• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Abortion: The Ethics of Liberty

Night

Boring old fossil
Joined
Nov 2, 2007
Messages
4,755
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5/8
Just that the anti-abortion label is unnecessary, and a little redundant. I get your stance though.

In the spirit of ironic redundancy, I am again compelled to restate that I'm not Pro-Choice.
 

Feops

New member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
829
MBTI Type
INTx
Arguing over timetables and such things is irrelevant, and is simply a search for a moral/ethical excuse.
You're coming from the perspective that once an egg is fertilized there can be no right answer, only less wrong (and morally palatable) answers, making any opinion that discusses timing wrong to some degree.

Unfortunately this is still an opinion.

I'll take myself as an example. I've already put down a 12 week safe mark as my own take. I've cited this because I don't consider a human to be an individual until self-awareness is attained. How then, am I excusing myself if I do not think of the fetus as a human individual before that point? It isn't a moral gray area to me, it's more or less identical to denying an unfertilized egg its natural process via birth control and condoms.
 

professor goodstain

New member
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
1,785
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7~7
You're coming from the perspective that once an egg is fertilized there can be no right answer, only less wrong (and morally palatable) answers, making any opinion that discusses timing wrong to some degree.

Unfortunately this is still an opinion.

I'll take myself as an example. I've already put down a 12 week safe mark as my own take. I've cited this because I don't consider a human to be an individual until self-awareness is attained. How then, am I excusing myself if I do not think of the fetus as a human individual before that point? It isn't a moral gray area to me, it's more or less identical to denying an unfertilized egg its natural process via birth control and condoms.

You are an individual. You have self awareness. At one point in your life you were a fetus.
 

Feops

New member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
829
MBTI Type
INTx
You are an individual. You have self awareness. At one point in your life you were a fetus.
So? At one point in my life I was an unfertilized egg and sperm. If my parents had used a condom, or my mom been on contraceptives, I wouldn't have been born.
 

Ivy

Strongly Ambivalent
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
23,989
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6
Do you really think a fetus at any stage of gestation is self-aware? I don't even think a newborn baby is self-aware.
 

Feops

New member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
829
MBTI Type
INTx
Prof: Purple monkey dishwasher.

Ivy: I wasn't aware that the brain continued to develop its fundamental functions once born. A baby isn't going to remember anything as a fetus, and isn't going to get much practice walking around, but the bits for memory and motion are there. At some point in development whatever sparks awareness is set in motion even if without reference to really ponder it. Neurology isn't to the point where we can identify when each system in the brain really fires up, especially something as vague as consciousness, but we can identify when brain activity as a whole starts.

Edit: My perspective can be simply put as "I think, therefore I am". Someone lives once they can think and dies once they cannot. The body is able to survive without higher level thought to a degree (as a fetus, or as a vegetable) but they aren't really human at those points. Their unique spark is not present. This ties heavily in my disbelief in anything resembling a soul and my assumption that this one life and this one mind is all a person ever gets.
 

professor goodstain

New member
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
1,785
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7~7
Prof: Purple monkey dishwasher.

Ivy: I wasn't aware that the brain continued to develop its fundamental functions once born. A baby isn't going to remember anything as a fetus, and isn't going to get much practice walking around, but the bits for memory and motion are there. At some point in development whatever sparks awareness is set in motion even if without reference to really ponder it. Neurology isn't to the point where we can identify when each system in the brain really fires up, especially something as vague as consciousness, but we can identify when brain activity as a whole starts.

If you do exist, did you exist at the point of the sperm touching the egg or somewhere thereafter? 99and44ths of one hundred% of the time the "thereafter" only happens once the sperm touches the egg.
 

Ivy

Strongly Ambivalent
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
23,989
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6
Prof: Purple monkey dishwasher.

Ivy: I wasn't aware that the brain continued to develop its fundamental functions once born. A baby isn't going to remember anything as a fetus, and isn't going to get much practice walking around, but the bits for memory and motion are there. At some point in development whatever sparks awareness is set in motion even if without reference to really ponder it. Neurology isn't to the point where we can identify when each system in the brain really fires up, especially something as vague as consciousness, but we can identify when brain activity as a whole starts.

Edit: My perspective can be simply put as "I think, therefore I am". Someone lives once they can think and dies once they cannot. The body is able to survive without higher level thought to a degree (as a fetus, or as a vegetable) but they aren't really human at those points. Their unique spark is not present. This ties heavily in my disbelief in anything resembling a soul and my assumption that this one life and this one mind is all a person ever gets.

Yeah, apparently we just have different definitions of "self-awareness." Which is a common issue in these discussions that leads to people talking past one another.
 

Qre:us

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
4,890
TheLastMohican;[B said:
581663If accepted for legal purposes, this argument would have some interesting implications for the procedures of abortion. [/B]It would be legal to remove a fetus from the womb, but not to kill it directly (especially not when it is capable of breathing on its own). That could necessitate some strange practices, but it would, at least in my opinion, make the legalization of abortion philosophically consistent. The basic rule is that we are not allowed to kill children, but we are not required to nurture them, either. It gives us the simple freedom to keep to ourselves.

Thoughts?

Interesting implication in terms of parental responsibility as well. Because then, by this proposition, it would be completely within a parent's legal right to neglect his/her child (i.e., not feed, clothe, etc) and not be persecuted for it. Right?
 

Nonsensical

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
4,006
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7
In general, Abortion should be a decision. I'll add that if I were in the situation of bearing a child, and didn't want it, I'd give it up for adoption. There's probably a happy couple out there somewhere looking for a child. Why kill it when you can give it to a better family? I mean, seriously, it's pretty selfish.

But I'm open to both sides, I guess..I can see why people resort to getting abortions..I just think it's more humane to give it a better life in another family..I'm sensitive like that.
 

Feops

New member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
829
MBTI Type
INTx
If you do exist, did you exist at the point of the sperm touching the egg or somewhere thereafter? 99and44ths of one hundred% of the time the "thereafter" only happens once the sperm touches the egg.
It depends what you consider existence. Do you think existence is when the genetics that make up a child first come into being or do you think existence is when those genetics are merged into a unique individual. Most would think the latter I suspect.

I'm going to go ahead and guess that you're attempting to link "me" to "existing at fertilization" so that destroying the egg at that point would have killed "me".
 
Top