Defense of the abortion/Discussion about Ethics

[Freddy]

Freddy:

But that doesn’t detract the point that women who have abortions treat very early abortions very differently to very late ones. As does everyone else.

Would you like to deny that?

At one point everyone treated black people differently to white people. Did they have less value?

I made no moral declaration on whether abortion is right or wrong. Why are you comparing what I said to racism?

Please concentrate on, and respond to, the point being made, as opposed to the point you think is being made.

 

[Nonatheist]

Yes, but l am not advocating ‘my body my choice’ rhetoric .When you bring ‘my body my choice’ one picture comes to mind, And that picture is negative.

l talked about violinist analogy very little, even than it’s much more complicated than ‘my body my choice’.
It’s also the most well known pro-choice argument, and only way for someone to challange it is to appeal to natural law. Which doesn’t always work

l explained it, but l didn’t go deeper into dicussion about it.

 

[Nonatheist]

It’s not possible to tell objectivelly when doesn’t child get a personhood. As personhood is the ability to think and reason.
But generally speaking it happens after one year or so.

Sentience in it’s most basic form, to feel any sort of pain.
Babies start showing consciousness at about 5 months after birth.(from what l read)

Sentience increases with age. When child is born, justification for killing it would be very hard to find.
As it’s no longer a burden to the mother, and pain of giving birth is over.

Sentience can usually be objectivally defined, most by the cognitive ability and they ability to feel pain.

Sentience is to me only logical reason to actually care about preserving life.
As preserving life for the sake of it being life seems illogical, because it would imply that cells have the same value as humans or any other animals.
On the other hand is that view that humans are so far above all other animals, that only they are deserving of moral worth, l reject that view as well

 

[Elf01]

I made no moral declaration on whether abortion is right or wrong.

Why did you bring it up unless you mean to imply that abortion is moral because everybody treats the unborn different to the born?

 

[o_mlly]

Sentience in it’s most basic form, to feel any sort of pain. …
Sentience can usually be objectivally defined, most by the cognitive ability and they ability to feel pain. …
Sentience is to me only logical reason to actually care about preserving life. …

I understand all that. Your license to kill ends when “minimal sentience” begins. The pragmatic question is when does “minimal sentience” begin? When does the child obtain its right to life and the community’s protection of its life?

 

[EndTimes]

Some who label themselves as “Catholic” and yet support Abortion

• are knowingly or unwittingly following Satan.

 

[Nonatheist]

l try to avoid the ‘right to life’ approach, l see it as a default for all living beings, just that right to life can be overturned if justification outweights the sentience. When that happens will be open for a dicussion.

 

[EndTimes]

When does the child obtain its right to life and the community’s protection of its life

At Conception.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

I made no moral declaration on whether abortion is right or wrong.

Why did you bring it up unless you mean to imply that abortion is moral because everybody treats the unborn different to the born?

You should really make an attempt to read what I write. I haven’t made any comment on the morality of abortion. I have avoided doing so. And my posts are definitely clear on their purpose. Which have been to highlight women’s positions (and most other people’s position) on early term abortions versus late term abortions.

Why do you think there is a difference?

 

[Elf01]

You should really make an attempt to read what I write. I haven’t made any comment on the morality of abortion. I have avoided doing so. And my posts are definitely clear on their purpose. Which have been to highlight women’s positions (and most other people’s position) on early term abortions versus late term abortions.

Why do you think there is a difference?

Why does it matter?

 

[o_mlly]

… that right to life can be overturned if justification outweights the sentience.

And how does one know when the inherent (default) right to life of a living being can be violated by another with some measure of its “minimum sentience”?

The question is one of time in the womb. How many days in the womb does a child need to exist before society must protect the child’s life from its own mother? You cannot be fuzzy on this issue of when if your moral philosophy is to be taken seriously. Otherwise, we may dismiss your morality as mere solipsism.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

You should really make an attempt to read what I write. I haven’t made any comment on the morality of abortion. I have avoided doing so. And my posts are definitely clear on their purpose. Which have been to highlight women’s positions (and most other people’s position) on early term abortions versus late term abortions.

Why do you think there is a difference?

Why does it matter?

You don’t think it matters to understand why women have abortions?

If you don’t understand the reasons then how on earth can you possibly claim a place at the table where people are looking for solutions?

 

[Nonatheist]

Default right to life is based on sentience, consciences and in humans personhood.
Justifications for killing would have to be something that benefits the most sentient beings in the highest number, those benefits would be: Life and well being(survival), and freedom.
Examples where human killing human is justified would be:
People killing a dictator(as by doing so the great number of people benefited from increased freedom, even if dictator has same sentience)
Person killing and cannibalizing another person as a means to stay alive( l would say that need for survival is always justified)

No time in the womb would make life of a fetus more valuable than freedom and lack of pain women would experience if she aborted it. This is a question of violinist analogy, in the end no being no matter how sentient would have a right to life if by them existing they reduce well being and freedom of another.

 

[o_mlly]

No time in the womb would make life of a fetus more valuable than freedom and lack of pain women would experience if she aborted it. This is a question of violinist analogy, in the end no being no matter how sentient would have a right to life if by them existing they reduce well being and freedom of another.

Now, you’ve gone beyond the pale. We may dismiss this thinking as pure narcissism.

 

[Nonatheist]

l think that freedom is one of the basic goods, including life and health.
Violinist analogy demonstrates this, would a person be allowed to detach from a person in need, even if that person will die without the help of the host?
We either diagree or agree with this, as there doesn’t exist an argument about this. It’s an intuition

 

[Nonatheist]

You calling it narcissism presupposes that all life in every form must be protected no matter what. Which l disagree with.
l think l demonsrated why mother is worth much more than a fetus.
Fetus wouldn’t have any real sentience before 20 weeks, even that it’s sentience would be limited to brain activity and minimal response to pain.
Even if fetus was as sentient as adult human, mother would still be justified in aborting it(with a reason of course)

 

[Elf01]

You don’t think it matters to understand why women have abortions?

If you don’t understand the reasons then how on earth can you possibly claim a place at the table where people are looking for solutions?

Thos topic is on the morality of abortions, not solutions.

 

[nicholasG]

l think l demonsrated why mother is worth much more than a fetus.
Fetus wouldn’t have any real sentience before 20 weeks, even that it’s sentience would be limited to brain activity and minimal response to pain.
Even if fetus was as sentient as adult human, mother would still be justified in aborting it(with a reason of course)

I think this is a valuable conversation but once you start weighing the worth between 2 beings you’re on a slippery slope. Abortions happen but we have no right to ever say who is worth more. Both lives are precious. I wonder how this would sound if you changed one word:

l think l demonsrated why mother is worth much more than a fetus.

“l think l demonstrated why mother is worth much more than a baby.”

 

[Nonatheist]

But l agree. Mother is worth more than a baby however, when the baby is born killing it would produce no good for anyone. Therefor it would be a killing for the sake of killing, which is immoral

 

[o_mlly]

We either diagree or agree with this, as there doesn’t exist an argument about this. It’s an intuition

So now you can kill another on merely your intuition? Nonsense.

You calling it narcissism presupposes that all life in every form must be protected no matter what.

No, narcissism does not presuppose that. Narcissism implies a grandiose sense of self-importance, a lack of empathy for others.

Fetus wouldn’t have any real sentience before 20 weeks, even that it’s sentience would be limited to brain activity and minimal response to pain.

Once again you contradict yourself.

As for sentience, there is no science to prove sentience because sentience is not a scientific concept.

You have no objective moral system to propose. Your grounded in, “If it feels good, do it.”