Another thread about Abortion

[Xerxys]

This is to discuss the ethics (or lack thereof) of abortion. Nobody touches this topic with a ten and a half foot pole because they don't want to get into this kind of discussion. I am debating where to put this because I would love some of our political folks to respond as well.

I am of the stance that abortion is wrong. I pay taxes, so I think the turd I elected to office should delegate how stray cats are handled, not necessarily putting them to sleep. I think abortion should come down to the health of the party involved i.e. Mother or child. The father should have absolutely no say in this.

What do you think about Abortion? Why?

[Redjake]

Depends on the situation and that's why I think it should not simply be outlawed. A woman who is raped should not have to bear the child.

That being said, I think there should be a cut off for when the abortion can be done.

[Martian]

Magpie and I had a discussion regarding this topic just last night.

As a man, I would never agree to have any offspring of mine aborted. The way the laws are set up as of now, my opinion doesn't matter and that stinks of misandry, but then that's a whole different discussion.

I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest that abortion is a casual thing. However, the objections to abortion seem to stem primarily from religious views. If we take that as a given, government has no business getting involved.

It's also my opinion that the welfare of an actual living, breathing and thinking human supersedes the welfare of a potential human. A fetus is not a person yet, and if the would-be mother believes it to be in her best interest to abort the child then that ought to be her choice to make.

There are plenty of unwanted children in the world as it is. I don't understand why anyone would want to add to that pool.

[Xerxys]

Originally Posted by Martian

As a man, I would never agree to have any offspring of mine aborted. The way the laws are set up as of now, my opinion doesn't matter and that stinks of misandry, but then that's a whole different discussion. ...

No Dammit, it's not ... I think the laws are just fine like that ...(I hate myself for repeating this as many times as I have) and I did say that in the OP so please, Discuss, rant, rave ... why do you think it's misandry in the case of abortion?

[genuinegirly]

It's a decision that no outside party should make.

It bothers me that men feel they should have a say in an abortion. (Sorry, Martian)
Pregnancy is not a friendly, easy experience for a woman. It's the woman's body that is affected. The man over-riding a woman's decision is the same as saying the woman is no more than his property.


Me personally? I can't see myself having an abortion.

[squeeeb]

i'm the one guy who says its wrong, i'm against abortion. if you don't want the kid, have it and sell it, give it up for adoption, whatever. just because it is a fetus and cant talk or breathe quite yet does not make it "not a person," in my opinion. it is a living thing, therefore killing it would be murder. yes, i'm kinda also against birth control because the morning after pill is technically an abortion. (oddly, i'm all for condoms and masturbation, even though bazillions of sperms die.)

does anyone have accurate statistics on how many children are born because of rape? i dont think it is that many, and i don't see it as a good reason to have an abortion. being raped is horrible, but have the kid and sell it and use the money for counseling. don't kill a human because something shitty happened to you.

the ONLY way i could justify abortion is if having the baby would absolutely 100% kill the mother, and that is more rare than a female willing to talk to me. sadly, abortion, like anything else humans want to do, will be done whether it's legal or not.

how about we make abortion illegal in the US, and instead of abortion clinics, we have abortion travel agencies that will book you a round trip flight, stay, and abortion in china?

---------- Post added at 06:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:57 PM ----------

Originally Posted by genuinegirly

It's a decision that no outside party should make.

It bothers me that men feel they should have a say in an abortion. (Sorry, Martian)
Pregnancy is not a friendly, easy experience for a woman. It's the woman's body that is affected. The man over-riding a woman's decision is the same as saying the woman is no more than his property.


Me personally? I can't see myself having an abortion.

it IS the woman's body that is affected. it's also the living thing inside that woman's body that is affected. i'm not saying you (the collective you, not genuinegirly you) cant have an abortion cause you are merely a woman, i'm saying you cant have an abortion cause the human inside you who cant speak should be taken into account. if i didn't believe the fetus is a living human being, i wouldn't be against it.

[Hektore]

I chose I don't know.

There are two issues at odds here and I agree with both sides. The right to life issue, abortion as birth control reeks morally to me. It is a right to life issue and I have no reason to oppose it outside the rotten feeling in my guts when I think about if it were me or my SO. This could have to do with the fact that my mother's age and mine are separated by a mere 16 years.

The women's rights issue I agree with as well, a person should have a say in what goes on insider their own body. More importantly than that, their say should trump anyone else's.

For someone to say or act like this isn't a moral issue and women's rights issue, only one or the other, I would have to assume they're being disingenuous or deliberately obtuse.

So who wins? I'm in the camp of the rights of the living trump the rights of the potentially living, but I would never chose abortion for myself or my wife (to be) or my daughters(to be). Doesn't matter though because that decision won't ever be up to me.

[genuinegirly]

Squee, I agree that the unborn life has great value.

I simply disagree with abortion being treated as anything other than a case-by-case personal decision.

[Martian]

Originally Posted by Xerxys

No Dammit, it's not ... I think the laws are just fine like that ...(I hate myself for repeating this as many times as I have) and I did say that in the OP so please, Discuss, rant, rave ... why do you think it's misandry in the case of abortion?

Originally Posted by genuinegirly

It's a decision that no outside party should make.

It bothers me that men feel they should have a say in an abortion. (Sorry, Martian)
Pregnancy is not a friendly, easy experience for a woman. It's the woman's body that is affected. The man over-riding a woman's decision is the same as saying the woman is no more than his property.

When it comes to childbirth and child rearing, there's a definite bias within the Western world towards the mother. I don't agree with that. I see no reason why a man should be considered in any way less capable of raising one or more children single-handedly than a woman. Depending on your beliefs, there has been exactly one or no cases at all of a woman spontaneously conceiving a child without masculine involvement. Men are expected to take a hand in birth control, and are expected to help raise the child if the woman decides to carry it to term (again, regardless of the man's wishes). If a guy gets a girl pregnant and doesn't want the kid, the prevailing opinion seems to be 'you should've thought of that before you fucked her.' Why is there a double standard here? Why should it be any different for a woman?

You say, genuinegirly, that the man being able to have a hand in the decision equates to the woman being property. I understand your point about the hardships of pregnancy and childbirth, but I also understand that there's a very real emotional cost to a lot of potential fathers due to this. I wouldn't dream of asking my girlfriend to get an abortion if the unthinkable occurred and she became pregnant, and I'd be very upset if she didn't take my wishes into account when making her decision. Fortunately I already know her stance on that issue and so don't have to worry about it, but I also know personally at least one man who wasn't so fortunate. I know that the loss of what he considered to be his child haunted him for a very long time, and I know that he's a damn good father and would've been a great dad to that kid. That opportunity was taken away from him, and he had no power to stop it.

Nothing about this issue is easy. Pregnancy isn't easy, childbirth isn't easy. Abortions aren't easy either; there's a very real physical and emotional toll on the woman, and often an equal toll on the man. I'm not saying the father should always have the final say in the issue, since every case is different, but I also don't agree with the idea that the father is automatically persona non grata here.

[Baraka_Guru]

Martian, I share your thoughts on this matter.

[inBOIL]

I think it comes down to whether or not a fetus is a person. If it is, abortion should be illegal. If not, it's entirely the woman's choice. I haven't heard a convincing argument either way regarding the personhood of a fetus.

[Tully Mars]

I'm no fan of them.

I'd like to see less of them.

I don't think it's my decision.

I don't think they should be illegal.

I do think there should be a cut off date.

I don't think we should be killing doctors who preform them.

[genuinegirly]

Ah. Yes. Martian, I am not saying that a woman should not consult the father. I am simply stating that there should be no legal requirement of his compliance with the decision to obtain an abortion.

[mixedmedia]

I was raised to be staunchly in favor of a woman's right to abortion, but my position has modified over time. While I agree that the practice should not be illegal, I do believe we would have a healthier society without as many of them. I don't care for any of the words that would commonly be used to modify the word 'healthier.' Not morally, for I do not believe it is necessarily a moral issue. Nor spiritually, because that is too vague. It's more along the lines of an enlightenment or intellectual - psychological - health that I am referring to. I would like to see less abortions because less men and women are creating less doubtful, irrational, ill-conceived (no pun intended) pregnancies. In my mind this can only be induced (again, no pun, I swear) by a sweeping and radical change in the way we view matters of sexuality and, as a consequence, birth control. I think birth control should be free and widely distributed to individuals on demand. Perhaps even delivered through the mail as a public service. I think birth control should be as naturally a consumer commodity and as commonly considered as toilet paper or toothpaste.

Also, I have no doubt that irrational, moral/religious-based attitudes - in concert with a wild, puerile fascination - that we (in this country) have with the subject of sex serves to increase the amount of thoughtless, foolhardy sexual activity and, as a consequence, the number of abortions that we have. That's where the enlightenment comes in.

Do I have any hope that we will ever reach such a lofty place in my or my children's lifetimes? Or ever? Nope. From the looks of it, things are only getting worse.

And one last thing, I understand that it is really hard for a man to lose a child, a fetus, to an abortion that he had no control over. But, I'm sorry, if it ever becomes so bad for a man that he is equally as disturbed and distressed as a woman who has carried to term and given birth to a child against her own will, then I suggest there is more going on in that man's head than is rational and he should probably seek professional help. I will go along with the regret and grieving only so far.

[Martian]

Originally Posted by genuinegirly

Ah. Yes. Martian, I am not saying that a woman should not consult the father. I am simply stating that there should be no legal requirement of his compliance with the decision to obtain an abortion.

But if the man has no legal rights in regards to the child, then it amounts to the exact situation you're decrying in reverse. At that point it ends up being that the man gets to have a say in the discussion, unless the woman doesn't like what it is.

The most reasonable solution in my mind is for an abortion to require either the consent of both parties, or for the father to abdicate any responsibility. Perhaps a failsafe of allowing the woman to make the decision unilaterally after making reasonable efforts to contact and consult the father, but other than that I don't believe the woman should have the right to make a decision in this regard without the father's consent.


I seem to be in the minority in the way I think on this.

[ratbastid]

Originally Posted by Tully Mars

I'm no fan of them.

I'd like to see less of them.

I don't think it's my decision.

I don't think they should be illegal.

I do think there should be a cut off date.

I don't think we should be killing doctors who preform them.

Bingo.

I'll also add: I think abortion is a symptom of something much bigger, and arguing about whether or not we should allow that symptom only allows the disease to go un-looked-into, which I find tragic in the extreme.

[genuinegirly]

Originally Posted by Martian

...The most reasonable solution in my mind is for an abortion to require either the consent of both parties, or for the father to abdicate any responsibility. Perhaps a failsafe of allowing the woman to make the decision unilaterally after making reasonable efforts to contact and consult the father, but other than that I don't believe the woman should have the right to make a decision in this regard without the father's consent...

Your scenario makes excellent sense and I am inclined to support it. But in this process you fail to address a scenario where a woman does not want the child and the man insists on its birth.

I agree whole-heartedly with the following comment:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

... I understand that it is really hard for a man to lose a child, a fetus, to an abortion that he had no control over. But, I'm sorry, if it ever becomes so bad for a man that he is equally as disturbed and distressed as a woman who has carried to term and given birth to a child against her own will, then I suggest there is more going on in that man's head than is rational and he should probably seek professional help. I will go along with the regret and grieving only so far.

[ASU2003]

I think there are too many people already. It does mess up the economics of the 20th century where the following generation would pay for the previous one to retire, and increase the demand for their homes & land. And while I wouldn't want to be the one who has to perform the procedure, fewer unwanted or unexpected pregnancies would help reduce the population level.

But, the main issue is how do you get women in the third world countries to see that their lives will be better if they wait to have kids and have smaller families?

Then again, better access and education (& religion's acceptance for some) to birth control would be preferred.

I also think a UTI device should be inserted for 5 years minimum after a woman has had an abortion.

[SabrinaFair]

I'm in the, "safe, legal, and rare" camp. I do not think abortions should be a substitute for birth control, or a decision to be undertaken lightly. But I don't think they should be performed with wire hangers in back alleys. So I support the right to chose abortion, and oppose unreasonable restriction on that right.

I've had two experience that guide my personal feelings on the issue. In college, I had a pregnancy scare. I had used birth control and all that, but for one reason or another had a late period. I made up my mind right then and there--"I'm having an abortion." A few days later, I got my period, but the experience made me feel like I could squarely count myself in the "pro-choice" column. Then, a few months ago, I had another late period. (again, we used condoms, but you never know) I had just started dating the guy, and absolutely dreaded having to tell him I'd gotten knocked up on our first time. I ended up being several days late, and to put my mind at ease decided to take a home pregnancy test. (That in itself was a new adventure--I've never been great at peeing-for-accuracy) I bought myself the Cadillac of home pregnancy tests (the one with the digital words), I peed on the stick, and waited the requisite amount of time. I walked into the bathroom with a great amount of fear, waiting to read the word "Pregnant" on the little screen. I took a deep breath, looked at the screen, and read what it said--"Not Pregnant". The magic words....and yet, they didn't feel very good. I felt a sense of loss, in a way. I was relieved, of course, and very glad I didn't have to immediately shake up what seemed to be a very promising relationship in its earliest days. But I felt the strangest sense of disappointment as well. And that's when I began thinking what it would have been like to have an abortion--to have read the word "Pregnant" on the screen and made the decision to erase that word. It was then that I realized I might not make that decision for myself. It did not change how I feel about the subject in general--but it did change how I feel about what I would do.

[Xerxys]

I don't buy the argument that there's too many people already. If Abortion was to be legalized, will it be like getting a tan? "Oh by the way, on my way home I have to get rid of this kid, I might be late for the PTA meeting" ...

[Martian]

Originally Posted by Xerxys

I don't buy the argument that there's too many people already. If Abortion was to be legalized, will it be like getting a tan? "Oh by the way, on my way home I have to get rid of this kid, I might be late for the PTA meeting" ...

That's a common pro-life argument, and also a complete fallacy. Legal or not, abortion is still a surgical procedure that carries inherent risks. Legalization of abortion also does not nullify morality.

I don't want to meet the woman who can commit to an abortion casually.

[Reese]

The risk, the burden, the physical changes and the stigma is all put on the woman. A man cannot be the one to decide something like that. He has no connection to the child. Have you ever met a woman that just learned she had an 18 year old son? Men are donors. Until men can be implanted with the fetus and carry the burden, they should have no right to it. The woman becomes a mother some time during gestation - a man doesn't become a father until that kid pops out.
I'm always questioning myself on the topic of abortion and the death penalty and I can honestly argue both sides with myself because they are both huge moral and ethical gray areas for me.
The one thing that isn't gray to me is the legality of it. I definitely think it should be legal because people are going to do it anyways. Making it illegal is only going to trade abortions for murder convictions and dead mothers from botched back alley surgeries which I can't do.
I hope some day with education and conditioning we can get rid of the need for abortion. It does upset me that there are stupid people out there using abortions as birth control because there are much easier ways.

[filtherton]

I wasn't sure what it meant to say that I though abortion was "right." I think the only circumstances necessary to justify an abortion are that a woman is knocked up and that she doesn't want to have the kid and it isn't viable outside of the womb. I voted "I don't care." I meant it in the sense that I don't care if any of you people have abortions. Though perhaps there are some of you that ought to.

[Xazy]

A number of things cause my viewpoint, one is I am Jewish and I strongly feel my religion help to shape my values, and we are very pro-life. I do feel a fetus is a life. I know so many who struggle who pray who would give everything for a child, I have had friends, relatives who have spent years struggling for this.

Another major thing is the birth of my daughter the idea of an abortion of terminating a life a child a baby just seems so unthinkable after seeing and experiencing the last 11 months.

Exception I would understand but not exactly say yes would be a case of rape. Questionable would be where mother health is on the line it is then a balance between2 lives, and I am not the person to evaluate but would come down I feel strongly on whose life is likely to survive.

[shakran]

Originally Posted by genuinegirly

Ah. Yes. Martian, I am not saying that a woman should not consult the father. I am simply stating that there should be no legal requirement of his compliance with the decision to obtain an abortion.

If the man has no legal rights in the matter, then he should have no, or at the least reduced, legal responsibility. The argument that "the guy should have thought of these complications before he had sex with her" applies equally to the woman, unless someone wishes to put forth the argument that women are and should be subjugated to the sexual whims of the man. In short, if you're screwin' someone that you aren't willing to have a baby with, then the plan of action for an accidental pregnancy should be discussed beforehand.

It is not entirely uncommon for the man to expressly say that he does not want a child, leading to the woman's intentionally screwing up the birth control in order to have the kid that she wants. It is also not entirely uncommon for the couple to agree to abort unplanned pregnancies, and then the woman changes her mind when she actually gets pregnant. In such cases, 100% of the decision rests with the woman, despite the man's best reasonable efforts at having a contingency plan. If the woman takes 100% of the decision despite earlier agreements, then she should bear 100% of the responsibility. In other words, if we said we would avoid having a baby, and then you decide to have it in spite of that agreement, you shouldn't feel entitled to come running to me for child support.

[levite]

With all due respect to Xazy, I would say abortion is actually an issue on which there is not a clear consensus in the Jewish world. Most Orthodox folks I know are at least nominally opposed to abortion, since the Orthodox interpretations of Jewish law tend to be restrictive concerning when and for what reasons a woman is permitted to have an abortion; many if not most non-Orthodox folks I know are more pro-choice, given that non-Orthodox interpretations of Jewish law tend to offer wider latitude in permitting abortion.

Personally, I believe that a fetus is not "alive" until it is at the point of being viable outside the womb. From the standpoint of secular society, I believe abortion should be legal, confidential, and nobody's business but the woman and whoever she chooses to confide in. The only reasoning I have ever heard to outlaw abortion is rooted in religious thought, and therefore IMO has no place in secular government.

On the other hand, while I believe in a secular government that stays as free as possible of entanglements in people's private lives, I believe it is the place of religion to offer moral enrichment and exhortation. And though I think abortion should be legal, confidential, and easily available, I don't think it is always a good thing in the moral sense, and should not be undertaken lightly or misused. I would hope that people's religions would advise them to be strict in the exercise of their right, and offer them solid advice toward prevention and use of alternatives.

[Xerxys]

In light of shakran's post, for those who feel that abortion is not entirely wrong, would you agree if abortion were to be legalized, then child support laws should also be amended?

[Jozrael]

I'm personally of the belief that abortion should be legal. Absolutely.

I'm also of the opinion that it's, by and large, a morally despicable act.

I am also using it as a last line of defense should my girlfriend get pregnant.

Full of contradictions, aren't I?

On the subject of men having a say, I absolutely agree with Martian's stance: I think men are way too marginalized in the decision making process.

When it comes down to the man insisting on the child being born, and the woman being adamantly opposed to it...I don't have a solution. It's a lose-lose situation, where either way you're, in my opinion, violating the rights of at least one human being. That being said, I do think it more the crime to force the woman to have the abortion than to force the man to watch his child die. So I kind of agree with what mixedmedia said. Not that the man needs help but...that I think the woman has more of an investment in the decision.

It's a difficult subject, with no 'nice' answer.

[mixedmedia]

I don't have a problem with the parental rights and responsibilities between men and women being unequal. The process of bearing (or not bearing) children is unequal.

[Baraka_Guru]

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

I don't have a problem with the parental rights and responsibilities between men and women being unequal. The process of bearing (or not bearing) children is unequal.

I don't think that equality is the aim here, as there clearly isn't any physiological or psychological way to equate things between the sexes. Heck, we don't even have the same genitalia, which is a big part of the problem.

On that same note, I think there are other distinct inequalities between the genders that can never reach reasonable equality. Pregnancy, childbirth, and child rearing is one thing. True equality in the workplace is another. Women are the assumed cornerstone of the family and so many are assumed to not be as fully engaged with the workforce as most men. As a result, men accumulate more experience, have uninterrupted attendance, more flexibility, and earn higher pay. (There are, of course, other unfair reasons for the inequality in the workforce, but there are also unfair imbalances for men when it comes to children and families.)

Basically, true equality between the sexes is a pipe dream. I don't think all of us assume men should have equal weight in all matters pertaining to the female reproductive system. I think the problem is being of no weight, except for a man's weight in matters of earning an income.

[mixedmedia]

Well, when the choice is one of two options (to abort or not to abort), then there is either all of the weight or none of it ultimately. That's not to say that men and women are not capable of consensus, and most of the time I believe there is cooperation and consensus, but when there is not I am fully comfortable with the woman having the ultimate say - because of the 'distinct natural inequalities' between the genders that you mention.

[Halanna]

I voted that it is right. Since that was the only postive choice in the poll, but I think it's right that women have the right. There does need to be trimester limits though.

Childbirth and pregnancy is an emotional, mental and physical event in a woman's life. But the emotional, mental and physical effects do not suddenly disappear when the woman gives birth. The thought that the child should be given up for adoption or given to the father is not the end all of the situation. Now you have a women who has spent 9 months bearing a child against her will, and a lifetime of worry, regret, loss and pain at giving that child away.

Why does giving birth end the mother's feelings? She may not want the child, can't afford the child, or doesn't feel she can be a good parent, but I would venture 9 times out of 10, once that child is born, she feels the maternal bond and the unconditional love. So the solution is to continue to hurt her for the rest of her life by having her give the child away. Hmm.

No, I don't believe the father should have a say in whether the child is born. He has no right to use a women's body for his own gain. If he want's to be a father, he needs to find a partner who shares his vision of parenthood and deliberately choose to have children. Really, what man wants to force a woman to bear a child against her will? If that is his route to fatherhood, he's already gotten off on the wrong foot. I also think the instances of the man wanting the child are rare cases and not the norm.

I don't think the majority of women who have abortions do so for purely selfish reasons. I think a major part of the decision comes from their belief that they can't adequately care for the child, whether that be financially, emotionally or wherever their train of thought takes them. I also don't think the majority of women who choose to have abortions make the decision on a whim or take the decision lightly. I think they do understand what they are doing and that is why they make the decision after all.

Is the developing fetus life? I don't know, I'm not a scientist or medical doctor. Is it necessarily right or wrong? I don't know. But I do believe it is right to give the woman a choice.

And to Xerxys - Yes, absolutely the child support laws need to be amended in the case of a women having a child without the man's consent. Some safeguards for men need to be in place where they can have the Court record their wish that the child not be born, that they do not want responsibility, etc. and they are found not to be legally responsible for that child.

If women want the right to to abort a fetus, then they have to allow a two lane road where the man is not responsible (at his choosing) if the woman chooses NOT to exercise that right.

[tisonlyi]

No-one outside of the parties directly involved should have any input to the decision. At all. The female's choice is absolute, but a touch of arbitration with the male seems, well, polite.

The rights of the 'foetus' come into play when, and only when, there is sufficient development of the foetus to give a reasonable chance of development into a well-functioning human being outside the womb.

The current limits of this are, by my understanding, at around 24-26 weeks.

Foetuses can be 'saved' after 20 weeks or so, but the entity left at the end of the process is decidedly less than a minimally well-functioning human being. I take a very broad definition of well-functioning.

So, up to the point that the foetus starts to have substantial capacity to survive properly, the involved parties have absolute rights.

Oh, and gentlemen, if we dip our 'toe' in shark infested waters and we're bitten by a shark, then we cannot complain about the nature of the shark-infested waters. It's like manslaughter; You may not have intended to kill the person, but pushing them near a cliff-edge is behaviour that is likely to result in death. You should know this, as a reasonable person, so you're guilty. If your sperm ends up fertilizing an egg, then you've had a role to play in that, no matter how much protection you were taking.

Unintended consequences abound in life. Deal.

[Bacchanal]

I'm against using abortion as birth control. I know a few women who have done exactly that because they can't be more responsible and I can't understand that.

I'm for abortion if there are extreme complications with the pregnancy, or severe deformities with the fetus, etc...

I agree with it being legal, and don't think anybody but the people involved need to be as concerned about it as they seem to be.

I think the guy who killed Dr. Tiller is a moron, and the people who praise him are even more so. I can't understand killing someone because you're "pro-life"...

[Latenter]

Originally Posted by inBOIL

I think it comes down to whether or not a fetus is a person. If it is, abortion should be illegal. If not, it's entirely the woman's choice. I haven't heard a convincing argument either way regarding the personhood of a fetus.

This is the basis of the issue. It's all about drawing that line. If we can determine that a fetus is a person, the argument shouldn't exist. I don't understand all of the moralizing and everything else that goes with the debate, I don't care how the mother feels, it's not her life being taken.

It's not that I'm heartless. I think rare cases should be looked at on a case by case basis, ie. rape (maybe), or medical concerns for the mother, but how it affects her lifestyle should never be a factor. We don't let people kill their spouse if they don't love them anymore, or push someone in front of a train if they are suing you. We also don't euthanize orphans to decrease overcrowding. No, it's not easy, but as a civilized society it's a part of "freedom" we give up. It's a different conversation, but it's related to the "we DON'T torture" stuff recently. Don't care if it's effective or not, as a society, we should choose to be above that.

As far as when we can determine that a fetus is a person, I think there needs to be a hard, scientific definition. Chance for viability is variable, and as medicine improves we can go further back.

Personally, I would put the line at the development of a nervous system/brain, where it is no longer a lump of cells and meat, and is becoming a lifeform, even if still dependent. I think this starts to happen pretty early, at around 2 weeks (I think, I haven't looked in a while.)

Interestingly for me, that means that I think the morning after pill should probably be legal, and I'm mostly for stem cell research, though I might still find parts of it distasteful.

EDIT:
According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_development), this happens about 18 days after fertilization.

Gestational age: 4 weeks old. 29-35 days from last menstruation.
Embryonic age: Week nr 3. 2 weeks old. 15-21 days from fertilization.

* A notochord forms in the center of the embryonic disk. (day 16 of fert.)
* Gastrulation commences. (day 16 of fert.)
* A neural groove (future spinal cord) forms over the notochord with a brain bulge at one end. Neuromeres appear. (day 18 of fert.)
* Somites, the divisions of the future vertebra, form. (day 20 of fert.)
* Primitive heart tube is forming. Vasculature begins to develop in embryonic disc. (day 20 of fert.)

[genuinegirly]

What bothers me most about this issue is that for the most part men have written the policy governing it.

[tisonlyi]

Originally Posted by Latenter

Personally, I would put the line at the development of a nervous system/brain, where it is no longer a lump of cells and meat, and is becoming a lifeform, even if still dependent. I think this starts to happen pretty early, at around 2 weeks (I think, I haven't looked in a while.)

Interestingly for me, that means that I think the morning after pill should probably be legal, and I'm mostly for stem cell research, though I might still find parts of it distasteful.

All central nervous systems are not equal.

Even the Central Nervous System of a 20-22 week foetus can't be made to develop anywhere approaching properly or near acceptably outside the womb even if you can have the entity there _survive_ to a full term 'age' at least. i.e. At that point there's still not enough matter there to kick-start with.

The abortion laws were hotly debated in the UK a few years ago based on distorted evidence presented through certain newspapers... This is how I came to look into it. I may be off on some of my figures, but the gist holds.

[shakran]

Originally Posted by genuinegirly

What bothers me most about this issue is that for the most part men have written the policy governing it.

And yet it still favors women by a wide margin. We must be incredibly generous.

It's your decision whether or not to have the kid, even if you rigged the birth control to fail so that you could have one. We have no say.

It's then our responsibility to at minimum help pay for the kid that we didn't want and that you possibly tricked us into having. And if we say we didn't want the kid and we don't want any part of it, you can take us to court and have our wages garnished, and in some jurisdictions, get us published in the town paper as a deadbeat dad.

[Halanna]

Originally Posted by Latenter

Gestational age: 4 weeks old. 29-35 days from last menstruation.
Embryonic age: Week nr 3. 2 weeks old. 15-21 days from fertilization.

* A notochord forms in the center of the embryonic disk. (day 16 of fert.)
* Gastrulation commences. (day 16 of fert.)
* A neural groove (future spinal cord) forms over the notochord with a brain bulge at one end. Neuromeres appear. (day 18 of fert.)
* Somites, the divisions of the future vertebra, form. (day 20 of fert.)
* Primitive heart tube is forming. Vasculature begins to develop in embryonic disc. (day 20 of fert.)

Maybe I should have paid more attention in biology or some other class, but nothing about this description suggests life to me.

[Latenter]

Originally Posted by tisonlyi

All central nervous systems are not equal.

Even the Central Nervous System of a 20-22 week foetus can't be made to develop anywhere approaching properly or near acceptably outside the womb even if you can have the entity there _survive_ to a full term 'age' at least. i.e. At that point there's still not enough matter there to kick-start with.

The abortion laws were hotly debated in the UK a few years ago based on distorted evidence presented through certain newspapers... This is how I came to look into it. I may be off on some of my figures, but the gist holds.

I never claimed that this is the point where a fetus can survive without outside help. I know it's not fully developed, but it's human. A full grown cow, with complete brain and everything I'm ok with killing, eating even. It's just the point, to me, where a person (and not their support system/organs) begins.

The reason I make the distinction, (I don't make any laws so all of this is my opinion) is that you don't count your arm as a separate entity from yourself, even if cut off. The difference between biological mass and an individual life is due to the brain/nervous system. That's why the mad scientists talk about brain transplants.

Originally Posted by Halanna

Maybe I should have paid more attention in biology or some other class, but nothing about this description suggests life to me.

How is it not life? It's organic matter reproducing and growing. My point is that once neural activity exists in a human brain, there's something going on, and I believe it has rights. Where do you draw the line? I think it's silly to say that a baby isn't it's own entity until the cord is cut, or that depending on the hospital it could or could not be viable. I'm just trying to find a specific, scientifically justifiable point.

That might be our problem, as objectively speaking, I might be able to pass on more genes if I were to rape and murder my way to the top without getting caught long enough, but we reject that as a society so there's more to it than that.