Your opinions of Abortion page 2

Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

I have a question for the anti-abortion crowd. You don’t like abortions, right? So don’t get one. Why do you feel the need to tell others that they can’t?

Not that I’m against abortions, but this argument doesn’t really work. I don’t like murder, but I am going to tell others that they can’t murder. I don’t particularly like abortions (it’s definitely not a happy act), but I would approve of it in the right conditions. In this case, the life of the mother is placed above the life of the unborn child, which is perfectly reasonable.

And what gives you the right to tell others not to murder?

And what gives you the right to tell others not to murder?

The law? Come on, Iggy, you know better than that.

Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

And what gives you the right to tell others not to murder?

The law? Come on, Iggy, you know better than that.

I should, but I don’t recognise the so called “law” imposed on my country. I’m really starting to wonder if the same applies to other laws. What gives “the law” the right?

I should, but I don’t recognise the so called “law” imposed on my country. I’m really starting to wonder if the same applies to other laws. What gives “the law” the right?

You misunderstand. The laws are giving out these rights. No laws, no rights.

EDIT: What do you mean with that you don’t recognise the law?

Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

I should, but I don’t recognise the so called “law” imposed on my country. I’m really starting to wonder if the same applies to other laws. What gives “the law” the right?

You misunderstand. The laws are giving out these rights. No laws, no rights.

EDIT: What do you mean with that you don’t recognise the law?

I mean I don’t accept the british establishment in Ireland. The British police, army, legal system? I don’t recognise it’s authority.

And I meant, what gives the law the authority to say “Do not murder.” ?

I mean I don’t accept the british establishment in Ireland. The British police, army, legal system? I don’t recognise it’s authority.

Depending on how it’s governed over there, I don’t think you not recognizing authority would have any effect on the law’s power on you (at least it won’t in my country). Can’t make statements about your country, but I would find it odd if you do not have any laws if you just “not recognize” it.

And I meant, what gives the law the authority to say “Do not murder.” ?

I’m not sure what you’re trying to imply. Such a law was implemented, because obviously people didn’t like it when a person came up to them and slit their throats. The law dictates order, and the police is there to uphold it. Are you asking me if the creators of the laws had no right to make those laws? Because that argument would end up in an infinite loop.

Are you asking me if the creators of the laws had no right to make those laws? Because that argument would end up in an infinite loop.

Pretty much yes. It’s become a might makes right situation. The entire legitimacy of banning abortion is because “We don’t like it and we can”.

Depending on how it’s governed over there, I don’t think you not recognizing authority would have any effect on the law’s power on you (at least it won’t in my country). Can’t make statements about your country, but I would find it odd if you do not have any laws if you just “not recognize” it.

As to that? Well, you get treated as a non-conforming prisoner for one. The laws themselves exist even if one doesn’t recognise them, and yet, I reject them as having no authority over me. It’s a form of protest, and speaks to the nature of the foriegn involvement.

Pretty much yes. It’s become a might makes right situation. The entire legitimacy of banning abortion is because “We don’t like it and we can”.

Abortion isn’t banned over here, depends on the country. I can really see that there’s many people disagreeing with even anything small within the laws, I myself found some points I would argue against if I had the chance. Abortion would be such an issue for you. Just for your information, I am not against abortion, but you seem to be emotionally involved here. Murder is disallowed by law, but I am sure murderers don’t like that. Abortion could be disallowed by law, but I’m sure you don’t like that. See the comparison?

As to that? Well, you get treated as a non-conforming prisoner for one. The laws themselves exist even if one doesn’t recognise them, and yet, I reject them as having no authority over me. It’s a form of protest, and speaks to the nature of the foriegn involvement.

I have no knowledge on how the system works over there, but I am surprised to hear you can just reject the laws like that. Are you explicitly crossing them?

Abortion was found constitutionally legal in the US decades ago. It IS legal for countless, already evaluated reasons. If someone wants to change the law by getting an amendment passed, or somehow reversing a Supreme Court decision, have fun. But to argue is pointless.

Is it bad that an unborn child will never be born? Of course.
Is it bad that we have a death penalty punishing offenders of heinous crimes? Of course.

Yet the people are often on opposite sides of the argument. (Pro-life often goes with Pro-death penalty and Pro-choice often goes with Anti-Death Penalty)

Ideally, one would either
A) Find human life sacred and therefore beyond capital punishment regardless of the crime (even if we consider being born as a ‘crime’)
B) Find all human life somewhat expendable depending on the circumstances.

I know this sounds cold, but really, what’s the difference. You are either preserving a life or taking one.

Arguing whether or not something is the “law” or not is really only suited for courts. What gives law authority beyond written words is enforcement…

I think abortion should not be illegal, but not necessarily legal. Not encouraged. There is an inherent utility in a growing or at least stable population size; start giving out abortions, and you have a situation like the Soviet Union’s negative growth rate (and now, Russia’s, but that’s not a state issue, that’s a substance abuse thing)… then again, start exiling people for them, and you have a situation like the Soviet Union’s orphanages. I think the current sort of limbo that abortion rests in in this country, legal, but controversial, is exactly where it should be.

Ideally, one would either

I consider the life of a person to have an intrinsic worth. A fetus, incapable of thought, and having absolutely no memories or experiences, is not a person.

I have no knowledge on how the system works over there, but I am surprised to hear you can just reject the laws like that. Are you explicitly crossing them?

In the course of furthering the cause of independence and freedom, I may. What cause have I as an Irish citizen on Irish soil to fear an english legal system and an english judge?

See the comparison?

Yes, and I’m wondering why it matters? What gives the law authority? Might? Fear? Fear of might?

Yes, and I’m wondering why it matters? What gives the law authority? Might? Fear? Fear of might?

There will always be people against the law, or part of the law. People decided laws should be there to prevent chaos. It is not really about fear or might, more about order. If the majority of the people is against the majority of the laws, something is amiss.

People decided laws should be there to prevent chaos

Preventing unpredictability? That seems asinine at best.

Originally posted by Dacheetah:

Arguing whether or not something is the “law” or not is really only suited for courts. What gives law authority beyond written words is enforcement…

I think abortion should not be illegal, but not necessarily legal. Not encouraged. There is an inherent utility in a growing or at least stable population size; start giving out abortions, and you have a situation like the Soviet Union’s negative growth rate (and now, Russia’s, but that’s not a state issue, that’s a substance abuse thing)… then again, start exiling people for them, and you have a situation like the Soviet Union’s orphanages. I think the current sort of limbo that abortion rests in in this country, legal, but controversial, is exactly where it should be.

The law IS the LAW. It is what actions are based on. Does a woman, needing an abortion, have it done in a clinic, as sterile as possible, or does she have it done with a coat hangar in a back alley? Of course enforcement is part of it. I never assumed or suggested that it didn’t. And to suggest that limbo is best…we will have to agree to disagree on that.

Originally posted by Jabor:

Ideally, one would either

I consider the life of a person to have an intrinsic worth. A fetus, incapable of thought, and having absolutely no memories or experiences, is not a person.

Jabor, that is the opinion of a majority of liberals. I respect your value system. Many conservatives have the opposite view. This is why I stated Pro-Choice often goes with Anti-Death Penalty. That’s what you seem to believe.

I say that if you believe human life has intrinsic value, how do you define it? 24 hours out of the womb? 48? OR do you measure by gestation? 9 months from conception? 7? What about a premature birth? Do they have no value until they are 9 total months old?

Developmentally, what is the difference? Just because one is out of a womb and the other still in it makes no difference. REM in fetuses show that they dream. They suck their thumbs. They are alive. Make no mistake about it, abortion is the TERMANATION OF A HUMAN LIFE.

I have just come to terms with that and feel a woman’s right to choose is greater than the rights of an unborn.

You give the law authority. Well, technically we give the law authority, under social contract theory. Its important to differentiate between “THE LAW” and “the law as it affects you (YOUR LAW)”. All law is really words tied to punishment or incentive to shape behaviour, the law is an instrument to encourage or force social and societal change. Law is also the basis of modern society, so just saying “Law is for wankers” is kind of like saying “lets all go live in the caves again.”

REM in fetuses show that they dream.

Not before the brain develops and cognitive activity starts – around the third trimester. You could either argue that the fetus starts being a person when brain activity starts (meaning third-trimester abortions should be illegal while earlier ones should not), or it starts being a person at some later point (ability to perceive pain, first experiences independent of host, etc.)

@solid:

The law is more than just the law. Do you wake up in the morning because of law? Do you flush the toilet because of law? Are you Immanuel Kant? Actions are based on more than just law, otherwise there would not be criminals in an informed society.

I feel that legislation either way is going to force the coat hanger back alley abortion or an abundance of abortion. Right now societal pressure is a sufficient abortion deterrent (some would argue TOO effective) that legislation to prevent excessive abortion is not necessary. I agree with you that life begins at conception, but realize that it is not a) my place as someone who can never phenomenologically experience pregnancy to inform a population that has that exclusive ability on how to behave <a cop out, I know> or b) possible to prevent abortions in full. Abortions relieve some social and economic pressures, especially in young and poor conceptions; I don’t think being poor, young, or stupid is reason enough to end a life, but do realize the inherent utility for the majority by allowing them this option legally.

@jabor:

So if it is a person genetically and biologically, but does not have cognitive functions, it is not a person? I don’t think experience or reasoning ability should be a qualification for being human, because then some of our posters would not fit the bill.

So if it is a person genetically and biologically

Notice I don’t use the word “human”. It is possible to be homo sapiens and yet not be a person – similarly, it’s (hypothetically) possible to be a person without being a member of homo sapiens.

Being a human or not is a matter of genetics, but being a person is entirely based on mental characteristics.

What about the fetus’ rights, though? Killing the fetus is the same thing as killing a human. And even if the woman was raped, it’s not the baby’s fault. If the mother really cannot support the child, then put it into adoption. If the mother cannot support a baby, then don’t have sex. The only surefire way to not get pregnant is to not have sex. Even birth control isn’t foolproof. The mother has no right to say whether or not the fetus dies, just as she has no right to say whether or not a human dies. And why is the life of the mother placed above the fetus’? The fetus is alive, with a heartbeat and brain waves. Just because the fetus is still inside the mother does not make it right to kill it.

What about the fetus’ rights, though?

Like I said, a fetus is not a person.

Before the third trimester, it can’t think, it can’t feel, it doesn’t display any human qualities beyond being roughly human-shaped.

The fetus is alive, with a heartbeat and brain waves.

It does not have brain waves. It does not even have a functional brain, for the majority of the pregnancy. A cow is more sentient than a fetus, and you don’t seem to be arguing against eating steak.

it doesn’t have a heartbeat the whole time either.

Originally posted by Iggyshark:

I have a question for the anti-abortion crowd. You don’t like abortions, right? So don’t get one. Why do you feel the need to tell others that they can’t?

I have a question for the anti-murder crowd. You don’t like murder, right? So don’t do it. Why do you feel the need to tell others that they can’t?

Preventing unpredictability? That seems asinine at best.

No laws, and the next thing you know is that you lay dead in your home, all your possessions gone. No laws, and nobody would work, the entire economy would collapse. Are you saying laws are redundant?

In many disciplines, things which will eventually come, are considered at future value, and not just as their present value. If you applied this to human life, you would value a fetus the same way as a human. This is not a ridiculous concept, just a difference in opinion.