Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

Dark Avorian
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 10:48 pm UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Dark Avorian » Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:54 am UTC

Well of course! That may have been the weakest argument one could possibly muster against mine. However we do generally accept that the passive version of an action is less moral or less immoral than the active version OF THE SAME ACTION. Throwing water on a house does not have the same result as letting it burn down.
The 62-foot tall statue of Jesus constructed out of styrofoam, wood and fiberglass resin caught on fire after the right hand of the statue was struck by lightning.


meatyochre wrote:And yea, verily the forums crowd spake: "Teehee!"

User avatar
iop
Posts: 930
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:26 am UTC
Location: The ivory tower

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby iop » Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:54 am UTC

dedalus wrote:in fact, no-one has ever pushed for a woman to have an abortion when she hadn't made that decision herself, barring the case where it's a health risk to not have the abortion.

No-one ever? You mean, like, except China? Or parents of a pregnant teen (like a classmate of mine)?

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Nordic Einar » Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:55 am UTC

iop wrote:
dedalus wrote:in fact, no-one has ever pushed for a woman to have an abortion when she hadn't made that decision herself, barring the case where it's a health risk to not have the abortion.

No-one ever? You mean, like, except China? Or parents of a pregnant teen (like a classmate of mine)?


Because China and That Anecdote Of Yours are totally equatable to the Pro-Choice movement as a whole, amirite?

hanecter
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 12:02 am UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby hanecter » Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:58 am UTC

Nordic Einar wrote:
iop wrote:
dedalus wrote:in fact, no-one has ever pushed for a woman to have an abortion when she hadn't made that decision herself, barring the case where it's a health risk to not have the abortion.

No-one ever? You mean, like, except China? Or parents of a pregnant teen (like a classmate of mine)?


Because China and That Anecdote Of Yours are totally equatable to the Pro-Choice movement as a whole, amirite?

Oh hush.
Dedalus said no one. That's clearly not true. Iop provided a counterexample.

User avatar
iop
Posts: 930
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:26 am UTC
Location: The ivory tower

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby iop » Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:59 am UTC

Nordic Einar wrote:
iop wrote:
dedalus wrote:in fact, no-one has ever pushed for a woman to have an abortion when she hadn't made that decision herself, barring the case where it's a health risk to not have the abortion.

No-one ever? You mean, like, except China? Or parents of a pregnant teen (like a classmate of mine)?


Because China and That Anecdote Of Yours are totally equatable to the Pro-Choice movement as a whole, amirite?


No-one ever in the pro-choice movement in the US, ok. Still probably not true.

User avatar
Vash
Posts: 488
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 9:14 pm UTC
Location: The planet Gunsmoke

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Vash » Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:08 am UTC

OT:
Spoiler:
Dark Avorian wrote:Well of course! That may have been the weakest argument one could possibly muster against mine. However we do generally accept that the passive version of an action is less moral or less immoral than the active version OF THE SAME ACTION. Throwing water on a house does not have the same result as letting it burn down.


Killing a fetus does not have the same result as bodily invasion or death of the mother and fetus. In fact, there is no situation on the subject in which what you are saying is true.

The debate honestly should not even consider for a second that a fetus has any likelihood of being developed enough to receive consideration "as a life." The (incomplete) evidence says mainly that there is barely any development at all. Superfluous synaptic bridges are eliminated upon application of numerous stimuli (i.e. social interaction, a visually rich outside world, etc.)As for more complete evidence, even a baby is nothing more than reflexes until a good while after birth.

Hence throwing water on fire, or removing a semi-developed siamese twin.

Finally, mortal defense is allowed in many other contexts where there is a violation of bodily integrity.

iop wrote:No-one ever in the pro-choice movement in the US, ok. Still probably not true.


The pro-choice movement is not a eugenics movement. Any examples of eugenicists who support legal abortion is an example of eugenics; therefore, these are an irrelevant conclusion fallacy.


Back to the topic, perhaps the 20 weeks limitation is actually fishing for some other result in a judicial ruling?

Edit: Ninja edit spoilering OT material. I replied to Iop/Nordic Einar/Dedalus conversation and Avorion. Perhaps we shall continue in SRS BIZZZNIZZ or PM (not here, though).
Last edited by Vash on Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:15 am UTC, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
cephalopod9
Posts: 2029
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 7:23 am UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby cephalopod9 » Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:09 am UTC

Avorian, there are better places for that discussion,what we're talking about here is not philosophical abstracts, but real world legislation.
You don't need to know the exact conversion rate for potential babies to human suffering, you need to know that a political party that runs on a platform of personal freedom and less government intervention, is putting out laws that intrude in a major way on a woman's ability to make decisions about her body.
Image

User avatar
iop
Posts: 930
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:26 am UTC
Location: The ivory tower

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby iop » Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:17 am UTC

Vash wrote:The debate honestly should not even consider for a second that a fetus has any likelihood of being developed enough to receive consideration "as a life." The (incomplete) evidence says mainly that there is barely any development at all. Superfluous synaptic bridges are eliminated upon application of numerous stimuli (i.e. social interaction, a visually rich outside world, etc.)As for more complete evidence, even a baby is nothing more than reflexes until a good while after birth.

That's interesting. In other words, until about the age of 3 months, you wouldn't consider a baby alive?

EDIT
Back to the topic, perhaps the 20 weeks limitation is actually fishing for some other result in a judicial ruling?

Most likely they want to take this to the Supreme Court, now that there's a conservative majority. Anyway, if I were to assume only "good" motives, maybe they'd say that after 20-is weeks, a fetus starts to be viable outside the womb, and thus, from that time on, only "non-destructive" abortions should be considered?

User avatar
Vash
Posts: 488
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 9:14 pm UTC
Location: The planet Gunsmoke

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Vash » Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:27 am UTC

iop wrote:That's interesting. In other words, until about the age of 3 months, you wouldn't consider a baby alive?


Not by the anti-abortion definition of a life, is what I meant. Come to think of it, I suppose it is unavoidable to get into defining it, though. Anti-abortionists have varying reasons for their opinion.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=69302&p=2540475&hilit=abortion#p2540475

I am unclear as to what that means, but let's pick a thread?

iop wrote:Most likely they want to take this to the Supreme Court, now that there's a conservative majority. Anyway, if I were to assume only "good" motives, maybe they'd say that after 20-is weeks, a fetus starts to be viable outside the womb, and thus, from that time on, only "non-destructive" abortions should be considered?


The main way this would end up in the Supreme Court is if a lower court decides to make a completely unusual hearing (I mean a sort of unrelated ruling). The legality is obvious. This case has basically already been heard. 5-4 for 24 weeks. The vaguely related ruling on a different subject could end up being upheld by the Supreme Court. I would actually say it is a good idea to do an investigation into judges in some of these districts if possible, if that could be the plan.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby sourmìlk » Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:46 am UTC

Even if a fetus in the second trimester and an infant 2 months old have the same cognitive capacity, infanticide is still wrong because other people can / do have a connection with the infant (Even if it's one-sided). Only the mother has any connection to the fetus, only she can decide its value.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Princess Marzipan » Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:49 am UTC

Dark Avorian wrote:Pro-choice: A woman has a right to choose. She has the right to stop her life from going to complete shit from an unwanted pregnancy. She has the right to abort a child who may end up being unwanted and resented. She has control of her own body.

Pro-life: A baby is life. Abortion is ending a life. Killing a child is not the answer to the problems presented by the unwanted pregnancy.

Look at those two points. Really think about them. I mean shit, they're both damn convincing, and I respect the reasons of both sides. I may not respect the conclusion, but that's another thing. This issue is one where it isn't simple bigotry. We can't just say "Oh it's like intolerance and they're being unreasonable."

...

It almost hurts me to type this, because I don't believe the pro-life arguments myself, but I can't help but see why they'd think that. I'm sorry.
My Googlefu is weak tonight, but I saw an excellent blog post, uh, SOMEWHERE that took a look at all the various policies that the pro-life movement is for or against, and whether those policies make sense from the standpoint of treating abortion the same as killing as a four year old, or from treating abortion as an easy way out for women who need to be punished for having been dirty and had sex.

Obviously few pro-lifers actually think that way, or more accurately most don't think that they do think that way. But their policies are NOT pro-life, and ARE pro-punishing women for sex. (And if anyone here can find that link, I'll bookmark it and give you a cookie!)
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

hanecter
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 12:02 am UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby hanecter » Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:56 am UTC

sourmìlk wrote:Even if a fetus in the second trimester and an infant 2 months old have the same cognitive capacity, infanticide is still wrong because other people can / do have a connection with the infant (Even if it's one-sided). Only the mother has any connection to the fetus, only she can decide its value.

Okay. First, that's not why most people say that infanticide is wrong.
Second...how can you say the mother has the only connection to a fetus? I'm absolutely sure that there are many fathers (for example) who are devastated just as much by a miscarriage as the mother. I'd say they had a connection to a fetus. It certainly had value to them.

Shedek
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:33 pm UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Shedek » Fri Mar 25, 2011 3:04 am UTC


Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Princess Marzipan » Fri Mar 25, 2011 3:11 am UTC

YES!

I found you a cookie. But then this big blue dude punched me and stole it. :( You can have it if you can get it, though.
Spoiler:
Image
i wouldn't recommend trying
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

Shedek
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:33 pm UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Shedek » Fri Mar 25, 2011 3:18 am UTC

Princess Marzipan wrote:YES!

I found you a cookie. But then this big blue dude punched me and stole it. :( You can have it if you can get it, though.
Spoiler:
Image
i wouldn't recommend trying


I was completely prepared to defend my cookie, but then I looked into his eyes and saw murder.

*Cries*

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby sourmìlk » Fri Mar 25, 2011 4:18 am UTC

hanecter wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:Even if a fetus in the second trimester and an infant 2 months old have the same cognitive capacity, infanticide is still wrong because other people can / do have a connection with the infant (Even if it's one-sided). Only the mother has any connection to the fetus, only she can decide its value.

Okay. First, that's not why most people say that infanticide is wrong.

Then why is it wrong? To kill a self-aware human would be wrong because there are connections between the human and itself, it values itself. But with a non self-aware infant?

Second...how can you say the mother has the only connection to a fetus? I'm absolutely sure that there are many fathers (for example) who are devastated just as much by a miscarriage as the mother. I'd say they had a connection to a fetus. It certainly had value to them.


I am not familiar with these situations, but others might say that the father either a) values the fetus as potential life, or b) values it by proxy (i.e. through the mother).
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

hanecter
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 12:02 am UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby hanecter » Fri Mar 25, 2011 5:07 am UTC

sourmìlk wrote:Then why is it wrong? To kill a self-aware human would be wrong because there are connections between the human and itself, it values itself. But with a non self-aware infant?

If you want to discuss using your terms, the infant certainly forms bonds with other humans. Most notably, of course, its mother/primary caregiver.

I think most people feel that the infant has a right to life, that the fact that it is living is valuable and shouldn't be taken away except for in extreme, generally hypothetical and convoluted situations.

I am not familiar with these situations, but others might say that the father either a) values the fetus as potential life, or b) values it by proxy (i.e. through the mother).

So how does the connection the mother have with the fetus differ in any substantial way from the father?

EDIT: Just fixed quote tags. No content change.
Last edited by hanecter on Fri Mar 25, 2011 5:30 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Garm
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:29 pm UTC
Location: Usually at work. Otherwise, Longmont, CO.

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Garm » Fri Mar 25, 2011 5:21 am UTC

marky66 wrote:
Garm wrote:Glad to see the Republicans are creating jobs, energizing the economy, and shrinking the government like the promised.

whoever wrote the article wrote:Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states
(emphasis mine)
What specific Republican promises are you referring to?


There are anti-abortion bills being run around at the federal level as well but what it boils down to is that the Republicans benefited from a down economy during a mid-term election on both the state and national level. Most (but not all) ran on an economic message or on an anti-Obama/incumbent platform. Instead of trying to improve their states (or the country), Republican lawmakers have wasted massive amounts of taxpayer money on bills relating to various culture wars (gay marriage, abortion, unions).
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
- JFK

User avatar
buddy431
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 5:21 pm UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby buddy431 » Fri Mar 25, 2011 5:36 am UTC

I never understood why people make such a big deal about killing babies. Infanticide has been an acceptable means of population control for thousands of years. Even in relatively recent times in the UK (18th and 19th century), abandoning children for economic reasons has been seen as somewhat acceptable.

At least those who are against abortion are being logically consistent in this regard. If you really do believe that killing any person is extremely bad, and that fetuses and young babies are really "people", then sure, it's reasonable to oppose both abortion and infanticide.

But if you're willing to allow abortions, especially late term abortions, then what possible significance does it have what side of the vagina the kid's on?

Spoiler:
Yeah, I'm posting flamebait on purpose. I realize that there are significant differences whether a baby is still inside a woman's body or outside, and that most people are much less accepting of late term abortions than aborting early in the pregnancy. But it always seemed silly to me that abortion debates tend to be framed around "any abortion's OK (but usually not killing them after they come out)" vs. "all abortion is evil and must be banned". Like most issues, there are not so much two sides as a continuum, but the middle tends to get shoved out of the discussion
Gellert1984 wrote:Also, bomb president CIA al qaeda JFK twin towers jupiter moon martians [s]emtex.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby sourmìlk » Fri Mar 25, 2011 5:37 am UTC

hanecter wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:Then why is it wrong? To kill a self-aware human would be wrong because there are connections between the human and itself, it values itself. But with a non self-aware infant?

If you want to discuss using your terms, the infant certainly forms bonds with other humans. Most notably, of course, its mother/primary caregiver.

One might argue on the level of mental sophistication that requires (baby chicks can do it), so the reality of that connection is debatable. But for now, I'll give that to you.

I think most people feel that the infant has a right to life, that the fact that it is living is valuable and shouldn't be taken away except for in extreme, generally hypothetical and convoluted situations.
I am not familiar with these situations, but others might say that the father either a) values the fetus as potential life, or b) values it by proxy (i.e. through the mother).

So how does the connection the mother have with the fetus differ in any substantial way from the father?


The mother can actually feel the fetus: it subconsciously affects her emotions and cravings and such. There is interaction going on, even if only on a chemical level.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
dedalus
Posts: 1169
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:16 pm UTC
Location: Dark Side of the Moon.

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby dedalus » Fri Mar 25, 2011 6:20 am UTC

You know, I swear we had this discussion like... A week ago.

Also, to clarify my statement, I was talking about in the US (and I guess that extends to the Western world), and I'll refine 'everyone' to 'people who aren't connected with the babies birth'. Does that suit better?
doogly wrote:Oh yea, obviously they wouldn't know Griffiths from Sakurai if I were throwing them at them.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby sourmìlk » Fri Mar 25, 2011 9:14 am UTC

dedalus wrote:You know, I swear we had this discussion like... A week ago.

youmustbenewhere.jpg
youmustbenewhere.jpg (82.04 KiB) Viewed 6199 times
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Xeio » Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:27 pm UTC

buddy431 wrote:But if you're willing to allow abortions, especially late term abortions, then what possible significance does it have what side of the vagina the kid's on?
All of it.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4581
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby LaserGuy » Fri Mar 25, 2011 3:55 pm UTC

iop wrote:
Vash wrote:The debate honestly should not even consider for a second that a fetus has any likelihood of being developed enough to receive consideration "as a life." The (incomplete) evidence says mainly that there is barely any development at all. Superfluous synaptic bridges are eliminated upon application of numerous stimuli (i.e. social interaction, a visually rich outside world, etc.)As for more complete evidence, even a baby is nothing more than reflexes until a good while after birth.


That's interesting. In other words, until about the age of 3 months, you wouldn't consider a baby alive?


Alive is probably not the concept trying to be conveyed. Bacteria are alive. Sentient is probably what is being referred to.

There's an interesting aside that I'll just add to this. We (for the most part) have no problems killing creatures with much higher levels of sentience than infants, such as full-grown pigs, which apparently have somewhat comparable faculties to chimpanzees (and are better at video games), and children of a few years of age . Yet we generally have no problem with the idea of killing them for food, but would be horrified about the prospect of killing children of similar (or less) mental capacity.

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby podbaydoor » Fri Mar 25, 2011 4:09 pm UTC

cephalopod9 wrote: Lastly,
At that hearing, two pregnant women underwent ultrasounds so lawmakers could see and hear the fetal hearts.
That this is a real thing that happened is something I can't quite comprehend.

By the way, the ultrasound specialist had to struggle for a while because she couldn't find a heartbeat at first. During the uncomfortable moment, the anti-choice activist presiding over the demonstration assured the lawmakers that this in no way negated her claims about viability.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3988
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Dauric » Fri Mar 25, 2011 4:14 pm UTC

podbaydoor wrote:
cephalopod9 wrote: Lastly,
At that hearing, two pregnant women underwent ultrasounds so lawmakers could see and hear the fetal hearts.
That this is a real thing that happened is something I can't quite comprehend.

By the way, the ultrasound specialist had to struggle for a while because she couldn't find a heartbeat at first. During the uncomfortable moment, the anti-choice activist presiding over the demonstration assured the lawmakers that this in no way negated her claims about viability.


I just want to know what issue will result in a live demonstration of a fucksaw in congress.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5926
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Angua » Fri Mar 25, 2011 4:19 pm UTC

The heart tube may be beating at that stage, but if I showed it to most people, they wouldn't be able to tell that it was even going to be a heart one day, the waves of contraction are fairly similar to what it looks like in the intestines - it looks nothing like a heart, it's a tube with a V on either end :P
Crabtree's bludgeon: “no set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated”
GNU Terry Pratchett

User avatar
Levi
Posts: 1294
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:12 am UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Levi » Fri Mar 25, 2011 4:50 pm UTC

I suggest we delineate based on the time at which the first gram of material is processed by the liver.

User avatar
jules.LT
Posts: 1539
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 8:20 pm UTC
Location: Paris, France, Europe

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby jules.LT » Fri Mar 25, 2011 5:00 pm UTC

buddy431 wrote:But if you're willing to allow abortions, especially late term abortions, then what possible significance does it have what side of the vagina the kid's on?

Because there isn't one single point in the development from a single cell to a grown human being where you can say "NOW he's a human being, so killing it is murder!"

You have to pick an arbitrary limit. Birth is the most natural threshold that comes to mind, but is usually considered too late. So lawmakers have to pick a number of weeks of gestation.
Bertrand Russell wrote:Not to be absolutely certain is, I think, one of the essential things in rationality.
Richard Feynman & many others wrote:Keep an open mind – but not so open that your brain falls out

Greyarcher
Posts: 708
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:03 am UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Greyarcher » Fri Mar 25, 2011 5:18 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:There's an interesting aside that I'll just add to this. We (for the most part) have no problems killing creatures with much higher levels of sentience than infants, such as full-grown pigs, which apparently have somewhat comparable faculties to chimpanzees (and are better at video games), and children of a few years of age . Yet we generally have no problem with the idea of killing them for food, but would be horrified about the prospect of killing children of similar (or less) mental capacity.
Hmm, we don't have a particular interest in eating human babies though.

That said, I do indeed value sentience as well as consistency. I'd be willing to weigh pros, cons, and arguments if some circumstance arose and infanticide was proposed as a solution. The number of situations where it would be necessary or beneficial seem to be low though.
In serious discussion, I usually strive to post with clarity, thoroughness, and precision so that others will not misunderstand; I strive for dispassion and an open mind, the better to avoid error.

User avatar
Vash
Posts: 488
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 9:14 pm UTC
Location: The planet Gunsmoke

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Vash » Fri Mar 25, 2011 5:33 pm UTC

There is no way that at any time any person has the right to use the body of another. What you could say is that a woman could induce at any time, but if you then do pre-term medical care it will impose a great economic cost (leading other people to die earlier). It also could lead to possible mental or physical defects in the pre-term baby. That would mean both a difficult life for that baby and a higher societal cost (again shortening the lives of others). By the way, I am talking about length of life since death itself is a moot point at the moment. Adoption also could possibly just increase the number of orphans. Forcing someone to raise a child in an unfavorable situation is also not kind to them or economically ideal (not to mention a violation of freedom).

To speak of the example of cannibalism cited previously, it actually would be justified for that person to defend themselves (even if they had to kill someone in the process).

As I mentioned in a previous thread, a fetus does not necessarily have the right to use the mother's vagina to pass a head through. Unwilling or not, severe harm to the mother (extreme pain, for example) is defensible by whatever means are possible.

buddy431 wrote:I never understood why ...


Abandoning children is actually probably a worse practice in the sense that they will grow up and have mental health issues. So, when they are sentient they will be miserable (and make many other people miserable as well).

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Heisenberg » Fri Mar 25, 2011 5:58 pm UTC

Princess Marzipan wrote:look at all the various policies that the pro-life movement is for or against, and whether those policies make sense from the standpoint of treating abortion the same as killing as a four year old, or from treating abortion as an easy way out for women who need to be punished for having been dirty and had sex.

Policy =/= Position.
Spoiler:
Let's say the climate change folks really want to pass a bill to severely restrict emissions. Great, but they represent a minority. However, a majority will agree to passing the Clean Air Act, which would help regulate emissions overall, but not specifically target greenhouse gas emissions. This argument would say that if the climate lobby pushed through the Clean Air Act, that would be conclusive proof that the Greenhouse Effect was a great big lie, and that their policies show that they don't care about the environment, they just hate oil companies. Or something.

So when you ask "Why do you allow funding for abortions for rape victims?", one answer may be "Because we secretly agree with all those pro-choice folks but we're really out to punish women", while a more likely answer would be "Because otherwise we can't get it through the Senate, and we'd rather do something than nothing." Politicians' stances are inconsistent (voting for the war before you voted against it). This does not illegitimize the position of the advocates of the policy, it simply tells you that politicians will say anything to get elected.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4581
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby LaserGuy » Fri Mar 25, 2011 6:06 pm UTC

Greyarcher wrote:
LaserGuy wrote:There's an interesting aside that I'll just add to this. We (for the most part) have no problems killing creatures with much higher levels of sentience than infants, such as full-grown pigs, which apparently have somewhat comparable faculties to chimpanzees (and are better at video games), and children of a few years of age . Yet we generally have no problem with the idea of killing them for food, but would be horrified about the prospect of killing children of similar (or less) mental capacity.


Hmm, we don't have a particular interest in eating human babies though.

That said, I do indeed value sentience as well as consistency. I'd be willing to weigh pros, cons, and arguments if some circumstance arose and infanticide was proposed as a solution. The number of situations where it would be necessary or beneficial seem to be low though.


I'm not sure whether or not the eating issue is really relevant, to be honest. Let me try it this way: What arguments do you believe can be made that would justify preventing a person from terminating a fetus that could also not be applied to killing a pig, given that a pig is almost certainly more self-aware than the fetus is?

User avatar
Vash
Posts: 488
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 9:14 pm UTC
Location: The planet Gunsmoke

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Vash » Fri Mar 25, 2011 6:17 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:I'm not sure whether or not the eating issue is really relevant, to be honest. Let me try it this way: What arguments do you believe can be made that would justify preventing a person from terminating a fetus that could also not be applied to killing a pig, given that a pig is almost certainly more self-aware than the fetus is?


I would frame that slightly differently: combining the want to terminate pregnancy with killing a fetus and comparing that to the want to eat with killing a pig, wouldn't it be acceptable for the same kind of reason, especially if it comes down to economic safety/livelihood? (you already included the other part of the argument so I will not)

Greyarcher
Posts: 708
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:03 am UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Greyarcher » Fri Mar 25, 2011 6:43 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:I'm not sure whether or not the eating issue is really relevant, to be honest. Let me try it this way: What arguments do you believe can be made that would justify preventing a person from terminating a fetus that could also not be applied to killing a pig, given that a pig is almost certainly more self-aware than the fetus is?
Waaait, how did we get to those arguments? I was talking about arguments for permitting infanticide, in response to a comparison between animals we are okay killing and infants. Arguments for preventing abortion aren't even related.
In serious discussion, I usually strive to post with clarity, thoroughness, and precision so that others will not misunderstand; I strive for dispassion and an open mind, the better to avoid error.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4581
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby LaserGuy » Fri Mar 25, 2011 6:59 pm UTC

Greyarcher wrote:
LaserGuy wrote:I'm not sure whether or not the eating issue is really relevant, to be honest. Let me try it this way: What arguments do you believe can be made that would justify preventing a person from terminating a fetus that could also not be applied to killing a pig, given that a pig is almost certainly more self-aware than the fetus is?


Waaait, how did we get to those arguments? I was talking about arguments for permitting infanticide, in response to a comparison between animals we are okay killing and infants. Arguments for preventing abortion aren't even related.


From a pro-life point of view, the arguments for preventing infanticide and the arguments for preventing abortion are identical. That's sort of the whole point, in my understanding.

Greyarcher
Posts: 708
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:03 am UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Greyarcher » Fri Mar 25, 2011 7:22 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:From a pro-life point of view, the arguments for preventing infanticide and the arguments for preventing abortion are identical. That's sort of the whole point, in my understanding.
Oh, I see. No no, I just thought the infanticide/pig-killing comparison was an interesting aside, and was looking purely at the moral/consistency issues and other arguments people would face when considering permitting infanticide.

I'm not too concerned about the consistency issues that pro-lifers face. From what I recall, they'd probably just go with things like placing value specifically on human life insofar as it's human, or perhaps something else.
In serious discussion, I usually strive to post with clarity, thoroughness, and precision so that others will not misunderstand; I strive for dispassion and an open mind, the better to avoid error.

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5926
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby Angua » Thu Apr 17, 2014 8:19 am UTC

Judge overturns North Dakota abortion law, which didn't allow any abortions if a heartbeat could be detected.

"The United States Supreme Court has spoken and has unequivocally said no state may deprive a woman of the choice to terminate her pregnancy at a point prior to viability," Judge Hovland wrote in his ruling.
Crabtree's bludgeon: “no set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated”
GNU Terry Pratchett

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:56 pm UTC

Hooray, but how long will the judge keep his job? "Activist judge" and all.

jareds
Posts: 436
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:56 pm UTC

Re: Wave of anti-abortion bills advance in the states

Postby jareds » Thu Apr 17, 2014 9:25 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Hooray, but how long will the judge keep his job? "Activist judge" and all.

Until impeachment and conviction in the US Senate, voluntary resignation or retirement, or death.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests