dk

New Study Shows Women's Death Rate Following Abortion Much Higher than Previously Known

dk

So, if in a biological sense a fetus has parents, then in a real world wouldn't fetus be a child?... because of biology.

Yet it seems in a real sense a fetus is not a child (only a biological sense), then in what sense is biology real, and in what sense is reality rational? I'm confused. Is an infant a child, toddler, a 7 year old a child, an 11... and in what sense... real, rational, ideal or subjective?

I was taught to distinguish real things that appear to be real by necessity. So if the only parents I ever know are foster parents, I only know I have real parents by necessity.

---It would seem necessary that a fetus in a real sense be real because biology is real. Any other presumption would be irrational.
---It would seem culturally that a {fetus may, or may not} be a child, because culture is subjective, or irrational, but not irrational by necessity.

I agree there's a lot more to being a parent than biology, but without biological parents a child couldn't possibly exist. In fact it seems to me foster, step or adopted parents are a convention that takes their form from biological families (nuclear), and by virtue of form become real parents.

Daleth

No.
Is a child an adult? No. Why? They're both human.

Why is a fetus not a child? The same reason a child is not an adult. It has not reached that stage of development yet. Maybe it never will. An adult is a human being who has gone through puberty (or in the eyes of the law, a person past a given age). A child is a human being that has been born.

It's a silly question. I have parents. Does that mean I am a child? My 61-year-old mother has parents. Does that mean she is a child? If she is a child, is she also a fetus?

You know, you can leave off what I said about biology vs reality, because it was not germaine to the argument you wished to make. It was merely an extension of my thoughts on parenthood. Yes a fetus has parents. Simple and direct.

Dal

Machiavelli

The position today rests on the viability of the fetus to survive outside the womb.

Taking a life, viable or not, is disgusting to me. If there is the faintest sense of self awareness, feeling, or desires in a being, then to terminate it is killing.

The plethora of medical rationalizations available to pro-choice advocates have provided them the means to keep their opinion guilt free. My only position would be that abortion shouldn't be taken so lightly. There should be guilt after an abortion. It should be considered a greivous act that should be avoided at all costs. We should dispose of the rationalizations that characterize abortion as the equivilent of getting a tooth pulled. It's time to face the facts that we don't know a whole helluva lot about life and where it begins.

But it should still be legal for practical purposes, life isn't always pretty.

scigirl

M - three questions for you now:

1) Would you personally be willing to adopt an unwanted child, or at the very least, offer to pay for the prenatal care for the mother?

2) If the answer is no, than do you think that children should be a "punishment" for having sex, or having a condom break, or getting raped (or other ways that we impregnate each other)?

3) Is it ok for a couple to terminate their pregnancy if their fetus had a deviant genetic condition that woud cause undue suffering, such as, oh let's say, sickle cell anemia?

scigirl the consistency police

Loren Pechtel

What PL parents--there wouldn't be many! Should this become technically feasible you would see them exposed for the hypocrits they are.
The punish-the-woman "PL"'s would defect, leaving something like a 90-10 PC vs PL ratio.

Loren Pechtel

Who made up that statistic? Early abortion is approx 10x as safe as normal childbirth.

Loren Pechtel

Or women who have abortions are in poorer life situations than women who have babies.

Machiavelli

Nope

You apparently still think I want abortion to be illegal.

I just want a scarlet letter or a tatoo on the forhead.

Seriously...I think the pro-choice side characterizes abortion as the sole right of the woman. And that since we are able to erase her responsibility for her actions with an abortion, we are saving the society from the greater evil of unwanted children. Does that sum it up well?

Well, it's my opinion that their kneejerk reaction to the pro-life nutballs strips the decision from having any moral consideration. I simply don't think the it should be made so lightly. And just perhaps, if abortion was considered a necessary evil and not simply a womans right, a little more consideration would be given prior to conception.


Cute, you thought you had me pinned down here didntcha?

This doesn't even apply. Now if they said to some geneticist that they wanted him to program their child to have sickle cell anemia because they thought it was the ideal way to live, I'd have problems with that.


Yea, but I bet ya don't want to be.

scigirl

Nope.

Sometimes she is raped. Sometimes she wants to abort the fetus because it has a terrible genetic condition that puts the mother's life at risk. Sometimes her birth control methods fail. Sometimes she is 14 years old and just doesn't have the rational capacity that, say, a 28 year old med student does, and makes a bad choice (excuse me I mean her and her male partner make a bad choice).

But yes I think it is a much worse crime to drink while you are pregnant and bring an unwanted FAS child into this world, than it is to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester.
Why? So people like J R Rudolph can have an easier target?

Also, should we stamp an A on the male's forehead as well? Or is he absolved of all responsiiblity?
I agree. This may surprise you, but pro-choice groups aren't out there advocating that all women should go out and have an abortion. In fact, the one I participate in is trying to find ways to reduce the amount of abortions. One of the ways they are doing that is to try to get the morning after pill over the counter, or at least easier to get. This prevents fertilization - so that abortion is not needed. But guess what - those anti-choice nutballs are against that as well - because THEY are the knee-jerkers, NOT the pro-choice advocates. As long as religious groups continue to rail against any form of birth control or education about birth control, I will continue to be a very very strong pro-choice advocate. Like I said before, a world of wanted children would make a world of difference.

scigirl