Abortion Views

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by the_faceman@3 July 2003 - 20:53
i don't want to go into this in detail, but one situation would be the one i mentioned earlier, and that is if it was known through testing that the child would be severely disabled (and by that i mean "vegetable like" not blind or deaf etc (that's not to say that being blind or deaf is an easy thing to live with, but i'm sure many people born deaf/blind have gone one to lead very happy, fulfilled lives).

The family i know have a huge burden in the form of a son they love dearly, but that has essentially ruined their lives. They are not bitter towards their son in any way. they hate to see him in pain, with no awareness of what's going on. I don't know what kind of life that is. The strain it has caused the family is tremendous, both financially and mentally, for the 2 parents and the two other children, who are healthy. 24 hour care is hard work, even with the help of nurses. This would maybe be easier to take if the child was just paralysed, but was still able to recognise their parents and siblings, and respond in any way to the love that is shown to them. I know many people would still consider it to be human life, but their son far more closely resembles a living mass of dysfunctional tissue. I find it hard to accept that for the sake of this "empty life" that 4 other lives should be ruined.

How many people have been heard to say when they have seen someone after an accident being kept alive by machines or living the life of a vegetable - "If i'm ever like that let me go peacefully" I know i certainly wouldn't want to live out my days like that, regardless if it's my one shot at life or not.

If a farm animal was born severely disabled it would be put down as an act of kindness and to put it out of it's suffering, and although i'm not putting the same value on human and animal life the principle is the same.

Well put sir. I don't know how to answer that. However the post was so well made I feel I must try.

I think it's one of those situations where those concerned would have to look at things when the situation arose. They would have to discuss the situation with everyone concerned and come to a decision on what was best for everyone.

I think this however is a similar situation to euthanasia and is probably best looked at from that perspective. I know it seems strange to discuss that about an unborn person, but I hope you take my point.

It would really be a case of thinking that the persons quality of life would be so little, that it wouldn't be any life at all. Which is similar to an old person who is perhaps seriously and terminally ill, deciding to end their suffering. In this instance the family would be deciding to end that suffering before it had begun. It would be an act of compassion towards the child.

I can see that this would be a group of people making a value judgement on whether another person's life was worth living. However if we accept that people of good conscience turn of life support machines on a daily basis, then I think that we can accept that this would also be an act of compassion.

I'm sorry, this seems like a pathetic response, but it's the best I can do.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by evilbagpuss+3 July 2003 - 21:24--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (evilbagpuss &#064; 3 July 2003 - 21:24)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Jpaul
Those cells you speak of are a human life in the making. All they have to do is develop and grow.

But can you really call killing a cluster of a few cells ********** though? I would argue that is pretty stupid too. As I stated I think it only becomes ********** when the fetus achieves consciousness.

Most abortion laws place a strict limit on the time frame for this very point.

What alternative would you suggest? [/b][/quote]
I&#39;m sorry, I thought I made my position clear in my first post in this thread.

From conception it is a human life. You may feel that is a stupid position, however it is what I believe.

[evilbagpuss]

Originally posted by Jpaul
From conception it is a human life. You may feel that is a stupid position, however it is what I believe. l

Perhaps stupid was a hastily used and innappropriate adjective. It seems illogical to me but then again everyone is entitled to their beliefs. About the alternative though...

I would like to see what you would suggest if you disagree with the current situation regarding abortion.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by evilbagpuss+3 July 2003 - 21:55--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (evilbagpuss &#064; 3 July 2003 - 21:55)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Jpaul
From conception it is a human life. You may feel that is a stupid position, however it is what I believe. l

Perhaps stupid was a hastily used and inappropriate adjective. It seems illogical to me but then again everyone is entitled to their beliefs. About the alternative though...

I would like to see what you would suggest if you disagree with the current situation regarding abortion.[/b][/quote]

Again my apologies, I believe that I have made my position entirely clear. In my first post particularly but also in a couple of subsequent ones.

They are not particularly long and this is a relatively short thread. 2 or 3 minutes would cover reading them again (assuming you have already done so).

[evilbagpuss]

Originally posted by Jpaul
Again my apologies, I believe that I have made my position entirely clear. In my first post particularly but also in a couple of subsequent ones.

They are not particularly long and this is a relatively short thread. 2 or 3 minutes would cover reading them again (assuming you have already done so).

hmm, perhaps I am having a particularly unobservant day today but.... I have seen you make your position clear on the status quo. You havent offered a clear alternative. Feel free to quote yourself if I am being unobservant.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by evilbagpuss+3 July 2003 - 22:12--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (evilbagpuss &#064; 3 July 2003 - 22:12)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Jpaul
Again my apologies, I believe that I have made my position entirely clear. In my first post particularly but also in a couple of subsequent ones.

They are not particularly long and this is a relatively short thread. 2 or 3 minutes would cover reading them again (assuming you have already done so).

hmm, perhaps I am having a particularly unobservant day today but.... I have seen you make your position clear on the status quo. You havent offered a clear alternative. Feel free to quote yourself if I am being unobservant.[/b][/quote]
You are being obtuse and we are ruining a perfectly good discussion. There has been some excellent posting here and if it is to be destroyed than I would rather not be a part of it.

If you cannot understand that to me there is no alternative and that there are only very limited circumstances (for example the mothers life being at risk) where this is acceptable then I cannot make it any clearer for you.

I have tried to answer an excellent post made by the Faceman as best I could, however I will not spoil this any further by answering nebulous questions like "what would you do instead" any more.

Abortion is wrong, however sometimes other things are worse and we have to chose between them. Freely available abortion, as a matter of convenience or vanity is wrong. In all instances we must weigh up the wrongs on each side and decide what is for the best.

I tried to explain that we have to balance the harms in my reply to The Faceman&#39;s scenario. Obviously I did not do a very good job.

[clocker]

I think JPaul&#39;s position is completely clear.
He believes that abortion is tantamount to ********** and is almost never an acceptable alternative.
Fine.
Because his thoughts on this matter are based on belief any and all conclusions that he draws are unchallengable and don&#39;t require outside authentication.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.


belief

&#092;Be*lief"&#092;, n. [OE. bileafe, bileve; cf. AS. gele[&#39;a]fa. See Believe.] 1. Assent to a proposition or affirmation, or the acceptance of a fact, opinion, or assertion as real or true, without immediate personal knowledge; reliance upon word or testimony; partial or full assurance without positive knowledge or absolute certainty; persuasion; conviction; confidence; as, belief of a witness; the belief of our senses.

I believe in a woman&#39;s right to autonomy regarding her own body.

I expect that you&#39;ll grant me the same consideration that I just granted you, JPaul.

[Rat Faced]

Like j2k4, I have been the potential father and was not consulted prior to an abortion.

Although this happened some 12-13 years ago, I still feel upset at times over it..I was denied the chance to know a son/daughter.


However unlike you j2k4 I still believe that it is and should be, the ladies choice as to wether to have an abortion.

I also believe that they should not be allowed to make this decision without councelling from a professional, prior to the operation.

I said, I still feel sad..I have also seen a dear friend try and kill herself while drunk and moping about an abortion she&#39;d had 4 years previously. I do not think that they should be allowed to make a decision of this magnitude by themselves, under any circumstances.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by clocker@3 July 2003 - 22:26
I think JPaul&#39;s position is completely clear.
He believes that abortion is tantamount to ********** and is almost never an acceptably alternative.
Fine.
Because his thoughts on this matter are based on belief any and all conclusions that he draws are unchallengable and don&#39;t require outside authentication.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.


belief

&#092;Be*lief"&#092;, n. [OE. bileafe, bileve; cf. AS. gele[&#39;a]fa. See Believe.] 1. Assent to a proposition or affirmation, or the acceptance of a fact, opinion, or assertion as real or true, without immediate personal knowledge; reliance upon word or testimony; partial or full assurance without positive knowledge or absolute certainty; persuasion; conviction; confidence; as, belief of a witness; the belief of our senses.

I believe in a woman&#39;s right to autonomy regarding her own body.

I expect that you&#39;ll grant me the same consideration that I just granted you, JPaul.

Absolutely and without reservation.

I totally disagree with your position, whilst supporting your right to hold it.

Given that I believe that it is a human being from conception I can take no other position. I must support their right to life as much as I support yours.

As I think I have made clear, I also accept that there will be circumstances when we have to balance things and make a decision based on that. Sometimes we have to chose the "lesser of two evils".

Ironically it&#39;s one of the areas I don&#39;t see as black and white. Probably because I take it so seriously.

[the_faceman]

Originally posted by JPaul@3 July 2003 - 21:31
Well put sir. I don&#39;t know how to answer that. However the post was so well made I feel I must try.

I think it&#39;s one of those situations where those concerned would have to look at things when the situation arose. They would have to discuss the situation with everyone concerned and come to a decision on what was best for everyone.

I think this however is a similar situation to euthanasia and is probably best looked at from that perspective. I know it seems strange to discuss that about an unborn person, but I hope you take my point.

It would really be a case of thinking that the persons quality of life would be so little, that it wouldn&#39;t be any life at all. Which is similar to an old person who is perhaps seriously and terminally ill, deciding to end their suffering. In this instance the family would be deciding to end that suffering before it had begun. It would be an act of compassion towards the child.

I can see that this would be a group of people making a value judgement on whether another person&#39;s life was worth living. However if we accept that people of good conscience turn of life support machines on a daily basis, then I think that we can accept that this would also be an act of compassion.

I&#39;m sorry, this seems like a pathetic response, but it&#39;s the best I can do.

It seems far from a pathetic response. The euthanasia comparison is a valid one. (I also agree with the theory of euthanasia, and as with my views on abortion, only in what i consider circumstances that are appropriate).

We all know that each case for abortion can&#39;t be compared to some standardised chart of "acceptabilty" as every single one would have different circumstances, so you&#39;re right that value judgements have to be made. I&#39;m sure there are women in the world that would abort a baby to avoid stretch marks, for vanities sake as you said earlier, and i find that horrifying, although i&#39;d hope they were in the extreme minority.

As i said earlier, if somehow my girlfriend/fiancee/wife (i don&#39;t have all 3, just considering the possibilities) got pregnant and it wasn&#39;t planned, i wouldn&#39;t want my partner to have an abortion, but i&#39;d still leave the final decision to her, letting her know she had my support either way. The only reason i&#39;d have the baby is because i know i would love it with all my heart, no matter the complications it brought to my life. If however, i felt like i would resent the child, and be bitter towards it for changing the path of my life, i wouldn&#39;t look forward to the birth as much, because i wouldn&#39;t want any child brought into the world unloved. That said, i&#39;d still leave the final decision to my partner and if she decided to go ahead with it, i&#39;d try and learn to love the baby, safe in the knowledge that at least it&#39;s mother will give it the love it deserves. I don&#39;t see myself being like that, i had a pregnancy scare with an ex-girlfriend a few years back and i was fully prepared to bring up a child, although it scared the sh*t out of me. I&#39;d consider being loved by your parents a contributing factor to a child&#39;s quality of life. I can&#39;t imagine how horrible it must be being brought up in a bitter household because i was lucky enough to have great parents.

I&#39;m sure that a lot of people, myself for one, have a somewhat general life plan. They may plan to get married or not, have children or not, etc.

My personal plan is to be happily married at some point, financially secure and able to provide for the children i plan to have while i&#39;m young enough to enjoy bringing them up. My point is generally that in some cases, if a pregnancy was totally accidental, say for example contraception had failed as it does in probably 1% of cases, that maybe it&#39;d be better for both the parents and a child born too early in their lives to provide the love and care that it deserves to be terminated very early on (before consciousness), and later on a child be born intentionally, in an environment that will much more likely provide joy for the parents and the child, rather than hardship and misery. Consider that the child born at the later date would not be intentionally conceived because of the earlier birth, that led to comparitively unhappier lives. What&#39;s the best option - two unhappy parents and an unhappy child, or the opposite? Quality of life comes into play again, i don&#39;t feel that two adults should be punished (for want of a better word, a child isn&#39;t a punishment, but can be a huge burden), for a mistake that was never malicious and more likely really unlucky.

I&#39;m sorry that was a bit of a ramble, but it&#39;s hard to come up with a coherent argument when you feel so strongly about your own opinion, but at the same time you can see why other people hold their own opinions.