as they already do? Probably not. Such a law is likely to have unintended consequences, like making doctors hesitate in situations where decisive action is needed to save the life of the mother.
The problem is that not all providers of medical care are legitimate providers. There does need to be a law to cover situations like the proverbial “guy in a back alley with a wire hanger”.
I’m sure there are situations where the fetus is severely deformed and would be able to be incubated and then live for several or many years, in constant pain or without an actual brain or whatever. And, the pregnant person may not want to bring that fetus to full term, inside or outside their body.
It’s all about edge cases when you get into these discussions, and I think no one is better than the pregnant person (probably with help from the doctors) to make those kinds of edge case decisions about what should happen to the fetus. Granting personhood rights to a fetus because it could survive in an NICU (or, in some imagined artificial womb) takes those decisions out of the hands of those best able to make them.
As soon as a fetus gets personhood rights, the law obviously gets involved. I trust pregnant people and the medical establishment to get it right often enough (essentially all the time, with a few well-publicized exceptions) that I never want to leave it in the hands of judges or legislators.
So, I stand by my on-topic statement that a fetus gets personhood when it’s born, not before.
ETA:
No, there doesn’t. The don’t have it in Canada, and it’s all going fine up there. Once you get legislators involved, they will miss various edge cases, overreach, and otherwise try to impose their will on pregnant people.
redacted
edit to add: never mind, I totally misunderstood what you were saying. Sorry
that is a horrible standard to judge whether someone is human. Apparently most adults don’t have any memories before age 2.5 or so. That does not mean they weren’t humans before that age
you continued to also be that after you were born as well
Not my body, not my choice. I would, of course, have an opinion, but that is irrelevant.
The woman gets to decide, even if I make really persuasive arguments. That is all I can do.
Thank you. Unfortunately, we still have people who believe in slavery, which is a pretty good definition of controlling someone’s body against their will.
It’s not just about the edge cases. Those are just the most difficult to make a decision on, and in which there is likely to be the most disagreement. It’s about, say, a normal fetus at 38 weeks, with no medical complications from the pregnancy. I think in those cases, a vast majority of people would say abortion is not justified, but the vast majority is not all. If there is no law against providing an abortion in such a situation, someone will pop up to start providing such a service, even if it happens outside of the supervision of licensed providers in licensed medical care facilities.
We absolutely should have a law that essentially says that only licensed medical providers can provide legal abortions. But the guy in the back alley shouldn’t be able to give you any kind of abortion (well, maybe if he isn’t in a back alley but owns a convenience store instead, he can sell you Plan B; but he shouldn’t be performing any kind of medical procedure).
That’s a separate question from which abortions are and are not acceptable.
Would this mean you have a situation where some abortions (like the hypothetical 40 week elective abortions) can’t be legally performed because no valid doctor would perform them? Yes, yes it would. But how we arrive there is different than a governmental body telling medical professionals how to do their job.
And there are injuries that can occurr to a child or even an adult that leave them bedridden and incubated with no conscious experience for years or even decades. We can talk about when it’s valid to “pull the plug” without stripping these people of personhood.
Personhood rights are rights which are legally defined protections of a person; but we aren’t talking about personhood rights, we are talking about what is and isn’t moral.
I think a fetus beyond a certain level of development is absolutely a person; that doesn’t mean I think they should have the same full legal rights as an adult human being.
Hold up, they absolutely do have laws in Canada that say that if you’re going to provide abortions or any other form of medical care you have to be a licensed professional in good standing with the appropriate medical regulatory body of your province.
There isn’t a criminal law banning abortions specifically, but you can’t doctor without being a valid doctor in Canada, whether you’re providing abortions or anything else.
So, I imagine Canada has those services?
The number of abortions happening where the fetus is viable and the pregnant person is healthy at 38 weeks is basically nothing, right? So why use that example? The edge cases will happen earlier, and whatever the legislature decides, even assuming they’re well-intentioned, will miss those cases and cause undue hardship, health problems, deaths, for pregnant people.
that is a completely inconsistent position from a logical standpoint. If you believe that the fetus is a person (with personhood rights), then it’s not enough to say the woman gets to decide. That would be like saying “well, I personally wouldn’t murder someone, but if others want to do it, that’s on them”. If the fetus has personhood rights (which you seemed to agree with above), then, logically, you HAVE to say no one can have an abortion, because that would be murder, and society does not leave murder up to personal choice.
The only logical argument for abortion is that the fetus is not a person, or, if it is a person, it does not have full personhood rights due to the unique situation, and thus the mother has superior rights to decide whether or not to keep the fetus.
What? No we’re not, this thread is about when a fetus becomes a person.
ETA: I think I fine with laws that say surgical abortions have to be done by a licensed medical professional.