- Joined
- May 1, 2013
- Messages
- 119,717
- Reaction score
- 75,681
- Location
- Outside Seattle
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Well 20 weeks is a nice round number, so that's why I chose it. Regardless of views on abortion I think most people can agree that people have a right to self defense, and I'd certainly never force a woman to continue a pregnancy that might kill her. And I see no harm (and quite a bit of good) in terminating a pregnancy where the baby has no chance of ever surviving outside the womb.
So that's my ethical considerations.
So would it be correct to interpret this as meaning you believe that abortions are ethically okay at any time?
Anytime within the parameters of Roe v Wade.
As I said only 1.3 percent of abortions take place past 21 weeks.
Also remember there are only 4 doctors and 3 clinics in the USA ( as of 2013) who perform abortions past 20 weeks.
It takes a highly skilled doctor to perform these and the medical need for the abortion must be a greater for the woman than the risk of delivery.
RM, I have always condemned that kind of behavior, and those places need to make sure that their patients don't experience it. There also need to be other places (hospitals, physician's office, generalized clinics, etc.) that perform the procedure.Let’s talk about “Privacy” in a different light.
DD, the aggregate information collected on abortion becomes a discriminatory tool for anti-abortion groups and even individual pro-life advocates that is used in invasive ways against the female sex. Individual names aren’t necessary to fuel disdain and the harassment at the only places that abortions are conducted.
To my knowledge, the same rules apply as for any other type of medical information. If I'm mistaken, please show a source that says otherwise.Requiring applications from Universities and medical research organizations to get abortion data - should be necessary. Managing such information should be highly confidential.
Roe vs Wade allows women to chose their own health decisions up to viability.
Do you agree Women should be able to choose?
So it sounds like your personal ethics are a perfect match with Roe v Wade. Were they the same before that decision?
RM, I have always condemned that kind of behavior, and those places need to make sure that their patients don't experience it. There also need to be other places (hospitals, physician's office, generalized clinics, etc.) that perform the procedure.
To my knowledge, the same rules apply as for any other type of medical information. If I'm mistaken, please show a source that says otherwise.
I believe that most women understand that they're choosing to end another person's life, and if they want to do it ethically, they need some justification for doing so. Please remember that this thread is about ethics and not law.
So again, what ethical justification..
I believe that most women understand that they're choosing to end another person's life,
You need a justification for your Christian Sharia.
I have done so more than once in the thread. If you read it and find my justification worth discussion, feel free to do so.
Law has to be secular.
Science is no help, religion is off the table.
And medical ethical structures allow for compromise.
I don't need to read the thread to know DOA when I see it.
And the secular law says that the unborn has no rights, including a right to life.
Since you seem to agree with that, why the criticism?
I believe that most women understand that they're choosing to end another person's life, and if they want to do it ethically, they need some justification for doing so. Please remember that this thread is about ethics and not law.
Wait a minute. You’re not just leaving the law and Constitution out of the arguments, but also science. Science has established the developmental stages of human life.
Science describes only how a human life develops. I'm not aware of any scientific study stating that a fertilized, implanted egg is "not a human life," or that a developing human does not have a human life before viability.
I’m not aware of any zygotes, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus named, “person”.
Not that I used the word 'person' in the first place, but playing semantics gets your argument exactly nowhere.
DiffferentDrummr said:I believe that most women understand that they're choosing to end another person's life, and if they want to do it ethically, they need some justification for doing so. Please remember that this thread is about ethics and not law.
Selective memory won’t get far either. See YOUR post #181.
I believe that most women understand that they're choosing to end another person's life, and if they want to do it ethically, they need some justification for doing so. Please remember that this thread is about ethics and not law.
Selective memory won’t get far either. See YOUR post #181.
Abortion is the ending of a pregnancy.
Women know if they have an abortion ( elective or otherwise ) ,the pregnancy will end and there will not be an infant born from that pregnancy.
An unborn is not yet a person.
Only the born are persons.
Calling an unborn a person just sidesteps the fact that it's still a human life.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?