Pro-life society...

I didn't think sapience had anything to do with it. Babies aren't sapient, so are you saying that it is okay to kill them?
Also, the hypothesis still applies to you - you just do't consider foetuses humans, therefore are 'pro-choice'. That is a textbook application of this hypothesis and I understand your viewpoint, whilst obviously disagreeing with it.

To clarify; when something is sapient, I believe it is unethical to kill it. A late term foetus may be semi-sapient, hence why I do believe in a time limit after which abortion should not be an option. I consider a foetus to be a proto-human, similar to gametes. A potential but as yet not fully realised. A baby may not have fully developed cognitive faculties, however they're by definition sapient as they can and will acquire knowledge and experience.

There was no real hypothesis if I'm honest; it was more a definition of Pro-life/Pro-choice divide - if I believed that a foetus were, in your words, a human being as such, then I would be, almost by definition, Pro-life.

Whoa, at last some replies!



Okay then. I simply believe that foetuses are alive and are 'humans'. Therefore, it naturally follows that it is wrong to abort foetuses, even if the mother was raped or had a malfuntioning condom or whatever. I do however believe that if the foetus is unlikely to survive and the mother's life would be put in danger by going ahead with the birth (the doctor would have to scrutinise the probabilities very carefully to decide the best course of action) then abortion woud be acceptable (perhaps compulsory). I am against making abortion illegal as that would not stop it from happening (same with drugs, prostitution etc.), but believe in increasing public awareness about just how 'alive' foetuses are and more sex education at a much younger age than it is provided currently.
Abortion is a big issue for me because I just think it is a social atrocity on the same scale as the holocaust and the bombings of Hiroshima/Nagasaki and all wars.
I repect the opinions of people wo are 'pro-choice' and recognise that this is an issue where people rarely change their views and have strong viewpoints.
It also angers me that a 'pro-life' stance is always associated with being a right-wing kook who hates women.
Also:

First, I don't think anyone would argue that a foetus is not human, it is by the definition of its genes, human. The question is when a life becomes a "person" which is a very complex argument.

I come from a pro choice perspective. My first point being that a woman/mothers current existing life is more important and valuable than a potential life that is inside her.
Many pro life say that a foetus is a person upon conception... but this in itself is unclear. When does conception occur? When the sperm fertilises the egg? When that begins to divide? When that attatches itself to the uterine wall? Bearing that in mind, where does the morning after pill come in this debate? Is it a form of abortion since it may or may not be terminating an unknown life concieved hours before.

I think judging that abortion is wrong in cases of rape is questionable by anyone who has not experienced rape. Perhaps more so by men. People who have never been raped would have no idea what that would be like, what the consequences are emotionally and mentally of the assault itself, let alone being constantly reminded of it for the next nine months. After an experience like that I think it is impossible to make a clearly judged decision based on ethics. The trauma would make most women want to end such a pregnancy and no alternative pressure should be put on them at that time.

I think saying that abortion is equal to the holocaust and hiroshima/nagosaki is a gross exaggeration. You simply cannot equate the long term irrepairable suffering and deaths of thousands of established lives with the lives of foetuses with only potential lives and without the consciousness or development to suffer pain. If you really did think that abortion was that bad, you would want it illegal.

The one thing I do agree with you on... even if a little contradictory on your side, is that abortion cannot be illegalised because it would still happen, and would you rather legal, safe abortions or illegal, unhealthy, unsafe abortions which put the womans life at risk

I disagree with most of what you have said. The trauma experienced by rape victims is outweighed by the fact that abortion is actually murder, so I don't aknowledge arguments along the lines of 'you have never been raped...' etc.

Er, no, it isn't murder, it is the termination of a potential life. Essentially a bundle of cells. Murder is the deliberate and malicious killing of a fully formed person.

When does conception occur?

So the killing of an infant isn't murder. They aren't 'fully formed'.

That every woman who is pregnant has an absolute duty to carry the baby to term; aborting is unjustifiable killing.

An infant has a fully developed central nervous system and can feel pain, among other complex sensations, they are fully developed enough to survive without having to rely soley on another persons body (note, the word body, not another person)

As for what qualities make a person, see above point about my thoughts on fully developed. based on this I am against abortion past the stage that the baby could survive without relying completely on another body.

Just because an egg has been fertilised, it doesn't mean that a pregnancy will go on or that this "life" will continue to develop. And I ask again, based on this, your thoughts on the morning after pill. Is it the same as abortion?

What if she was raped?

It would hardly be the foetus' fault then would it?

Personally I'm not sure on abortion.

Pro-life is a stupid name. Just because you're for abortion doesn't mean you're anti-life.

I'm not saying it is the foetus' fault. It shouldn't become the woman's duty if she was raped.

Er, no, it isn't murder, it is the termination of a potential life. Essentially a bundle of cells. Murder is the deliberate and malicious killing of a fully formed person.

Is the rape point the only one you'd like to pick up on? I'd be interested to hear your views on the morning after pill and the value and health (mental and physical) of a fully grown, self conscious woman compared to a bundle of cells, meaning that the trauma experienced in rape outweighs ending the life of a bundle of cells that has no developed nervous system, no self consciousness and therefore no concept of life.

Also, why is abortion worse than say, killing an animal?
What are your thoughts on IVF where several eggs are fertilised but only a couple implanted
When does conception occur?

I think that you, along with most pro lifers, grossly oversimplify the issue.

What if she was raped?

EDIT: Why the neg rep, it happens in reality..

How would that change anything?
If abortion is murder, then it is still wrong even though it would bring comfort and relief to the mother.

Hmmm I suppose, it's up to the mother at the end of the day.

I can't wait to see what the ratio of males to females is in that Soc.

Edit: Even better than I expected. Keep it up, guys.

Er, no, it isn't murder, it is the termination of a potential life. Essentially a bundle of cells. Murder is the deliberate and malicious killing of a fully formed person.

Is the rape point the only one you'd like to pick up on? I'd be interested to hear your views on the morning after pill and the value and health (mental and physical) of a fully grown, self conscious woman compared to a bundle of cells, meaning that the trauma experienced in rape outweighs ending the life of a bundle of cells that has no developed nervous system, no self consciousness and therefore no concept of life.

Also, why is abortion worse than say, killing an animal?
What are your thoughts on IVF where several eggs are fertilised but only a couple implanted
When does conception occur?

I think that you, along with most pro lifers, grossly oversimplify the issue.

Whoa, at last some replies!



Okay then. I simply believe that foetuses are alive and are 'humans'. Therefore, it naturally follows that it is wrong to abort foetuses, even if the mother was raped or had a malfuntioning condom or whatever. I do however believe that if the foetus is unlikely to survive and the mother's life would be put in danger by going ahead with the birth (the doctor would have to scrutinise the probabilities very carefully to decide the best course of action) then abortion woud be acceptable (perhaps compulsory). I am against making abortion illegal as that would not stop it from happening (same with drugs, prostitution etc.), but believe in increasing public awareness about just how 'alive' foetuses are and more sex education at a much younger age than it is provided currently.
Abortion is a big issue for me because I just think it is a social atrocity on the same scale as the holocaust and the bombings of Hiroshima/Nagasaki and all wars.
I repect the opinions of people wo are 'pro-choice' and recognise that this is an issue where people rarely change their views and have strong viewpoints.
It also angers me that a 'pro-life' stance is always associated with being a right-wing kook who hates women.
Also:


It is just a bloody name, get over it.



That is your opinion, so whatever. I don't believe that it is like chopping off a leg or whatever and that is the fundamental (and I would argue only) difference between our viewpoints. If you believed a foetus was a human being, then you would be pro-life would you not? (I am speaking hypothetically, so don't respond by saying '...but I don't')