If that person has no chance (or a statistically insignificant chance) of regaining any consciousness, I would remove life support. I don't pretend to speak for all people who think abortions are murder. I really don't know when the soul enters the body. But yes, it leaves at death.
Thank you for answering my questions in a civil way. I honestly do appreciate it. When I first started coming I had a very low and stereotypical opinion of people against abortion. Thanks to the many threads over the years I do actually understand and can empathize with people who are against abortion. I still disagree on a number of fundamental points but because of civil discourse I no longer dismiss the idea and it's proponents without a second thought. Yelling and finger wagging just make people dig in to their positions and prevents real thought. The idea of exactly what a soul consists of and how it works is always an interesting topic because so many people seem to have different opinions. And the definitions are definitely related to this issue.
Tough question, since I don't know the success rate of implanting a fertilized ova. If that rate was over 1/3 and I somehow knew for a fact that they were going to be implanted (as opposed to all the ones that are being discarded) I would probably save the three ova. More than one life is greater than one life. Of course, I would probably try to save both, even if it meant getting killed in the process, but that wouldn't answer your question.
I know you had to come up with a situation out of the blue so you didn't intend for it to be a direct representation but I think there is a difference between a fertilized ova not implanted in a human and a fertilized ova already growing in a human. That would be a factor in the decision. If you leave the ova outside the body alone, it doesn't grow into a human. The one already inside the human will (most likely).
I honestly wouldn't have predicted the last two responses in 1,000,000 years. Very interesting by themselves and they also raise many 'what if' scenarios that I wouldn't have thought of otherwise. Thanks.
I feel a bit sorry for Sishir. I thought his thread would blow up, and this one did, instead. Maybe I should say I'm happy for Sishir, lol! As for the hypothetical above, I can't believe, with all due respect, that anyone could even think about hesitating bringing the month old baby out first. Good grief... grabbing some mechanical devices instead is just plain insane. In my opinion. Have whoever would grab the mechanical gizmos first ever had a month old baby in their arms? They honestly can't see a difference? Incredible. Keep D&D Civil.
It isn't grabbing mechanical devices. No one is saying they will take a defibrilator and leave the baby, it is weighing 1 life against 3 with less chance of survival.
...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... No. Death in any form should never be legal. From conception, to infant, to toddler, to child, teen, adult, middle-aged, retiree, octogenarian, etc. No to abortion, no to euthanasia, no to all words synonymous with murder disguised as medicine.
Wow. Someone medically and scientifically hopeless to recover and only experience intense pain until their last breath should not have the right to make the call themselves. I wouldn't want a doctor of me or my family with that perspective.
A man who can control his ejaculate will have control of his finances wrt what you are talking about.
If you think that abortion gets a woman out of parenthood "dree," then you are sorely mistaken. I agree that they both could take measures, but if a man wants to avoid even the possibility of child support, he has that ability. That is his responsibility and his right. If he chooses to engage in risky behavior, that is his choice, but HIS choice ends there. At that point, the woman still has a right to choose but the man's rights ended when he left his seed inside her.
I never said the woman was "blameless." Had I made that statement, it would indeed have made no sense. As long as you don't try to force your opinions on me, I am perfectly OK with that. Yes, of course. If he did not know how to use it properly, did not know how to use backup methods (spermicidal lubricant with a condom), or whatever, it is ultimately his responsibility to MAKE SURE that the birth control method he is using is as effective as possible in the context of wanting to protect HIS OWN PERSONAL interests. They are both responsible for the pregnancy, but the statement you are objecting to had to do with child support, nothing else.
No, I do not force anyone to have an abortion. At this point in my life, I would not suggest that my partner have one and I would counsel just about anyone who asked me to avoid abortion. There is a MASSIVE difference between that and forcing your moralistic beliefs regarding when life begins on the rest of society, MOST OF WHOM DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU!!! You are the one attempting to force your opinion and your belief system on others, I am standing up for the rights that Americans have to choose for themselves how best to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. It is not society's place to enfore your limited moralism on people who do not believe the same things that you do. You are welcome to believe what you like, but don't try to force those beliefs on other people.
Well said. I have a LOT of appreciation for many of the posters here (MadMax is at the top of that list) who have had reasonable, thought provoking discussions on this issue, which could be one of the most contentious of the issues facing our society. Thank you all for helping me to crystallize my opinion completely with the discussions here.
If the pursuit of happiness leads one to decide on abortion or euthanasia, they should be allowed that choice. Have you ever seen someone in such intractable pain that even Oxycontin fails to relieve it completely? Go seek someone like that out and tell me that euthanasia is a bad thing.
Agreed. I do not think Abortion is a good thing, but there are defenitly situations were it is the best choice. But i do understand that people do not agree with that. Euthanasia is another thing, i do not understand why people think it is bad to help someone who wants to die, because they are is that much pain. Isn't it better that that person can finally find rest, then that he suffers for some more time, or just kills himself(if he is able to do that). If somebody really is suffering and really wants to die, why should we be so cruel to let him continue the suffering? Sorry that was offtopic, so i will not start an entire discussion about euthanasia.
You seem to have misunderstood me on this one. If a woman does not want to have the responsibility of bearing and raising a child, she has every right to control what happens in her own body. The major difference is that everyone in America save the depraved sickos you referenced agree that kidnapping, child sex rings, and pedophilia are wrong. A majority of us believe that abortion is acceptable given certain conditions. Even if it wasn't a majority, if half or 40% of the countrydoes not believe that abortion, in and of itself, is wrong, what gives you the right to push your moralism on them? I disagree. There are certainly a lot of things that are wrong because of our social norms and you have named a few. However, abortion obviously doesn't belong in that category as evidenced by the fact that over half the country thinks it should remain legal. A "social norm" by the very definition of the term implies that virtually every person in the society believes in that particular "norm." This is clearly not the case with abortion. If doctors were killing off "newborns" I would agree with you on the "social crime," but we are not talking about that, we are talking about abortion. Those doctors and nurses have every right to avoid performing abortions, nobody will ever put a gun to their head and compel them to abort a fetus. However, you have no right to force someone who does not share your belifs to comply with them through threat, which is what a government ban would do. I have not made the claim that there is only one set of "tissue," I am saying that the woman has the right to decide what goes on inside her own body. She has the right to choose whether or not to use her uterus to bring a fetus to term and bear it. I realize that there is separate DNA and tissue, but it is still the mother's choice whether to nurture that fetus for 9 months to 18+ years. For a woman who chooses to bring the fetus to term and bear it, the doctor has the responsibility to make sure that everything goes as well as possible. For a woman who chooses not to bring the fetus to term, her doctor has the responsibility to comply with her wishes. Two different sets of ethics, two different types of doctors, two different choices. The difference comes with the choice. Once a woman chooses to bring the fetus to term and bear it, the doctor has the responsibility to comply with the woman's wishes and to do his/her level best to make sure that what emerges is a healthy baby girl/boy. If a woman chooses abortion, her doctor has the responsibility to carry out those wishes instead. It is not your choice to make. You see it as "killing an unborn baby," but not everyone shares your moralism and moreover, nobody is obligated to share it. You may see the choice of abortion as "horrible," but you have no right to force that view on anyone else. I disagree. I personally see late term abortions as wrong, particularly in the case where the fetus is viable. I would fully support a ban that would already be in place if it were not for the intransigence of the GOP with regards to a health exception. Different doctors have different ethics and you don't have a right to force your moralism on them. Ultimately, we do take on responsibility for those choices. As you well know, the road for women who have had abortions is not exactly carefree or devoid of regret. However, they still have the right to make that choice, even if it will cause sadness later on. You see it is "kill[ing] someone innocent," but not everyone views it that way and you have no right to force your beliefs on another person. I have never said that abortion is a "responsible" choice. It is obviously a choice made because of some measure of irresponsibility. However, some people's morality allows them to see it as the "right" path to take. You don't have the right to force your morality on those people. You hit the nail on the head here. The CHOICE TO CONCIEVE. Neither do I. Sex has its consequences and I will teach my children this as they grow up. However, the choice extends beyond "to sex it up or not to sex it up." That is reality. I do believe that better sex education for our young people combined with universally available contraception would help people to make more responsible choices, but due to the state of medical technology today, the choice extends past sex for the woman. I have very deliberatly stated that the woman has the right to choose what happens in her bosy. I am not claiming that the fetus is PART of her body at all. It was easy when my wife was pregnant. We CHOSE for her to get pregnant, so the fetus was deserving of protection and we (plus our OB/GYN) were responsible for taking care of it and doing everything possible to make sure that it emerged as a healthy baby. For a woman who has made the choice to abort, the doctor's responsibility is to carry out her wishes. As I do not have any hard feelings wowards those who would choose not to have abortions. I get upset when people try to make those decisions for other people. Find a solution that does not mandate that a woman use her uterus to bring a fetus to term and bear it under threat of force. And work like this is invaluable. I don't see a problem with attempting to convince women to bear children to put up for adoption. I have a problem with the government stepping in and making a medical procedure that should be between a woman and her doctor illegal. When a woman has sex, it is in her past and cannot be changed. She still has a choice to set her future course if she believes that abortion is the right thing for her to do. You would be more than welcome to try to convince her to take another course of action, but you have NO right whatsoever to compel her to bring the fetus to term and bear it under threat of force.
