Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Continuing with the other discussion on General Discussion this evening; what do you think about the rights of the foetus?

    Today's society takes it for granted that because the baby is inside the womb it's the mothers right, but I say, it her responsibility. Just because she's caring for it doesn't mean that she has the right to kill it. The pilot doesn't have the right to kill his passengers even though just as the mother, they are completely dependant on him. In a similar way a mother doesn't have the right to murder her newborn son just because he's completely dependant on her or because he's not welcomed; and rightfully so that's illegal. So why do we let this happen for unborn lives? Just like the mother of the newly born baby the pregnant mother too has the responsibility of her offspring but not the right over him.

    EDIT: Some posters need a bit of incite on abortion v.s. contraception. They are not the same thing! Contraception is reducing the possibility of conceiving a life while abortion is killing one. And by life here I intend proper human life not life as in a living cell. Possibility of life isn't life and it isn't the same thing. It's almost like temptation and sin (I know i should compare the miracle of life to sin but I can't think of anything else at the moment ); temptation is thing wrong while sin is doing wrong. They both are wrong because your contemplating doing a wrong thing or actually doing a wrong thing but no one will be prosecuted for the desire to strangle his room-mate who's getting laid and is purposely make it clear throughout the whole hall, while he's trying to study for his annuals, tomorrow.

    EDIT: Who would have that that in 2010 we would be debating the right of the mother to kill her children. Doesn't that sound even minimally ####ed up?? Not to mention that this isn't at all necessary. It's not like the mother will die. She, did have sex, knowing that there is a pregnancy risk and most probably she did it in a risky way just for the sake of pleasure. So now that she meets up the consequences, she'll just kill it? Wasn't it her fault? Shouldn't she carry on the consequences for the 9 months to follow? That's not fair for the baby. He was brought to the world as an unwanted by product and then he's killed again before having the chance to experience it!

    And for those saying that s/he'll have a though life. That a flawed argument. He/She'll have a though childhood. What about the rest of his life? His/Her twenties, thirties, forties....etc Do you think that it's for his/her benefit to kill him/her to prevent him/her a though childhood and prevent him/her from experiencing the rest of his/her life? Besides it's not given that s/he'll have a though childhood and life is though for everyone, but that doesn't prevent us from enjoying it (like his mother was while risking pregnancy).

    EDIT: When ever I ask this question many avoid it, why? Question: "Given we don't know when a bunch of living cells become a human life, should we stay on the safe side of things, instead of risking to kill millions (billions with time) of human lives?". This given we will never be able to determine the actual point at which such change happens but I hope we one day will be able. Since then I think it's reasonable to stay on the safe side.

    EDIT: I'm noticing in this thread a lot of what can be called one of the biggest sins when living in a society. A society is a when a group of people decide to live close together, help each other and grow strong. Therefore greed and selfishness are natural enemies to a society of people. In fact I surprised today that we are still a strong society given most people are driven by greed. Anyway, the point is that an individual in a society has right and responsibilities. As of lately though some liberal extremists has redefined the meaning of "the rights of an individual" to mean "for his convenience" and sadly enough they buried responsibility in middle earth. Rights are conveniences. They are the fundamental laws for every individual in a society to be treated equally and humanly. Then there's responsibility. Everyone seems to have forgotten about this word. I never heard of a campaign for certain people to take certain responsibilities. A couple have the right to have sex and they have the responsibility of any pregnancy. They have the right to risk it but they also have the responsibility to take care of any accidents.

    In today's society responsibility is seen as a oppression of rights when in fact it's a fundamental element of every society.

    I also feel I must express my sadness whenever debating such an argument. Abortions in general distort the miracle of life in such a way that it seems more like a castigation.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    :yep:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    How about if I don't kill it, I just remove it from my uterus?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nolongerhearthemusic)
    How about if I don't kill it, I just remove it from my uterus?
    In fact I'm rightfully hoping science will be able to simulate an artificial womb for any unwanted pregnancies to be transferred to. If the life survives and develops well than that would be a much better solution for abortion and perhaps made law.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    You have sperm or eggs. Hurry up and fertalise them then!

    I belive there is way too much hype over a few cells. The human brain dosnt even begin to develope untill the end of the first month!

    But im not expecting a scientific debate with a person who, in thier sig, completly misconcepts athiesm.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theBOON)
    In fact I'm rightfully hoping science will be able to simulate an artificial womb for any unwanted pregnancies to be transferred to. If the life survives and develops well than that would be a much better solution for abortion and perhaps made law.
    ********* - yeah and reckon the NHS will pay for that when a couple of pills is so much easier and cheaper
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    This is why you shouldn't look into philosophy.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I completely agree with you.

    However, have you heard of this argument put forward by a pro-abortion philosopher?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violini...ght_experiment)

    It assumes that the foetus is a human life but defends even given that this is the case a mother still has the right to abort. I don't think I agree but it's an interesting argument nonetheless.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by silverbolt)
    ********* - yeah and reckon the NHS will pay for that when a couple of pills is so much easier and cheaper
    We are talking abortion not politics and tbf it should be the mother's choice to either upbring it or pay for his/her upbringing.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jammiebreadman)
    I completely agree with you.

    However, have you heard of this argument put forward by a pro-abortion philosopher?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violini...ght_experiment)

    It assumes that the foetus is a human life but defends even given that this is the case a mother still has the right to abort. I don't think I agree but it's an interesting argument nonetheless.
    Tbh I think his thought experiment fails. Life is something sacred and should be protected at all costs.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I have the right to life just as my tortoise has the right to cower in his shell when poked by a staw, I don't blame him.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theBOON)
    In fact I'm rightfully hoping science will be able to simulate an artificial womb for any unwanted pregnancies to be transferred to. If the life survives and develops well than that would be a much better solution for abortion and perhaps made law.
    That would be fine. I'd abort if I got pregnant and had to carry it and give birth to it *shudder* But if it was in an artificial womb outside my body and the pregnancy would be equal (as in not in my body) and I coudl adopt it then, well yeah there would be no need for abortion. I would still support abortion though.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GottaLovePhysics! :))
    You have sperm or eggs. Hurry up and fertalise them then!

    I belive there is way too much hype over a few cells. The human brain dosnt even begin to develope untill the end of the first month!

    But im not expecting a scientific debate with a person who, in thier sig, completly misconcepts athiesm.
    It's still life; it's evolving little by little and most importantly it's a human life. That's all I need to consider a fertilised egg a human life.

    The sig :fyi: is not there to instil hatred or as an attack towards atheists. It's there as a thought provocation. Something that will provoke atheist to reflect on their believes. The better they strengthen their belief, whatever it might be, the better. I know people may take is as an offence but I'd happily risk my rep (and you can see the difference :lol:) so that an atheist reflects even for a few seconds on his believes.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Casshern1456)
    I have the right to life just as my tortoise has the right to cower in his shell when poked by a staw, I don't blame him.
    Apparently though in today's society you will have to wait 9 months upon being conceived to be acknowledged that right.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theBOON)
    Apparently though in today's society you will have to wait 9 months upon being conceived to be acknowledged that right.
    I'm actually surprised you didn't say "YOU MONSTER" towards the end.:p:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theBOON)
    Apparently though in today's society you will have to wait 9 months upon being conceived to be acknowledged that right.
    It was much better in the past when we had no rights for our whole lives and if you wanted to kill your baby no one cared, and it was okay to kill others as long as god said so.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theBOON)
    It's still life; it's evolving little by little and most importantly it's a human life. That's all I need to consider a fertilised egg a human life.

    The sig :fyi: is not there to instil hatred or as an attack towards atheists. It's there as a thought provocation. Something that will provoke atheist to reflect on their believes. The better they strengthen their belief, whatever it might be, the better. I know people may take is as an offence but I'd happily risk my rep (and you can see the difference :lol:) so that an atheist reflects even for a few seconds on his believes.
    I didnt take offence, I was taken aback by the misconception. But were not here for for a debate about god so ill go straight back to the question.

    Would you not agree that it is harming for a child to be brought into a family that wanted to abort it? I would feel this is a thousend times cruler than aborting x numer of cells.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    What rights?

    As far as i see rights are just words written on paper, like laws easy to break and not so easy to be caught.

    You have the right to live as does any living thing(including feotus if you count it as being alive whilst being symbiotic) if you can protect yourself and those you wish to keep alive, if someone comes at you with a knife and you can't defend yourself it's your own fault if you die.

    Feotus can only rely on the compassion of the mother and surrounding people for life if she wishes to take it ,questionable, life then she can.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theBOON)
    In fact I'm rightfully hoping science will be able to simulate an artificial womb for any unwanted pregnancies to be transferred to. If the life survives and develops well than that would be a much better solution for abortion and perhaps made law.
    If there was a definate home for each and every baby that was in these artificial wombs then fair enough. Having 100,000 unwanted children a year doesn't help anyone though.
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by theBOON)
    Continuing with the other discussion on General Discussion this evening; what do you think about the rights of the foetus?
    If you can tell me absolutely, categorically without a doubt, when 'life' begins then you may be able to argue a case for an anti-abortion stance.

    As none of us are able to do this, in my opinion, the pro-life camp have no case.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.