Abortion...

[Gentoo]

1 minute ago, BoM said:

It actually perfectly represents modern ethics, foundation and all. I am weighing all the pros and cons of restricting a woman's right(s) to her own body compared to that of potentially dead fetuses that are considered pre-life to me. It has nothing to do with semantics and everything to do with exactly what you're saying, viewing the value of human life from all sides. I am valuing and understanding the impact of pregnancy on a woman and her *life*, while considering all social and realistic situations where a woman might end up pregnant regardless of preventative measures and then having a need to have an abortion.

 

I am all for owning up to how I view things and explaining that directly to you, but do not go and say it is undermining modern ethics when in fact it is me applying a proper ethical understanding of the situation as a whole.

Clearly you interpret things differently, but my understanding is that a belief similar to Aquinas' intrinsic value of human life is what is most often pointed to in modern ethics. The human experience has value in and of itself, with the potential for good coming second. With the mother's health set aside temporarily, I don't think her potential for what she or anyone else deems better overrules the fetuses intrinsic value of life. I think saying that it is reasonable because the fetus doesn't feel pain, have sentience, etc. is just a semantics game and opens the door to all sorts of other nonsensical arguments.

[BoM]

5 minutes ago, Gentoo said:

Clearly you interpret things differently, but my understanding is that a belief similar to Aquinas' intrinsic value of human life is what is most often pointed to in modern ethics. The human experience has value in and of itself, with the potential for good coming second. With the mother's health set aside temporarily, I don't think her potential for what she or anyone else deems better overrules the fetuses intrinsic value of life. I think saying that it is reasonable because the fetus doesn't feel pain, have sentience, etc. is just a semantics game and opens the door to all sorts of other nonsensical arguments.

No it isn't just semantics, it is based a lot more in science. I, based on scientific f a c t, understand that sustainable human life is not established at conception. When the growing fetus becomes something that can sustain life and therefore be valued as human life in my eyes, then I am no longer for abortions. And no, in weighing all human life properly I cannot set aside the mother's health at all. Your intrinsic value of life is simply far skewed from what I know to be true.

 

This is so far from semantics or nonsensical arguments lmao.

[Gentoo]

1 minute ago, BoM said:

No it isn't just semantics, it is based a lot more in science. I, based on scientific f a c t, understand that sustainable human life is not established at conception. When the growing fetus becomes something that can sustain life and therefore be valued as human life in my eyes, then I am no longer for abortions. And no, in weighing all human life properly I cannot set aside the mother's health at all. Your intrinsic value of life is simply far skewed from what I know to be true.

Could you be a bit more specific on what "sustainable human life" is? Sounds like this could reach a lot further than you intend if you're not careful.

[BoM]

1 minute ago, Gentoo said:

Could you be a bit more specific on what "sustainable human life" is? Sounds like this could reach a lot further than you intend if you're not careful.

There is a point in which, if the growing fetus was not in the mother, it could live...i.e. pre-mature baby. It is a rough hard go of it, but it's been proven that it's possible. Anything before that is just a future potential for life, but does not actually hold value as a life for me.

[Gentoo]

12 minutes ago, BoM said:

There is a point in which, if the growing fetus was not in the mother, it could live...i.e. pre-mature baby. It is a rough hard go of it, but it's been proven that it's possible. Anything before that is just a future potential for life, but does not actually hold value as a life for me.

Okay, I'd like to hear a more clear explanation of why this is a good marker of when life gains value for you, as it's not self evident to me how you make this connection.

 

But first, isn't this definition based on the limitations of current technology? Would you say that after this point the mother must carry to term or offer it to be sustained only when this becomes viable?

[BoM]

16 minutes ago, Gentoo said:

Okay, I'd like to hear a more clear explanation of why this is a good marker of when life gains value for you, as it's not self evident to me how you make this connection.

Honestly I'm not sure, just makes sense to me I guess. Like at some point its cells...and then sort of this amorphous blob, and then a sort of baby looking thing that can now survive. Somewhere in there it gains value for me. What defines why we value life? The look...the connection...the interactions...the potential.  If it looks like a clump of cells, my only connection to it is some sperm, I have zero interactions with it, and all it has is a potential for life you tell me what else I should use to value life.

Quote

 

But first, isn't this definition based on the limitations of current technology? Would you say that after this point the mother must carry to term or offer it to be sustained only when this becomes viable?

You nailed it. The day we the science to take the fertilized cells out of the mom and go grow the baby in a tube and gain more life instead of throwing it away, we can talk about bumping abortion out all together and giving a better alternative (in most peoples' eyes I'd imagine). Give a way that the mom doesn't have to be told she is forced to carry it in her body or be an incubator if you will and I have zero issue completely removing abortions from society.

[lynxie]

10 minutes ago, BoM said:

Honestly I'm not sure, just makes sense to me I guess. Like at some point its cells...and then sort of this amorphous blob, and then a sort of baby looking thing that can now survive. Somewhere in there it gains value for me. What defines why we value life? The look...the connection...the interactions...the potential.  If it looks like a clump of cells, my only connection to it is some sperm, I have zero interactions with it, and all it has is a potential for life you tell me what else I should use to value life.

if gentoo was an abortion this arguement wouldnt happen

[BoM]

1 minute ago, lynxie said:

if gentoo was an abortion this arguement wouldnt happen

who's arguing?

[lynxie]

Just now, BoM said:

who's arguing?

its a joke

[Gentoo]

22 minutes ago, BoM said:

You nailed it. The day we the science to take the fertilized cells out of the mom and go grow the baby in a tube and gain more life instead of throwing it away, we can talk about bumping abortion out all together and giving a better alternative (in most peoples' eyes I'd imagine). Give a way that the mom doesn't have to be told she is forced to carry it in her body or be in incubator if you will and I have zero issue completely removing abortions from society.

I'm trying to picture what this would look like in practice. I'm picturing us just keeping around hundreds of thousands of motherless children because people are still too lazy to use contraceptives 100 years down the road. Spooky.

 

I don't think that stands as an argument in its own right, but I'm curious what your thoughts are on how things may play out.