Fetuses can't feel pain before 24 weeks, and are not conscious for a while even after

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20100625/thl-no-foetal-pain-before-24-weeks-d831572.html

Yay.

I think this pretty much kills the abortion debate, unless you're arguing about late term abortions. There's no justification for prioritizing the rights of something that isn't conscious and can't feel pain over those of a real, thinking, feeling woman who really will suffer from having bodily autonomy taken away.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

According to Islam the fetus receives a soul after 120 days of pregnancy though lol.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hehe.

Not that I would waste any time getting an abortion. It's good to know the limit is high though. Say you were irregular, and you just found out you were pregnant?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Don't women usually find out if they are pregnant before 17 weeks pass from something like morning sickness?

 

Depends on the woman. What if their cycle is irregular to begin with? What if they are regularly subject to nausea from an unrelated condition? (Ulcers, etc?)

Are you suggesting that abortion should be limited similarly to the Law? Ignorance is no excuse? It is not unheard of for a woman to go full term without knowing she is pregnant - try to think for a moment before spewing...

 

Who's spewing? I'm not referring to the exceptions. :shrug:

 

What exceptions? I missed where you referred to the norm - please reiterate, I'm kind of slow today...

 

Indeed. Makes my hair spike up on end...I think I'd die of shock if I found out I was pregnant and far gone...

I wish it didn't cost a shit ton to get surgically sterilized.

 

Sorry, but for me, the guiding principle is a moral one. After an egg has been fertilized, the rest of the nine-month process is, well, nine months long. There's no way to make a distinction between a clump of semi-human tissue and a living human being. One day, it's tissue and the next, it's [Poof!] a human being?

If you can't draw a clear line between tissue and a baby, the best PRACTICAL dividing line is simple. Could the unborn child live if it were to be "born" with a cesarean section? This is a viability argument, and I honestly think it's the best middle ground we have, one we'll need to implement in order to prevent violence and to promote civilized discussion.

Viability depends somewhat on the local availability of technology, including incubators where preemies call home until they've grown large enough to have well-developed immune systems, respiratory systems, and digestive systems. A preemie that needs an incubator in a poorly-financed small-town hospital may not have as much justification for a c-section as one the same age whose mother is in a large-city teaching hospital, but a fair policy demands that they both be treated the same if both preemies are the same age.

Again, my personal preference is to outlaw all abortions on moral grounds. Please note the difference between ethics and morality. Ethics is a code of conduct that is formulated by fallible human beings, some of whom are selfish and politically motivated. A few percent of us fall into the category of the demonstrably malicious, as judged in court by a jury of their peers.

In contrast, morality is a code of conduct that is given to us by a perfect god, one that sees every act, hears every word, and has the ability to judge us all the moment after we die. He has also expressed the willingness to do so in the holy books of every major world religion.

For me, abortion is a violation of the rules that God gave us two thousand years ago, rules which were simplified by the birth of a man who said that we should love one another, that we should treat others the way that we want to be treated BY others, and that we should follow the example of a man from Samaria, who found a man who had been beaten, robbed, stripped of all his clothing, and abandoned, picked him up, carried him to an inn, asked the innkeeper to care for him, and even gave the innkeeper some of his own money to pay for the man's food, shelter, and medical care.

There's no Biblical evidence that the Samaritan met Jesus, but Jesus knew who he was and recommended his actions to us. Unborn babies have no reason to be executed. They've violated nobody's code of conduct. I would prefer to see all of them born, and if still unwanted by their mothers, they should be offered to the fathers, and then to the millions of good parents who are on adoption waiting lists.

Whether a baby "feels" pain is not the point. Killing a baby hurts the society at large by inflicting an injury on an innocent life that could grow up to reward us all with all kinds of achievements.

Those who are heartless should not impose their will on the tiniest of hearts.

Bernny, an admirer of Mr. Franklin

 

Life isn't an achievement, slugs do it too. The line should be drawn on consciousness. This can be measured by brain activity. Our current rules are about right, maybe they can be adjusted somewhat. If the foetus can't even feel pain, that makes the ethical question even easier. Overpopulation hurts society way more than underpopulation. Let's concentrate our resources on children that are wanted, that have the best chance of success because their parents are prepared to raise it. The God argument isn't even worth considering, because there is no evidence for God (and he ordered the killing of babies too).

 

Because a lump of gelatine has rights over a real, living, conscious woman.

Yeah, whatever.

 

Please read the linked articles, it may clarify the actual difference between ethics and morality.
A shorter explanation is:

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-ethics-and-morals.htm

The claim that "morality is a code of conduct that is given to us by a perfect god" is without evidence (and in fact has contradictory evidence, see here and here, for example).

Edit:

If (as I assume) you're referring to the "Good Samaritan" then could you please get THAT fact right as well in future. Samaritans came from the Levant and have no connection with Samaria. The similarity in names is an accident.
Try here for more information.

 

You're right for someone non-religious the line can be drawn where one feels comfortable or according to a man-made standard for any moral issue e.g. abortion, stem cell research.

 

Yeah, it's awesome, isn't it? Imagine using our own intellect to figure things out, what a concept.

 

Don't you think people are too stupid to be granted so much freedom?

 

What do you suggest?
A group of people for figuring things out and another group (the rest of "us") who aren't allowed to think for themselves?

 

Some people.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I don't mind men expressing thought out and measured views on abortion. I do mind when they trivialize pregnancy with phrases like 'nine months of being a bit uncomfortable' or 'inconvenience'. Very strongly. If someone were to take away his control of his own body I think he would use stronger phrases than 'uncomfortable' or 'inconvenience'.

 

Abortion is wrong unless it will cause harm to the female.

Other then that If your Old enough to, have sex, your old enough to take responsibility for it.

Have the child and put it up for an adoption.