Is Abortion Ethical?

[Paraprakrti]

That, or when a fetus isn't going to live long if at all after birth.

Too quick to reason out of speculation.

Do you plan on being hit by a car when you drive, or getting hit by a meteorite every time you're above ground? That has a chance of happening, too.

That is fine. I can accept those risks. Just as we should all accept the risk of pregnancy when we have sex.

 

[Jaymes]

Too quick to reason out of speculation.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Rephrase?

That is fine. I can accept those risks. Just as we should all accept the risk of pregnancy when we have sex.

Abortion is accepting the risk, too... it just deals with it in a different way.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I think it depends. It can be ethical, it can also be unethical. There is no 'one answer fits all' for the issue of abortion.

This is the truest statement in this thread.
Take a look at Webster's definition of ethics:
Main Entry: eth·ic
Pronunciation: 'e-thik
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English ethik, from Middle French ethique, from Latin ethice, from Greek EthikE, from Ethikos
1 plural but singular or plural in construction : the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation
2 a : a set of moral principles or values b : a theory or system of moral values <the present-day materialistic ethic> c plural but singular or plural in construction : the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group <professional ethics> d : a guiding philosophy

I think the only thing you can agree on is that not everyone agrees on what is moral or ethical.

On this rarest of occasions, I agree with Para - the abortion rate would definitely take a sizable dip if everyone considered the consequences of an unwanted pregnancy every time they engaged in sex. But all is not lost - we disagree from this point on. I think that this is (at best) an incredibly naive point of view, in light of the fact that the vast majority of people do not live in that world. Jensa's point in a later post that relying on a practice that is 99% effective is pretty widely accepted is the way most people go through life, whether one approves or not. Obviously, the ethics of many people allow for just such circumstances to result in abortion. I wish that no one viewed abortion as another means of birth control, but those are my ethics and my morals. I do not have the right to impose them on others.

Para - I noticed that you have not responded to the situation of when a woman's life (I would say health) is imperiled. Is this unethical in your view Para?

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[Sunstone]

Para - I noticed that you have not responded to the situation of when a woman's life (I would say health) is imperiled. Is this unethical in your view Para?

I too am very curious about how you'd answer that question, Paraprakrti.

 

[Linus]

I agree with those that believe that the possibiblity of pregnancy should be taken into consideration every time a couple has sex. But this is far too often not the case. But I believe that in any case it is unethical to kill the person who is least at fault.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

...But I believe that in any case it is unethical to kill the person who is least at fault.

I agree with you Linus - but we disagree on when the fetus becomes a person (human).

TVOR

 

[Linus]

When do you think that a fetus becomes a human?

 

[linwood]

I believe engaging in the sexual act with disregard to the possibility of pregnancy is unethical.

No argument here.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

When do you think that a fetus becomes a human?

A fine question. You are asking for my opinion, right? Many disagree with me, and I have no problem with that whatsoever.

In my opinion, a fetus becomes a human being at the moment of delivery. Not at the moment of male arousal - not at insemination - not at implantation - not at any given trimester - not at "viability" (whenever that is).

My reasoning is this - at the moment of delivery, the fetus (now baby) is no longer a part of the woman's body. Hence (for me), it is now a fully functioning, stand alone human being.

That may not be the politically correct opinion, it may not be the most popular opinion. It may not be the opinion of even one other person on earth. But, - it is my opinion.

Thanks for asking,
TVOR

 

[The Voice of Reason]

My bad, Linus -

It was incredibly rude of me not to ask in return. I am asking you for your opinion - when do you think a fetus becomes a human? I truly am interested in hearing your opinion.

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[Paraprakrti]

On this rarest of occasions, I agree with Para - the abortion rate would definitely take a sizable dip if everyone considered the consequences of an unwanted pregnancy every time they engaged in sex. But all is not lost - we disagree from this point on. I think that this is (at best) an incredibly naive point of view, in light of the fact that the vast majority of people do not live in that world.

Then the vast majority of people live in ignorance.

Para - I noticed that you have not responded to the situation of when a woman's life (I would say health) is imperiled. Is this unethical in your view Para?

The woman dying is speculation. One of my best friend's mother almost died giving birth to him. The complications were there but she proceeded. She lives and so does her son. So this is all speculation.

It is my opinion that the woman should be more mindful of her child than of herself. In the same manner that a woman would not sacrifice her child's life to save her own, (at least we would hope not).

 

[Paraprakrti]

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Rephrase?

It is speculation that the baby will not live long after birth. You should not make that determination lest we can all say, "hey, we all have to die so what's the big deal about murdering people or committing suicide?"

Abortion is accepting the risk, too... it just deals with it in a different way.

That is accepting the risk by thinking that one can be selfishly indulged and then evade the consequences in the case that they manifest. That is irresponsible. Next you can say that it is responsible in that it responds in a different way. But then we are always all responsible in everything we do because we never fail to respond in one way or another. So I would be acting responsibly if I came to your house and *insert something offensive to you*.

 

[Jaymes]

It is speculation that the baby will not live long after birth. You should not make that determination lest we can all say, "hey, we all have to die so what's the big deal about murdering people or committing suicide?"

There are cases where it is known that the baby will not live. How is it unethical to reduce his suffering?

I'd link you to the Harlequin Fetus, but I'm afraid to do so for fear of traumatizing other people who click on it. The first time I saw it it sure traumatized me. Google 'Harlequin fetus.' See what comes up. Would you say it's wrong to end the suffering when something is that sick and won't live long, if at all?

That is accepting the risk by thinking that one can be selfishly indulged and then evade the consequences in the case that they manifest. That is irresponsible.

It's not evading the consequences, it's simply using a different means of dealing with the consequences. The result of pregnancy does not always have to be birth.

 

[Pah]

I believe engaging in the sexual act with disregard to the possibility of pregnancy is unethical.

The woman dying is speculation. One of my best friend's mother almost died giving birth to him. The complications were there but she proceeded. She lives and so does her son. So this is all speculation.

Let's see - it is unethical to use speculation regarding sex but it is ethical to disregard it when a woman's life is at stake. I'm tempted to give myself a warning for rudeness and tell you what I think of people who talk out of both sides of their mouth. It seems, Paraprakrti, you just like to argue and pull any argument out of the air just to be contrary.

-pah-

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Then the vast majority of people live in ignorance.

Oh, to be as enlightened as you. :sarcastic Is there even the remotest chance that you understand what opinion is? I guess I'd have to say that I'd rather deal with people that are ignorant than those that are smug. Come to think of it, when you combine smug with intolerant and mix in a little obstinance, it's a pretty ugly product. I won't turn this into a personal attack, I'm just making an observation.

The woman dying is speculation.

I just can't understand why you didn't become a doctor. I'd be more than happy to have my wife or daughter come to you for medical care (please note the strong sarcasm).

It is my opinion that the woman should be more mindful of her child than of herself.

WHOA!!! What's this??? You are expressing an OPINION? I'm certain that this is a typographical error on your part. Surely you meant to state that as a fact. It would be a shame to admit that other points of view might possibly have merit (or, God forbid, be correct). I'd hate to see a string of 350 consecutive posts with no possible room for disagreement come to an end. Hopefully, the statement can be edited to remove any hint of doubt.

Waiting for the inevitable retraction of the phrase "in my opinion",
TVOR

 

[Paraprakrti]

There are cases where it is known that the baby will not live. How is it unethical to reduce his suffering?

The fetus suffers in the womb regardless. Even if everything is fine, there is suffering.

I'd link you to the Harlequin Fetus, but I'm afraid to do so for fear of traumatizing other people who click on it. The first time I saw it it sure traumatized me. Google 'Harlequin fetus.' See what comes up. Would you say it's wrong to end the suffering when something is that sick and won't live long, if at all?

My point is that the suffering is there regardless if harlequin fetus is a factor or not. Let nature determine death.

It's not evading the consequences, it's simply using a different means of dealing with the consequences. The result of pregnancy does not always have to be birth.

The result of pregnancy is not always birth, but that should not be for us to determine.

 

[Paraprakrti]

Let's see - it is unethical to use speculation regarding sex but it is ethical to disregard it when a woman's life is at stake. I'm tempted to give myself a warning for rudeness and tell you what I think of people who talk out of both sides of their mouth. It seems, Paraprakrti, you just like to argue and pull any argument out of the air just to be contrary.

-pah-

Wow...

"unethical to use speculation" and "ethical to disregard it" are two congruent statements! Unethical to use speculation means ethical to disregard speculation!

There is no "talking out of both sides of the mouth".

 

[Paraprakrti]

Oh, to be as enlightened as you. :sarcastic Is there even the remotest chance that you understand what opinion is? I guess I'd have to say that I'd rather deal with people that are ignorant than those that are smug. Come to think of it, when you combine smug with intolerant and mix in a little obstinance, it's a pretty ugly product. I won't turn this into a personal attack, I'm just making an observation.

This is not an opinion. If the vast majority of people do not live mindful of the possibility of pregnancy as a result of sex, then it is logical to say that the vast majority of people are ignorant of that possibility. Hence my statement, "then the vast majority of people live in ignorance". I do not exclude myself from this in all cases.

I just can't understand why you didn't become a doctor. I'd be more than happy to have my wife or daughter come to you for medical care (please note the strong sarcasm).

Doctors are flawed just like anybody else. That is my point.

WHOA!!! What's this??? You are expressing an OPINION? I'm certain that this is a typographical error on your part. Surely you meant to state that as a fact. It would be a shame to admit that other points of view might possibly have merit (or, God forbid, be correct). I'd hate to see a string of 350 consecutive posts with no possible room for disagreement come to an end. Hopefully, the statement can be edited to remove any hint of doubt.

The capacity to disagree is always there. So what is your point? It is a motherly and fatherly quality to consider the life of the child as top priority. I stated that as my opinion just to dare someone to argue it. Would you throw your kid in front of you to stop a bullet? I wouldn't, but that's just my opinion on that.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

So far I've heard a lot of posts about when abortion is ethical, and why, but so far a significant part of my initial post has been overlooked. Here it is, once again, just in case anyone feels like answering it:

In your opinion, when is abortion unethical, and why?

 

[linwood]

In your opinion, when is abortion unethical, and why?

Abortion is unethical once a fetus becomes a child.

Bcause it is murder.