andrewducker (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2004-01-19 09:00 pm
andrewducker) wrote2004-01-19 09:00 pm
Abortion
Taking some of the thoughts brought up by the post yesterday, I'm going to try and sum up some of my thoughts on the matter.
(Disclaimer 1: when I say "everyone", I'm bearing in mind that there are bound to be some people that feel likewise and actually mean "nearly, but not quite everybody)
(Disclaimer 2: Legalised abortions are necessary, because otherwise women have illegal ones, in pretty much the same numbers, only the women die in much larger amounts. Which I think we can all agree is a bad thing)
Everyone agrees that killing babies that are out of the womb is wrong.
Most people are fine with contraception, the prevention of the sperm and egg coming together to form a zygote.
In between it comes down to a clash between the right of the mother to self-determination versus the right of the zygote/foetus not to die.
For some people the answer is simple - at any point after conception the foetus is alive and has the same rights as any other person, including the right not to be killed. To them all abortion is wrong.
For others the answer is equally simple in the opposite direction. If the foetus is inside the mother it's not alive yet, and therefore has no right to life. Abortion at any point is therefore fine.
For the rest of us, it's a little trickier - it rests on some measure of life/sentience. If, for instance, at 25 weeks gestation a baby is born prematurely, is it alive and does it have the right to life? If so, then presumably it would have the same right while inside the mother. Could you remove it's right to life by putting it back inside the mother (one imagines a ceasarian taking place with the baby being alive and then pre-natal once again as the baby is raised and lowered).
The simplest measure in the last case is time - after all the complexity and intelligence of the foetus increases over time in a very well understood manner. Deciding on how many weeks old a foetus needs to be before it's "really alive" is left as an exercise for the reader.
[Poll #235527]
*feels nervous about hitting 'post'*
*awaits the end of the world*
(Disclaimer 1: when I say "everyone", I'm bearing in mind that there are bound to be some people that feel likewise and actually mean "nearly, but not quite everybody)
(Disclaimer 2: Legalised abortions are necessary, because otherwise women have illegal ones, in pretty much the same numbers, only the women die in much larger amounts. Which I think we can all agree is a bad thing)
Everyone agrees that killing babies that are out of the womb is wrong.
Most people are fine with contraception, the prevention of the sperm and egg coming together to form a zygote.
In between it comes down to a clash between the right of the mother to self-determination versus the right of the zygote/foetus not to die.
For some people the answer is simple - at any point after conception the foetus is alive and has the same rights as any other person, including the right not to be killed. To them all abortion is wrong.
For others the answer is equally simple in the opposite direction. If the foetus is inside the mother it's not alive yet, and therefore has no right to life. Abortion at any point is therefore fine.
For the rest of us, it's a little trickier - it rests on some measure of life/sentience. If, for instance, at 25 weeks gestation a baby is born prematurely, is it alive and does it have the right to life? If so, then presumably it would have the same right while inside the mother. Could you remove it's right to life by putting it back inside the mother (one imagines a ceasarian taking place with the baby being alive and then pre-natal once again as the baby is raised and lowered).
The simplest measure in the last case is time - after all the complexity and intelligence of the foetus increases over time in a very well understood manner. Deciding on how many weeks old a foetus needs to be before it's "really alive" is left as an exercise for the reader.
[Poll #235527]
*feels nervous about hitting 'post'*
*awaits the end of the world*
no subject
One of the problems I have with this argument, is that in its purest form it would prevent the use of emergency contraception (and even taken to its extreme, the use of certain hormonal contraceptives which could have an abortificant effect).
Deciding when the fetus has a right to life is very difficult and I will not attempt to do so, but I will say that I do not believe it is in the first few days of pregnancy, especially given the miscarriage rate in the early stages of pregnancy.
no subject