abortion

[miss fortune]

Well, for starters, I'd require a much better education be provided for every child. 32-40 students per teacher is absurd. I'd like to see no more than 16 students per teacher. I think any parent that is satisfied with the public education system in the U.S. does not know what the "right" way to raise a child is.

What are parents teaching their children, anyway? Is it permissible to teach your children anything? Would we allow a private school to teach Nazism? What about universal naturalism?

Why are we talking about education in the abortion thread?



Public schools in my area are rather horribly underfunded, and the parents have more say in thier children's educations than may necissarily be a good idea. For instance, we never learned about birth control in school- in fact, we were told that if we had sex we would get an STD and die (unless we were married, in which case I'm guessing STDs didn't work anymore or something ).

Needless to say, we had such a high teen pregnancy rate that the New York Times ran an article on our school's large number of knocked up teens.

Though parents may think that it's a good idea to have a lot of say in what the school teaches, it's not always best for the kids. None of those girls or thier baby daddies ended up going to college, and almost all of them are working low wage jobs in a nearby town.

Just something to think about on that argument

 

[Mort Belfry]

I've also heard that change for a better world always starts with oneself.

I concede. The zing of the day goes to Jennifer.

 

[Badlands]

I would guess the majority of the population would have no serious emotional qualms about killing an insect, certainly not enough to stop somebody else from doing it. First trimester fetuses appear to be about as competent and sentient, so I don't think it's a sentience issue with most aborted fetuses. With overpopulation a threat in many areas, I think three happy people is a more desirable outcome than six unhappy people. This attitude that quantity somehow defines how successful the human race is is ridiculous. Everybody talks about how adoption is an option as opposed to raising an unwanted child, but chances are the kid will just get caught in the foster care system until they're 18 (unless you've found adoptive parents) and life will be about as redeeming. Abortion should be an option for any reason for first trimester fetuses. After that, I think it should be almost completely closed off except for the purpose of saving the mother's life; if you wanted to get one for any other reason, you just had a 13 week window of opportunity.

 

[Athenian200]

So what's your cutoff level for sentience?

It involves being able to respond to their environment and other people in a manner that indicates a particular level of awareness about their relationship to them.

Would a child suffering from Down's Syndrome be viewed as sentient?

Some are, some are not. Depends on severity of mental deficiencies.

Would someone in a coma for years fit?

If they were sentient before going into the coma and after coming out of it, yes.

What if they're actually sentient but just can't communicate due to a stroke? So we wouldn't really KNOW?

Again, if they were sentient before the stroke, and recover, then they are sentient. But in the mean time? Well, no, we wouldn't know.

What about your dog, if it's really smart and "seems" sentient?

It would have to demonstrate sentience by displaying a level of self-awareness and awareness of others and their environment.

What if it's just a really stupid person who can't really contribute much to society? (Can we do medical experiments on them, since they're not really that sentient?)

A person's ability to contribute to society has nothing to do with their intelligence or sentience. Intelligence is linked to sentience on some levels, however. Again, if they demonstrate a particular level of awareness of themselves, their environment, and other people, then they are sentient, regardless of whether they use this ability well.

Can human life has value even if it doesn't come across as sentient?

No.

What about parents of children like mentioned above?

Of course the parents could be sentient even if the child is not... why?

Can there still be a relationship, and can they impact their parents' lives positively if they are not "sentient" in the sense many would hope?

Yes. But so can a cat or a dog.

Are they less human?

Define human. If you mean, do they have human DNA and organs, then no, they are not less human. If you mean, can they perceive and react to things in a manner that sets humans apart from non-sentient beings and makes their lives more valuable, then yes they are less human.

You see how complicated this all gets, I hope.

Yes. Some of those questions were difficult to answer.

Cause, um, you're murderin' babies! Ya wouldn't let mom smother her baby at 3 months even tho it's hers and thus her choice... why let her do it earlier?

You presume that the object of discussion is a "baby," when in fact it has not yet reached the level of development where it can be called that. It is a fetus, potentially a baby, but not one already. This makes a difference.

What do you think? I did my best to answer your questions, but I fear my answers may have come off a bit rigid. I couldn't carry the ideas too far, because they were already on the precipice of perceptual limitations.

 

[walking flour]

I almost never actually reply to the topics that I spend forever reading, so I'll give my opinion..condensed.

The unborn child is inside of the mother and connected to the mother. The unborn child is part of the mother. It is the mother's choice to do as she wishes with her body. If she decides that the baby must come out, then that is her choice. If someone can keep the baby alive after it comes out of mom, then fine. As long as it is inside the mother and living off of her, then it is up to the mom to decide.

I do not know if I would get an abortion ever myself or not. I would defiantly do everything in my power to not become pregnant because having an abortion would still be a nasty thing. It could be damaging to me either way (to have the baby or not have the baby). It would depend on the circumstances. I would give it much thought before I did it. The thing that I must rely on is my own reasoning. I must be able to have control over my body and be able to do whatever my reasoning says that i should do. Any law that limits what I do to my own body (which includes the dependent, physically connected child) is wrong and I will not follow it.
Our own bodies, when sick, can expel our babies. I mean, we don't die so that our little creations will live.

Obviously, there are many reasons why people don't kill. Other than that "love for life", it is very culture based. We need to get along. Most of us depend on other people (even now when we can hide out in our homes)...
Pregnancy is a private matter and, certainly in these times, shouldn't have any laws attached to it.

I can see why people try to force laws regarding abortion into place, but these people are often somewhat hypocritical..not in the sense that they go against their own 'values', but that their values are rashly chosen and their thinking doesn't 'work' for more than just them. (Because not everyone can just pick up all of these values and call them truths.) Childbirth is a personal matter. There are so many other things people could focus on to help satisfy their need for moral purity.


And that is my opinion, somewhat. I may have overlooked several things but this is just my base and some flowers that have sprouted from it.

Edit: Ha! I just noticed this The thread is about abortion, and half of my name (the first part) comes from a song entitled "Of Walking Abortion". I don't know why that is so pleasing Maybe it unconsciously attracted me. I don't usually bother arguing these things...

 

[Ivy]

(emphasis mine)

Can human life has value even if it doesn't come across as sentient?

No.

I have to admit to you that I cringed upon reading this. That is scary as hell to me.

 

[lowtech redneck]

The unborn child is inside of the mother and connected to the mother. The unborn child is part of the mother. It is the mother's choice to do as she wishes with her body. If she decides that the baby must come out, then that is her choice. If someone can keep the baby alive after it comes out of mom, then fine. As long as it is inside the mother and living off of her, then it is up to the mom to decide.

The unborn child is NOT part of the mother's body-though it would be fair (if a bit tactless) to define the unborn child as a parasitic organism. Also, what if an unborn child is capable of surviving (obviously through medical care and technology) outside the womb, but premature expulsion (which is not actually what abortion is) would inflict the child with crippling medical defects?

 

[Nocapszy]

(emphasis mine)

I have to admit to you that I cringed upon reading this. That is scary as hell to me.

What's shocking about that?

(I'm not trying to start anything)

 

[Nadir]

I'm *flourishes the label* pro-choice (wow!) in that I would like everyone to have the choice to have an abortion if they should wish so, with their own choices dictating the action and the result, without any sort of external stigma added in. I can't go any further -- it is off limits. It's not my place to morally approve or disapprove of a deed which does not concern anyone but the doers of the deed in any way -- and certainly not to say it should or should not be done.

To make my position clearer. I'd like everyone to have abortions if they want to. What I wouldn't like is someone other than those having the abortion pretending to feel any pangs of conscience, regrets, or despair that may or may not later arise.

 

[mippus]

To make my position clearer. I'd like everyone to have abortions if they want to. What I wouldn't like is someone other than those having the abortion pretending to feel any pangs of conscience, regrets, or despair that may or may not later arise.

I can't agree more. I don't see why non-involved people should find it their duty to react to someone else's choice. What is the difference with arrogance then? I can see, however, that people identify, think about it, and conclude that to them personally, it would be a horrible deed, but still: that would be and should stay their own conclusion.
Funny that this is such an issue in the land of the free...

 

[pure_mercury]

I almost never actually reply to the topics that I spend forever reading, so I'll give my opinion..condensed.

The unborn child is inside of the mother and connected to the mother. The unborn child is part of the mother. It is the mother's choice to do as she wishes with her body. If she decides that the baby must come out, then that is her choice. If someone can keep the baby alive after it comes out of mom, then fine. As long as it is inside the mother and living off of her, then it is up to the mom to decide.

I do not know if I would get an abortion ever myself or not. I would defiantly do everything in my power to not become pregnant because having an abortion would still be a nasty thing. It could be damaging to me either way (to have the baby or not have the baby). It would depend on the circumstances. I would give it much thought before I did it. The thing that I must rely on is my own reasoning. I must be able to have control over my body and be able to do whatever my reasoning says that i should do. Any law that limits what I do to my own body (which includes the dependent, physically connected child) is wrong and I will not follow it.
Our own bodies, when sick, can expel our babies. I mean, we don't die so that our little creations will live.

Obviously, there are many reasons why people don't kill. Other than that "love for life", it is very culture based. We need to get along. Most of us depend on other people (even now when we can hide out in our homes)...
Pregnancy is a private matter and, certainly in these times, shouldn't have any laws attached to it.

I can see why people try to force laws regarding abortion into place, but these people are often somewhat hypocritical..not in the sense that they go against their own 'values', but that their values are rashly chosen and their thinking doesn't 'work' for more than just them. (Because not everyone can just pick up all of these values and call them truths.) Childbirth is a personal matter. There are so many other things people could focus on to help satisfy their need for moral purity.


And that is my opinion, somewhat. I may have overlooked several things but this is just my base and some flowers that have sprouted from it.

Edit: Ha! I just noticed this The thread is about abortion, and half of my name (the first part) comes from a song entitled "Of Walking Abortion". I don't know why that is so pleasing Maybe it unconsciously attracted me. I don't usually bother arguing these things...

Manic Street Preachers, eh? Good stuff.

 

[alcea rosea]

I'm definitely pro-choice but people should use their right to choose very carefully.
Abortion should not be one option for contraception.

I don't know if I would be able to have an abortion. After having three babies I know how featus already is a little human being already on pregnancy week 12 with their little heart beat and all. It terrifies to think what I would do in a situation where my baby would have been very sick and I would have had to decide on abortion. I'm very fortunate that I didn't have to make such a decision.

But I'm still very pro-choice.

 

[Nocapszy]

I don't understand all this business about "life starts at conception"

For some reason I can't shake the notion that it never ended; how can you start something that's already going?

 

[Ivy]

What's shocking about that?

(I'm not trying to start anything)

The question posed was whether life could have value even if it didn't come across as sentient. Not whether life could have value even if it weren't sentient. The answer, a straight "No," puts a little too much confidence in a human's ability to recognize sentience for me to be comfortable with it. It seemed like major hubris to me.

 

[Nocapszy]

Ah. How silly of me not to look for importance in the bold.

But then, now I wonder what constitutes "coming across as" though of course I'm sure everyone's response to that matter would degrade into shades-of-gray squabbling.

Just out of curiosity, why is this abortion thing such a big deal?

My guess is it's got a lot more to do with the popularity of the issue than the actual significance the decision has.

Sure, sure -- I have a real opinion on it too. "I'm not just in here arguing to argue. I want my voice heard"