The Abortion Debate: Pro-Life or Pro-Choice? Is it that simple?
Overview
My comments on this started after watching the following PragerU video, regarding The Abortion Question. As a heads up, in case you don't know, PragerU is a right-wing conservative think tank so, that being said, you might already guess what their position is on this. However, I strongly recommended watching the video, so that things are put in context.
They suggest the issue is very simple, and I disagree strongly on that point, as there is no black or white, good or evil, right or wrong answer when you consider all the intricacies of the matter. Instead, what is required is careful consideration of the different scenarios that can come up, and solutions found for each of the main types of scenarios.
The Issue of Consent
If there was consent from both parties during the sexual intercourse, the mother should not be able to have an abortion without the written consent of the father. The fetus may develop in her body, but until such time as she can remain pregnant by herself, she would also need the father's consent. This is due to the shared responsibility the two parties possess with regards to this issue.
Obviously, in case of rape abortion should ALWAYS be allowed, without the consent of the rapist (this assumes the rapist is male of course).
The Developmental Journey of the Fetus
The fetus in the initial stages of development is not the same as in the later stages. In the beginning it is just a mass of cells, no nervous system developed or anything. If abortion is done early, the only "moral grounds" you can base yourself on considering it immoral are religious.
Conversely, in the later part, it is much more akin to a newborn - and thus, the act, much more akin to murder. It is only here where you can really begin talking about objective immorality. Otherwise, even an ejaculation that does not turn into a baby is immoral, since, after all, you are killing all those cells, some of which could have become living beings.
A Possible Way Forward
The previous points suggest that there should be some rough rules on when abortion is allowed. For example, it doesn't make sense to allow abortion two weeks before birth. Conversely, there shouldn't be much of an issue if it is done in the first few weeks or up to 3-4 months (the actual time may be based on careful medical consideration and should include factors such as stage of development, risk factors etc.).
If Not Allowed, How Can the Issue of Responsibility be Solved?
If there is a state apparatus that explicitly prohibits abortion, it should also TAKE responsibility for that child (ensuring it can become an independent adult), in case the parents to not want it.
The only way to deal with this additional responsibility is by moving the responsibility from those parents, to the state (i.e: indirectly, to other tax payers). This can only be done through taxation, which is a violation of the non-aggression principle and thus, also immoral.
P.S.: I apologize for any images which are "too graphic".
Right to Life? No hat tip to the Quality of that life? Right to live abused, the child of your mother's father, riddled with disease, deprived of choices, denied the truth of your beautiful existence. What kind of life are we talking about.
Perhaps your point is that it doesn't matter. That the quality is beside the point. Personally I don't get it.
The point is that there is no simple "pro life" or "pro choice" answer, and it really depends on the specific context.
"Quality of life" may be something that is in the eye of the beholder, because, after all, how do you define this quality to be sufficient? Where do you draw the line? Whether the child will be abused or not in the future etc., is hard to predict simply from this choice...even some women who wanted an abortion at a point in time and didn't get one later learned to love their child (furthermore, there are also cases where the reverse is true).
You are right, nobody really has a right to decide for the child. Maybe we all at least deserve a chance. There are so many happy and beautiful children in the world. But it breaks my heart when there is suffering. Thank you for your thoughtful reply.
First of all, sorry to interject, I couldn't help it.
A quality of 0.001 is still greater than null. And it beats the hell out of the horror of fighting in vain for your life inside the womb, the very place where you're supposed to be protected and nurtured. Well, I guess you can comfort yourself thinking that the fetus doesn't feel pain and horror until after delivery.
I bet worries about the kid's quality of life prompt uni students for example to abort.
People generally just want fun with no consequences and then start making excuses. Can't afford raising a kid? Use condoms, if that fails give the kid for adoption; just two options out of many.
There was that joke: In a family of storks at dinner pop an ma complain of how many deliveries they had on that day. Then they ask the young stork: but how was your day, kid? Not much, I just scared the crap out of students over at the campus.
The decision is taken after "suffisant" reflexion and interviews with the mother who will be able or not to keep the baby. There are so much circumstancies ... the mother is the most important person to consider.
Run by right wing Jews to shill for Israel.
This post recieved an upvote from minnowpond. If you would like to recieve upvotes from minnowpond on all your posts, simply FOLLOW @minnowpond
i agree with you