Abortion
POSTED BY: cartoon
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 03:33
VIEWED: 22628
PAGE 7 of 28
Brain activity is cortical activity for purposes of (legally and morally) discerning the brain dead - and, as I propose, the brain alive.
Mrs Schiavo did not have cortical brain activity - in her case b/c she did not have cortical brain tissue. Basic brain-stem functions, like breathing, are not a sufficient indicator of a living 'person' in the absense of cortical activity. Legally, one is allowed to 'pull the plug' in that case.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
dbl
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
These kind of discussions always happen when the "rights" of two parties are in direct conflict. I don't see that we will ever resolve them here.
Just an observation though, we have the legal concept of justifiable homocide, that is, the right of one adult to terminate the life of another under certain circumstances. With controls we give that power to members of law enforcement. If as has been suggested the taking of a life is murder and murder is immoral isn't justifiable homocide or the taking of human life by the agents of a state also morally wrong? What we find when we look into anything deeply enough is that there are no absolute truths and no black and white when it comes to human interaction. It is and remains subject to context. That seems to be the missing component in an outright ban. First it values the child's potential life over the actual life of the mother. Second in the case of rape it pursecutes the victim and potentially aids the aggressor. I'm not sure how enacting such a law can be considered a good moral viewpoint.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Cartoon, is this string of ad hominems meant to be your reply on the issue of fetal pain? When do you think you might get around to discussing... er... pain... as part of the topic?
As related to real-world experience, I was probably involved in political discussion and debate before many of the posters in this thread were even born. I've also witnessed and experienced things firsthand which many of you can only have read about long after the fact.
..... Oops. I didn't have my source pre-approved by Rue. I forgot. Everything with which Rue disagrees is "bogus" -- including the Nobel-Prize winner I quoted in another thread, etc. etc. etc. etc. Thanks for clarifying, Rue. The only authority worth quoting is you. I keep forgeting that you know everything, and all of the others (those who disaggree with you) are braindead. By your definition, then, they aren't "life" either.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
I keep forgeting that you know everything, and all of the others (those who disaggree with you) are braindead. By your definition, then, they aren't "life" either.
Nah. They're just in need of one.
Graphics available at www.desktophippie.com
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Is it an ad Hominem fallacy if you can make a case as to why you honestly think that's the case?
Originally posted by Causal:
That said, calling someone insensitive, uncompassionate and ingnorant is still an ad hominem fallacy, and doesn't establish your case.
Quote:Except it is. No one is saying they support murder, there will never be a consensus on whether a foetus or embryo is a fully-fledged human being. Shall I start?
Not sure I can agree with you here. Casting it in this light certainly makes it easier to call someon uncompassionate, but this isn't the whole story.
Foetuses are potentially people but not people, they don't have souls, there is no such thing as a soul, whatever.
Your line.
Point is no side is going to up with an argument that is good enough for the other, but there has to be a decision made on the real issue, which is the legality of abortion.
Quote:How many people did you kill during military service?
If--notice the "if" there for argument's sake--if a fetus is a human being, and if all killing of human beings is murder and if all murder is morally wrong, then abortion is morally wrong.
Don't get me wrong, I don't want to daemonise you for military service, far from it, but are you a murderer? Do you consider yourself a murderer? Should you be considered a murderer? I wouldn't consider a soldier doing his or her duty a murderer, but is killing morally right during military service? Is military service a necessary evil because the alternative is worse?
Quote:Perhaps we should ask Socrates, perhaps he could come up with an answer we can both agree on?
This is the crux of the argument as far as I'm concerned. For me it's isn't as simplistic as "legal or illegal." I think we need to clear up the thorny issue of the ontological status of the fetus before we can really make any progress on this issue.
Quote:Since when were these the only circumstances for abortion? And still I say in my experience even those that are anti-legalised abortion tend to see it as a necessary evil when the issue hits closer to home.
Well, given that my position on the issue is that the aborting of the fetus is a moral wrong, I fail to see how opposing the commission of a moral wrong is an indicator of a lack of compassion and life experience. Pregnant and don't want to be a mother? What a difficult spot to be in. But I think that there are ways to avoid having to be a mother other than aborting the baby.
Quote:I note that most (not all, most) those that support criminalising abortion tend to be against social programs that help these very people, and the education that may help to reduce the requirement for it.
It's also the case that unwanted pregnancies are higher amongst poorer demographics. So maybe doing something about the vast economic disparities would go some length to solving these problems.
Quote:Whose assuming it? I'm questioning if whether any moral issue is that black and white, I'm also questioning if sometimes we have to allow something bad because in this imperfect world stopping it would be worse.
I guess my basic point is that you're assuming that it's been established that abortion is a morally neutral issue, and I'm not ready to concede that point yet.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"if all murder is morally wrong, then abortion is morally wrong" and should therefore be illegal.
This is the central fallacy. Immoral and illegal are not one and the same. The US legal code was based on humanist thinking, not theocracy.
Well, there isn't a fallacy there, logically speaking. What there might be is an untrue premise, in which case you'd have an unsound argument, but not a (formally) invalid one. But I digress.
Let's try a different syllogism, one that doesn't cast the issue in moral terms.
If all fetuses are human, and if it is illegal to kill a human, then it is illegal to kill a fetus. Again, the issue revolves around the ontological status of the fetus.
And by the by, morality is not coextensive with religiosity.
In The Moral Foundations of Atheism and Christianity, Mark Vuletic suggested that atheist are able to be more moral than theists. In Being Good: A Short Introduction to Ethics, in his first chapter, Simon Blackburn tackles (and offers a refutation) of the idea that morality is synonymous with religion. Bertrand Russell, perhaps the most prominent philosopher of the 20th century (and definitely a very determined atheist) was deeply concerned with morality, especially concerning war and sexuality; you can read about his ethical views in Russell on Ethics, released by Routledge.
One need not be a religous person to be interested in being morally good. A great many atheist thinkers would insist that just the opposite is the case. My point, Rue, is that appealling to what is morally right is not the same thing as wanting to install a theocracy; suggesting that it is is merely constructing a straw man. I'm not advocating theocracy (which is a disastrous form of government). I'm saying that I oppose abortion because I consider it to be murder, a moral wrong.
Quote:
The moral of the story...
Pun intended?
the morality of abortion should be left between the woman and her religion.
Are you suggesting that we ought to ignore the moral implications of abortion? Or that abortion only has moral implications if a woman and her religion thinks it does? If the former, I'm afraid that I can't accept that, because any more than I could accept the proposition "The morality of infanticide should be left between parents and their religion." If the latter, there are some very grace logical problems with ethical subjectivism, not the least of which is that if it obtains, it will turn out that there is not such thing as ethics at all!
________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.
Vote Firefly! http://www.richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:LOL. So funny, I wish I typed it myself.
Originally posted by DesktopHippie:
Nah. They're just in need of one.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:Quote:Is it an ad Hominem fallacy if you can make a case as to why you honestly think that's the case?
Originally posted by Causal:
That said, calling someone insensitive, uncompassionate and ingnorant is still an ad hominem fallacy, and doesn't establish your case.Quote:Except it is. No one is saying they support murder, there will never be a consensus on whether a foetus or embryo is a fully-fledged human being. Shall I start?
Not sure I can agree with you here. Casting it in this light certainly makes it easier to call someon uncompassionate, but this isn't the whole story.
Foetuses are potentially people but not people, they don't have souls, there is no such thing as a soul, whatever.
Your line.
Point is no side is going to up with an argument that is good enough for the other, but there has to be a decision made on the real issue, which is the legality of abortion.Quote:How many people did you kill during military service?
If--notice the "if" there for argument's sake--if a fetus is a human being, and if all killing of human beings is murder and if all murder is morally wrong, then abortion is morally wrong.
Don't get me wrong, I don't want to daemonise you for military service, far from it, but are you a murderer? Do you consider yourself a murderer? Should you be considered a murderer? I wouldn't consider a soldier doing his or her duty a murderer, but is killing morally right during military service? Is military service a necessary evil because the alternative is worse?Quote:Perhaps we should ask Socrates, perhaps he could come up with an answer we can both agree on?
This is the crux of the argument as far as I'm concerned. For me it's isn't as simplistic as "legal or illegal." I think we need to clear up the thorny issue of the ontological status of the fetus before we can really make any progress on this issue.Quote:Since when were these the only circumstances for abortion? And still I say in my experience even those that are anti-legalised abortion tend to see it as a necessary evil when the issue hits closer to home.
Well, given that my position on the issue is that the aborting of the fetus is a moral wrong, I fail to see how opposing the commission of a moral wrong is an indicator of a lack of compassion and life experience. Pregnant and don't want to be a mother? What a difficult spot to be in. But I think that there are ways to avoid having to be a mother other than aborting the baby.Quote:I note that most (not all, most) those that support criminalising abortion tend to be against social programs that help these very people, and the education that may help to reduce the requirement for it.
It's also the case that unwanted pregnancies are higher amongst poorer demographics. So maybe doing something about the vast economic disparities would go some length to solving these problems.Quote:Whose assuming it? I'm questioning if whether any moral issue is that black and white, I'm also questioning if sometimes we have to allow something bad because in this imperfect world stopping it would be worse.
I guess my basic point is that you're assuming that it's been established that abortion is a morally neutral issue, and I'm not ready to concede that point yet.
Well, here's where I bow out. As with most of our conversations, I've enjoyed this one. You've made good arguments; I hope I have as well. But we're not going to convince each other. Thanks for remaining calm through it. Wish I could same the same for everyone in this thread. I just hope you don't seriously walk away with the evaluation that I'm ignorant and insensitive. I'm don't doubt that you've encountered plenty of that, but I hope that I've shown you at least one example of someone who is not the stereotype you're accustomed to.
Cheers!
________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Lan
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You're right, which is why I made certain comments earlier as to why this thread exists. No I don't think you're ignorant or insensitive, but I do think most those who are against legalised abortion are, at least in this circumstance. To be perfectly honest I feel that abortion is an issue where the vast majority of people who are against it see it as something that 'they' do, and don't have a personal experience of it.
Originally posted by Causal:
Well, here's where I bow out. As with most of our conversations, I've enjoyed this one. You've made good arguments; I hope I have as well. But we're not going to convince each other. Thanks for remaining calm through it. Wish I could same the same for everyone in this thread. I just hope you don't seriously walk away with the evaluation that I'm ignorant and insensitive. I'm don't doubt that you've encountered plenty of that, but I hope that I've shown you at least one example of someone who is not the stereotype you're accustomed to.
Cheers!
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME