Jim Stillman
NevarAbortion quandaries abound.
September 4th 2007 19:58
I have become engaged in posting and commenting upon the right of a woman to seek and obtain an abortion, which I am defining as an intentional termination of a pregnancy. Several writers have expressed their point of view indirectly by suggesting Democratic candidates want to kill babies! Not only is this silly, but it hides the real issues in the abortion rights debate.
At the outset, let me explain that, generally, my personal view is that a woman has the exclusive right, after consultation with religious counselors, parents, the prospective father, or anyone else, to make the determination to continue or terminate a pregnancy.
I understand and appreciate that many people, including pregnant women, believe that any voluntary termination of pregnancy is anathema to them for a number of reasons, often expressed as a termination of a life. Those views are consistent with the belief that life is created at the moment of conception, the joinder of egg and sperm. In that view, issues of viability become irrelevant. (Many of the more conservative authors on these pages have been vocal in their condemnation of those who would allow pregnant women to exercise some degree of choice.)
In my opinion, this belief in equating of embryo with a fetus with a living child creates a number of problems that the “pro-life” movement has failed to address. This is a suggestion that these problems and issues be openly and logically discussed.
Most people accept that certain exceptions to the prohibition of rape do exist. There is precedent for excusing the killing of a human being, and, to some extent, they could be applicable and applied here.
Generally, a person may kill another if the killing were in self-defense. Thus, there is a generally accepted excuse for an abortion, even at a late stage, if the pregnancy is terminated to save the life of the mother. If one accepts the fetus as living person, then can the relative values and “worth” of the mother and yet-unborn child be compared? If that comparison is found to be offensive, then what if the choice is the life of the fetus and the physical or emotional health of the mother?
Another exception often allowed by pro-life adherents is in connection with a pregnancy as a result of rape. If one feels that rape would excuse an abortion, he or she risks being caught in an ethical and logical mess.
One last quandary to be addressed is the legal consequences of treating the fetus as the same as a living person.
Would an early term abortion constitute murder on the part of the mother who makes that choice or on the part of the physician? Are you prepared to imprison a woman who has had an abortion; a mother would certainly be prosecuted for willfully killing an infant. A doctor who participated in the killing of a live child several months old would certainly be subject to prosecution. What punishment will be imposed upon a pregnant woman who ingests a drug in the belief that the pregnancy will terminate?
What if the pregnant woman acts in a manner inconsistent with the health and even life of the unborn child? Once the child is born, there are statutes and policies in place to prevent, or punish, child abuse or neglect. Suppose the woman’s doctor warns her of serious aspects of the pregnancy and directs her to take medicine or get extra rest and she does not take the medicine and goes to a disco every night, remaining until dawn. She suffers a miscarriage, likely due to her failure to take measures to protect the fetus from harm. Will we prosecute her for murder? What if the pregnant woman continues to smoke or drink or refuses to take prescribed vitamins, all legal behaviors. Can she be arrested for endangering her child? If a fetus is the same as a living child, it should follow.
I respectfully ask that these points be discussed.
At the outset, let me explain that, generally, my personal view is that a woman has the exclusive right, after consultation with religious counselors, parents, the prospective father, or anyone else, to make the determination to continue or terminate a pregnancy.
I understand and appreciate that many people, including pregnant women, believe that any voluntary termination of pregnancy is anathema to them for a number of reasons, often expressed as a termination of a life. Those views are consistent with the belief that life is created at the moment of conception, the joinder of egg and sperm. In that view, issues of viability become irrelevant. (Many of the more conservative authors on these pages have been vocal in their condemnation of those who would allow pregnant women to exercise some degree of choice.)
In my opinion, this belief in equating of embryo with a fetus with a living child creates a number of problems that the “pro-life” movement has failed to address. This is a suggestion that these problems and issues be openly and logically discussed.
Most people accept that certain exceptions to the prohibition of rape do exist. There is precedent for excusing the killing of a human being, and, to some extent, they could be applicable and applied here.
Generally, a person may kill another if the killing were in self-defense. Thus, there is a generally accepted excuse for an abortion, even at a late stage, if the pregnancy is terminated to save the life of the mother. If one accepts the fetus as living person, then can the relative values and “worth” of the mother and yet-unborn child be compared? If that comparison is found to be offensive, then what if the choice is the life of the fetus and the physical or emotional health of the mother?
Another exception often allowed by pro-life adherents is in connection with a pregnancy as a result of rape. If one feels that rape would excuse an abortion, he or she risks being caught in an ethical and logical mess.
One last quandary to be addressed is the legal consequences of treating the fetus as the same as a living person.
Would an early term abortion constitute murder on the part of the mother who makes that choice or on the part of the physician? Are you prepared to imprison a woman who has had an abortion; a mother would certainly be prosecuted for willfully killing an infant. A doctor who participated in the killing of a live child several months old would certainly be subject to prosecution. What punishment will be imposed upon a pregnant woman who ingests a drug in the belief that the pregnancy will terminate?
What if the pregnant woman acts in a manner inconsistent with the health and even life of the unborn child? Once the child is born, there are statutes and policies in place to prevent, or punish, child abuse or neglect. Suppose the woman’s doctor warns her of serious aspects of the pregnancy and directs her to take medicine or get extra rest and she does not take the medicine and goes to a disco every night, remaining until dawn. She suffers a miscarriage, likely due to her failure to take measures to protect the fetus from harm. Will we prosecute her for murder? What if the pregnant woman continues to smoke or drink or refuses to take prescribed vitamins, all legal behaviors. Can she be arrested for endangering her child? If a fetus is the same as a living child, it should follow.
I respectfully ask that these points be discussed.
| 61 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by katyzzz
Photography Tips
MS Paint Art
Both men and women need to learn how to be more mindful of creating life.
I don't think the young think and moderate their behaviour too much at all. And so often come to that position without really knowing what they are about.
Responsibility is the by-product of the exercise of freedom.
I think it has got tucked away in the Dictionary and forgotten.
These are viable, healthy babies we are talking about and whatever the decision it is usually mother and baby who pay the price, with father disappearing into the wide unknown.
Men's behaviour is rarely discussed in these debates.
I've probably said too much already, but I am not really interested in engaging in repetitive semantics.
And, actually, at the end of the day, who cares about yours or any other opinion anyway. These debates have been going backwards for years.
Sad realities of life.
katyzzz
Comment by Jesse Mitchell
First of all, when people call the fetus a lump of tissue that is true... the first tissue to form in the first week to fourth month are nerves. Imagine that, doesn't it hurt you when you have nerves exposed in your mouth from a cavity to get hot/cold or food stuck in it? Imagine what the baby feels. Also the heart beat starts early in the first trimester. By the time a woman usually finds out that she is pregnant it has a heart beat. This surely signifies life beyond any doubt.
I do believe that doctors and mothers should be held accountable. Doctors who perform abortions should lose their license the first time and face jail for every time after. I believe that a woman should be forced to give up her reproductive rights with sterilization if she chooses to kill another just for convenience.
The fact is that pregnancies resulting in rape are rare (in some countries like USA) and besides there are adoption agencies willing to find good homes for the babies. If we are to hold babies accountable for their parent's actions such as rape then we should do it to everyone not just those that are unborn, let's not be discriminatory. Here, I am instituting your logic. If we are going to only kill some people for being the product of rape should we send people out to level the playing field and make it fair? Africa along with other third world countries would be all but wiped out... and the world population would significantly decrease.
As for the mother who neglects to take care of herself while pregnant. Obviously the person who placed here in this post was not "mother material" and should not have babies. Therefore I do think that punishment of neglect and endangerment resulting in the death of a child should be enforced and any other children she has been taken from her and given to good homes.
Unfortunately we are allowing life to be viewed as nothing important at all in the allowing of murder by labeling it with 'justified' names like abortion. And it may be silly in reality but democrats DO support abortion in all stages of life from the heart beat to the sucking of thumbs inside the womb. And the new candidates like Obama and Hillary support the killing of the baby once it has been born if the mother tried to abort but it failed. This is being called 'justified euthanasia'. It is planning to being observed as a legal choice within the first year or two of the new presidential term if democrats are elected. So, my question to you is where does it stop? If you are allowed to kill children under some laws then what about others. Obviously the babies are alive if they have heart beats right? What right does anyone have to stop another beating heart?
Comment by S.L. Bradish
Antiseptic terms like "termination of a pregnancy" and "removal of tissue" are great ways to dehumanize the victims. Sort of like Hitlers "final solution", don't you think? From what you have said, apparently you have the misguided notion that women who "choose" to kill their children give it deep consideration and consult with family, friends and clergy before doing it. Wrong. I have known several women who "exercised their right to choose." Not one of them gave a damn about consulting with anyone. They use it as a method of "birth control." After all, it's free with Planned Parenthood, safe (we don't want the "poor women" suffering any consequenses, do we?) and not only legal, but applauded as a "wise and sensible choice." From that perspective, all women must be free to kill their children with impunity, right? So, where are the shrines to those herioc women like Susan Smith and Andrea Yates? After all, they only did what the liberals think is their right, didn't they? Really late term abortions, of course... like several months or years after the birth. But those are the same children you would have approved killing up to their due date, right?
I suppose you support Dr. Tiller, the Baby Killer, as well...? He does abortions up to the due date even on girls in their early teens. Can't be bothered to report it, either, after all if the "fathers" of the dead babies keep impregnating underage girls, he can keep profiting by killing their children. Are you aware that Barak Obama goes to the same "church" as Tiller? Very religious, huh? Lets share a pew with someone who kills full term babies and doesn't report rape.
Any woman who kills heer child should be steriziled, lose her other kids, and go to jail. Murder is murder. Simple as that. As for women who fail to take care of themselves while pregnant, it ammounts to the same exact thing as OOOpppsss, I left the baby in the car all day and he died from the heat... or cold. Or, gee, I didn't know I was supposed to feed him... Great excuses, huh? The doctors who commit abortions should be prosecuted for murder. That is, the taking of an innocent life, isn't it?
To suggest that libs/dems aren't infavor of abortion is the same thing as saying the Nazi party didn't mean any harm to the Jews, Jim. Hell, what's a little holocaust, right?
Comment by Jim Stillman
In any event, I abhor abortion as just another contraceptive device. I am not so certain that a pregnant woman who smokes or has a drink -- stupid acts certainly – should be jailed.
The problem with being a liberal (not a dem-lib, please) is that many of us do not see all issues in black/white choices, rather in shades of gray. For the record, before a contrary statement is made, I find nothing good about the Holocaust.
Comment by Jesse Mitchell
It has been interesting. I guess I will talk to you later. Cheers!