balderdash111

Conservative talk show host (Andrew Wilkow, out of NYC I think) is posed the following question:

You are in a fertility clinic and there is a fire. In the left corner of the room is a 2 year old. In the right corner is a petri dish with 5 fertilized eggs in it. You can only save one (postulate your own reason why this would be so, but let's go with it). Which do you save?

Listen to the response (no, it's not outrageous, he doesn't threaten to kill the caller or anything) and let me know your thoughts.

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/abortion.MP3

Hint: he doesn't answer the question, but gets pissed.

__________________
A little silliness now and then is cherished by the wisest men. -- Willy Wonka

Willravel

Andrew Wilkow doesn't belong on a talk show based on his response. What an embarassment. Another loud mouth with everything in the world to complain about, but nothing to say. Shame on anyone who listens to him.

I'm anti-choice, but I would save the 2 year old. Zygots in an open dish are alive, but so are bacteria.

Edit: I changed "pro-life" to "anti-choice". It's less general and misleading and better describres by belief.

tecoyah

I would of course....save the 2 yr old. The dish contains cellular material that might or might not eventualy become a 2 yr old, whereas the living thinking child has reached a state I personally consider Human.

No Brainer

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

Ustwo

I'm at work so no speakers, but you would have to be a moron to not be able to answer that question as a right to lifer.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Seaver

Honestly that question does not work.

Abortion is not a matter of which life to save, but whether or not to save life in general.

Yes, if we were faced with the decision we would save the 2 year old. But abortion is more along the lines of

"There's a young child that can not protect herself. Her mother is going to kill her. Do you save her?"

Now THAT's a question we're faced with in abortion.

tecoyah

That depends on perspective Seaver....and therein lies the reason this is such a heated topic. Many dont see the cells as a child, but instead as a grouping of cells. Many see the Cells as a living human , deserving protection. Who is Right....?

That is why the question has some merit.....though not much, as it is hypothetical, and extreme.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

Daniel_

Te question has merit - but the answer is clear to me - the child is a current real person - the embryos are potential people, so I'd save the real person.

But then I'm an Atheistc European Liberal - I would probably (no strike that - I would CERTAINLY) save the Stereo before I saved the embryos - unless I was in some way connected to the person undergoing IVF, and I'd maybe save the embryos in order to help my contact's chaces at IVF.

One related question:

What is the concencus view of IVF amongst Pro-Life people? I'd presume that anyone that says it's up to God to decide who is born, not an abortion clinic, OUGHT to belive that it's up to God who gets preganant, not an IVF clinic, am I right?

__________________

╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗
Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air,
And deep beneath the rolling waves,
In labyrinths of Coral Caves,
The Echo of a distant time
Comes willowing across the sand;
And everthing is Green and Submarine
╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝

Seaver

No, it has no merit because an embryo will not last in a petri dish. What will you do, hold it in your armpit to keep the cells warm?

Willravel

The question posed is a hypothetical one that is constructed in such as way as to create a moral equasion. Is one child greater to or less than 5 zygotes? If you say the child is worth more, than you have just saved one life forsaking 5...which would lead us all to the conclusion that the zygotes are no, in fact, AS alive as the boy. This would be fundamentally in contrast with the ascertion by pro lifers that life is created upon conception (the marriage of spermatazoa and egg). If you choose to save the zygotes, then you clearly value the lives of the zygotes as equal to or greater than a boy. The caller on the recording makes it sound as if someone choosing the latter were a monster. Well consider the source. I happen to be a liberal with many liberal friends who is anti choice...so I know what it's like to be in the minority. They may see me as a monster, but I know that I am not. The question posed is a Sofie's Choice...therefore either way you are leaving life behind and are thus a monster.

hannukah harry

but when you run out of the clinic with the petri dish, you just need to take it to another one and they should be able to still make use of them.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

solowe1

These poor woman who get abortions--to hear the rt2lfrs talk, you'd think these woman were taking chainsaws to the necks of their little girls or boys. There's no perspective in this country. I mean its not as if Americans in general have some mythical and legendary moral repugnance toward the taking of life. We love killing in this country. Always have. People were barely in this country for a few years before they started killing indians. Every generation of Americans have seen war---very few of these wars, mind you--were conscionable by any modern standard of morality. We have impounded American Citizens. We have hounded law abiding citizens for social change with our secret police(MartinLutherKing &FBI etc). Black people were lynched by the hundreds maybe thousands. We have killed criminals. We have ordered the execution of foreign nationals. We have allowed our own citizens to die because they were poor and we couldn't be bothered. Right now, we are allowing a major foreign power to exterminate its people through one of the most despicable crimes of depraved indifference the world has ever seen. Apparently our country's precious embryos are more important than the 3 and a half MILLION North Koreans who have perished at the bequest of crazed meglomaniac who appears absolutely giddy at having a country all to himself. I don't see us FREEING North Korea. Nobody's talking about DEPOSING the evil dictator. PUNISHING the evil doers. Bringing DEMOCRACY to the North Koreans. What we Americans are allowing to happen to the people of North Korea is a S I N spelled out in capital letters. And people in this country have the gaul to get all self righteous about a few superfluous embryos. As if we are the guardians of all that is good and great in the world. Hypocracy.

My solution is more frequent public oral sex between people who like each other, for the most part.

Believe me we are a long way from the Nirvanic attainment of a completely self regulated non violent society of large brained communicative upright men and women. Saving the unborn will do very little to cleans our human slates. Lets take baby steps. Instead of saving the unborn, lets end revenge killing(Capital Punishment). Perhaps when our legs are more steady we can tackle unnecessary foreign collateral bloodshed through and for American Imperialism(If you don't like this word, attempt if you will-- to explain how it violates(in its usage and meaning) the definition most often given to the word imperialism.

im·pe·ri·al·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (m-pîr--lzm)
n.
1)The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations.
2)The system, policies, or practices of such a government.

Willravel

Good post solowe1 (if a tiny bit preachy). I agree that we do a great deal of crap in this country, and that abortion is a tiny part of the problem. I think you might have veered off subject though. This is about the value of a child versus the value of a zygote. It is supposed to show a person if they are justified in claiming that they are pro life.

For me, pro life is about people taking responsibility for their bodies. [B[Freedom comes with responsibility[/B]. If you have the freedom to bone Justin, the high school quarterback, then you have the responsibility to take care of Justin Jr. You don't have the right to kill Jusstin Jr. just beacause you weren't ready. And I don't care for people who always say "but what if they're raped?!" For those who are fighting that urge, find out how many abortions worldwide are a direct result of rape, then come talk to me. If you think you're ready to have sex, then you better be ready to raise a child. Otherwise, keep your damned pants on and, like solowe1 said, go for oral.

Seaver

Ok why do we always have to explain this.

Pro-life people do not believe in saving ALL life, we believe in preserving the life of the good and innocent.

THAT is why we have no problem with the death pentalty, if they murder dozens of people their lives are nothing to be valued. A person who has committed no sin, hurt no person, done no wrong other than being alive does not deserve to die.

Your little spill about N. Korea? I support. However we have to fix Iraq before moving onto our next adventure. Apparently the mass murders and rape rooms are not a bother to the anti-death pentalty lot who oppose the war.

FoolThemAll

I'm not a supporter of the death penalty myself, but I don't see any problem of inconsistency with pro-lifers who support it.

As for the question, I choose the child. The child has a much better chance of survival once out of the building, having evaded all the risks of the unborn successfully. But that just shows a problem with the question. Perhaps a restructuring of the question?

__________________
I wonder if we're stuck in Rome.

host

Okay Seaver, you indicate that IYO, the description of a fertilized egg is reasonably interchangeable with "a young child" description.

What then, should the punishment be for the woman who aborts that "young child". Does the young child leave a legal entity, an "estate" that can pursue it's mother who killed it, for civil damages? If abortion is the taking of a life, is it murder? Why does the new South Dakota law, which defines life as beginning at the moment of fertilization of an egg by male sperm, provide no criminal penalty for a mother who "kills her", the fertilized egg inside the mother's body? Why is the doctor who performs the abortion violating the law against taking the life of a fertilized egg, and not the mother who conspires with the doctor to take a life, and pays him to do it?

The stock answer of public demonstrators in support of banning abortion, to some of the questions above, may surprise those who view the interviews:

http://www.atcenternetwork.com/?p=64

I submit that most folks who view abortion as <b>"Her mother is going to kill her."</b>, do not believe their own words. They do not believe that it is murder. They do not think through their position, yet they have few qualms about using what amounts to sensational descriptions to attempt to provoke an outcome and a set of consequences that they have not really considered. They themselves do not believe the core of their own, strongest argument against abortion. If I believed your description of abortion was a mother "killing her child", I would consider that decision to be murder or conspiracy to commit murder, and I would have answers to all of the questions that I asked above.

It is of great concern to me that the folks driving the debate, and now actually legislating the law, do not think about or believe thir own arguments enough to be consistant and coherent.

Willravel

I have a tremendous problem with both the death penalty and abortion. Where you hold innocenet life in high esteem (I certianally understand that), I hold all life in high esteem. If Hitler were put on trial after the final solution, and I were on the hypothetical jury, I would not be able to condem him to the death penalty. That's just me. I am personally confused by the stereotypical liberal view in which abortion is alright, but the death penalty is wrong. I see that as being contradictory.

My main concern about abortion is a combination of dehumanization of a fetus with a lack of acocuntability. The dehumanization point is endlessly debatable, but I doubt many can argue that a 16 year old girl who gets laid should be allowed to simply abort her problems away.

In the cases of rape condom break, and incest, there are ways to prevent the fertilization of the egg. You have 72 hours after intercourse to take a pill that will prevent the ovaries from releassing the egg. The success rate of that pill is roughtly 90%. It is a contraceptive, not an abortion pill. Bottom line: I don't see a need for abortion with the mornign after pill. Can you imagine if abortions were reduced by 90% over night?

Paq

i want my 6.5 minutes back.

This talk show host is ...damn, why does he have a job?

__________________
Live.

Chris

balderdash111

I hadn't actually meant to trigger an abortion debate here, since I know those tend to go nowhere. I had meant to provoke a discussion about the tactics of the talk show host (avoiding the question, going on the attack on unrelated issues, etc).

But I did want to respond to a couple of will's points, as there may be some confusion

I can't speak for all pro-choice people out there, but for me there is no contradiction here. I think you assume that we view both a murderer and a fertilized egg as a human life (and therefore it is contradictory to say killing one is ok, while killing another is not).

Personally, I don't view a fertilized egg as a "life." Yes, it is alive, in the sense of a living group of cells, but not in the sense of being a person.

Therefore, I don't see a contradiction between favoring a right to abortion while opposing the death penalty.



I think you are greatly oversimplifying the 16 year old's ability and motivation. It is not a simple procedure, so I don't think you can accuse someone of "simply aborting her problems away." I know some women who have had abortions, and it sucks. A lot.

Also, though obviously people differ on this, I have not known anyone to casually decide to have an abortion. Typically, they agonize over it before taking that step.



I'm not sure of your biology on the timing of fertilization and release from an ovary. I believe that eggs are fertilized well after they leave the ovary, but defer to those with superior knowledge if they can step in on this. What the pill does, as I understand it, is prevent the ovary from implanting in the uterine wall after it is fertilized. So it's sort of a forced miscarriage.

The contraceptive pill does do what you describe - prevent an ovary from releasing an egg during the monthly cycle, but that is different from the 72 hour pill you can take after having sex.

That said, I do recall once being told that a woman who is afraid of being pregnant can take an overdose of the latter pill, and what will cause a miscarriage of some kind.

Also, as a practical point: 72 hour pill aside, not everyone knows they have accidentally become pregnant right after it happens. The contraceptive pill does not always work, nor do various other types of birth control, and you would not know it until well over 72 hours have passed. So the 72 hour pill is helpful if you have reason to think you have an unwanted pregnancy during that time frame, but not otherwise.

__________________
A little silliness now and then is cherished by the wisest men. -- Willy Wonka

Willravel

I appretiate that.
I hope that I'm clear that I am only speaking for myself. I, personally, find pro life and pro death pentalty confusing, as well as pro choice anti death penalty. I know that a zygote isn't a person in the sticktest sense of the word, but the fact that the line is so fuzzy cuases me to er on the side of caution (I wouldn't want to be wrong about when "life" is formed). Abortion = killing of human life(?) that has less intrinsic valuem than the average human that's been born. Death penalty = killing of human life that, because of behavioral or mental problems, has less intrinsic value than the average human. I see those as fundamentally linked, but I respect those who don't.
The reason it sucks a lot is because their conscience says it migth have been wrong. I agree with their conscience. If you are old enough to have intercourse, you should be old enough to raise a child. Sex shouldn't be causal, espically at a young age.
Well the morning after pill and the "pill" are two different animals. As far as contraceptives, condoms, spermacide, and abstainence are pretty good. Forced miscarriage? I'm really not sure. I'll have to do some reading before I can be sure about that one. For now, let's say you're right.
The morning after pill is the pill that prevents fertinization by holding the release of the egg, and it can work up to 72 hours after intercourse (according to the nice folks at planned parenthood around the corner). If one has been raped and then takes this pill, odds are that she will not become pregnant. Combine the 90% success rate of the morning after pill with whatever odds there are of simply not getting pregnant because sex does not always result in successful fertilization...and there is a very good chance that rape pregnancies can be drastically reduced. If those pregnancies are reduced, then the need to abort drops. Combine that factor with accountability for intercourse between consenting people....and the abortion rate drops down to almost nothing.

balderdash111

Again, not looking to start an abortion debate.....

Sorry, I wasn't clear. When I say that the abortion sucks a lot, I wasn't referring to the moral struggle, but the physical aftermath. It is very unpleasant, from what I understand.



Again, not sure of your bio on the morning after pill - I think the egg is fertilized, but the morning after pill prevents it from implanting in the uterine wall. Not a big difference to me, but it may be a key difference to you if you are basing your opinion on whether the pill prevents fertilization or aborts a fertilized egg.

__________________
A little silliness now and then is cherished by the wisest men. -- Willy Wonka

pig

As far as the way the question was handled by the radio personality guy....doesn't surprise me. That seems sort of standard for a lot of the guys on radio, left or right. I wouldn't be surprised to hear Hannity or Glen Beck do it, or Sam Seder or Mike Malloy. You're behind the mic, you've got all the control.

As to the merits of the question posed, I think the question is perfectly legitimate and could be useful to help evaluate one's position on the relative "human-ness" of a zygote vs. a child. I don't think it's the full scale KO that the caller invisioned it being, or that the radio guy obviously was afraid it was. I think that you can take a position that you value the child's life more, and still maintain that wanton destruction of the zygotes is unethical. Sort of like if you asked me if I wanted you to cut off my penis or my thumb, and it *had* to be one or the other. Well shit, take my thumb. That doesn't mean I'm advocating for everyone to start cutting off their thumbs. I think that's essentially what Seaver said, I suppose.

On the general discussion about abortion, hopefully its not a threadjack in light of the above posts - I personally strugge with this one a lot. I'm not sure I'd like to be involved in a decision to get an abortion, but that ambiguity that willravel is talking about makes me land of the side of choice. I definately don't view the fertilized egg or fetus as a "person" until after birth. I don't know at what point I'd actually have reservations about destroying the vessel that would eventually contain a human spirit / soul. I guess I ultimately see it as a highly specialized organ of the females body, until after birth.

__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style