Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Moonduck · 07-30-2003, 08:20 PM

Hmm, methinks this left the realm of philosophical discussion a while back. Ah well...

I find myself at odds on the issue. I dislike that, as I am the type of person that like my own positions to be strongly realized. Abortion sends my normal careful construction of rationale into disarray.

I find abortion personally repugnant. The idea is overwhelmingly repulsive. The mechanics are abhorrent, and the result is so morally revolting that my conscious mind shrinks from it. You see, I'm a parent. I have two kids that I adore. The idea that either one of them could've been destroyed on a whim simply sickens me. I've seen what results from conception, and it is a beautiful things, two beautiful things in my case.

However, I find the idea of the govt deciding to restrict abortion, an act so completely not covered by anything in the legal underpinnings of this nation, to be intellectually repugnant. What right has the govt to tell you or I what we can and cannot do with our own bodies? None, says I. It is my body. Tattoos, piercing, drugs, alcohol, suicide, what have you. My body, in the end, is the only thing I can be said to truly possess. An abortion is an act that affects, in the end, your body.

Therein lies the rub. There is another entity involved in an abortion. It's that little blastocyst, bundle of cells, or even foetus growing within that body of yours. It may be your body, but it has a body too. It has existence, of some sort. The question becomes not whether abortion should remain legal, nor whether or not it is your body or not, but when does a foetus have legally protectable rights? When does it have status as an individual, instead of simply an aberration on the uterine wall?

I am not a person to really answer that. I am not a doctor or scientist, I am not a religious man that believes life begins at conception. I do think that if a foetus has a chance of living outside the womb with the wonders of modern medicine, it becomes murder to terminate the pregnancy. That would seem self-evident to me. If the foetus is capable of sustaining independent life, even with the caveat that serious medical treatment is required, I would call it an entity in its' own right. At that point, I would say that the govt does have a responsibility to protect it, and that it has all the rights and duties of a human being.

So, my bottom line is that I find abortion horrid, but feel like the govt has no right to legislate what anyone does to themselves. However, once the foetus is capable of independent existence, you have no more right to harm it than you do to hurt the neighbor kid down the street.

As to giving the prospective father a say, how do you do that? Is there anyone to argue that the father has as much invested in a pregnancy as the mother? Realistically? So if the mother's opinion carries more weight, how does on egive the father a say that is in any way meaningful. As much as I find it 'unfair' that the male has no say in something he helped create, I cannot find a meaningful way to give him a say that does not impinge on the rights of the female.

Lastly, to those concerned about how pro-lifers are unworried about the child once it is born, I say feh. I've seen a number of studies and reports that show that pro-lifers are statistically much more likely to give to charity than their pro-choice counterparts. Pro-lifers do care, they just tend to dislike rampant welfare and the like as they tend to be on the conservative side of the spectrum.

07-30-2003, 08:20 PM	#137 (permalink)
Moonduck Junkie Location: SE USA	Hmm, methinks this left the realm of philosophical discussion a while back. Ah well... I find myself at odds on the issue. I dislike that, as I am the type of person that like my own positions to be strongly realized. Abortion sends my normal careful construction of rationale into disarray. I find abortion personally repugnant. The idea is overwhelmingly repulsive. The mechanics are abhorrent, and the result is so morally revolting that my conscious mind shrinks from it. You see, I'm a parent. I have two kids that I adore. The idea that either one of them could've been destroyed on a whim simply sickens me. I've seen what results from conception, and it is a beautiful things, two beautiful things in my case. However, I find the idea of the govt deciding to restrict abortion, an act so completely not covered by anything in the legal underpinnings of this nation, to be intellectually repugnant. What right has the govt to tell you or I what we can and cannot do with our own bodies? None, says I. It is my body. Tattoos, piercing, drugs, alcohol, suicide, what have you. My body, in the end, is the only thing I can be said to truly possess. An abortion is an act that affects, in the end, your body. Therein lies the rub. There is another entity involved in an abortion. It's that little blastocyst, bundle of cells, or even foetus growing within that body of yours. It may be your body, but it has a body too. It has existence, of some sort. The question becomes not whether abortion should remain legal, nor whether or not it is your body or not, but when does a foetus have legally protectable rights? When does it have status as an individual, instead of simply an aberration on the uterine wall? I am not a person to really answer that. I am not a doctor or scientist, I am not a religious man that believes life begins at conception. I do think that if a foetus has a chance of living outside the womb with the wonders of modern medicine, it becomes murder to terminate the pregnancy. That would seem self-evident to me. If the foetus is capable of sustaining independent life, even with the caveat that serious medical treatment is required, I would call it an entity in its' own right. At that point, I would say that the govt does have a responsibility to protect it, and that it has all the rights and duties of a human being. So, my bottom line is that I find abortion horrid, but feel like the govt has no right to legislate what anyone does to themselves. However, once the foetus is capable of independent existence, you have no more right to harm it than you do to hurt the neighbor kid down the street. As to giving the prospective father a say, how do you do that? Is there anyone to argue that the father has as much invested in a pregnancy as the mother? Realistically? So if the mother's opinion carries more weight, how does on egive the father a say that is in any way meaningful. As much as I find it 'unfair' that the male has no say in something he helped create, I cannot find a meaningful way to give him a say that does not impinge on the rights of the female. Lastly, to those concerned about how pro-lifers are unworried about the child once it is born, I say feh. I've seen a number of studies and reports that show that pro-lifers are statistically much more likely to give to charity than their pro-choice counterparts. Pro-lifers do care, they just tend to dislike rampant welfare and the like as they tend to be on the conservative side of the spectrum.