I'm pro choice but this is an abortion too far.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ned
Che avoids the issue, so does Sava

I don't know about Sava but che certainly is.

[Dis]

what's the difference what reason you abort? It is still the same act either way. Killing a baby for no reason is better than killing a baby for a specific reason?

[Ned]

I think there are seriously different issues when an abortion involves a seriously defective infant and a completely normal infant. In the former, we are terminating a life that would only know misery or be a significant burden to their parents and society. In the latter, the infant is being killed for the "health" of the mother. If this "health" is a sham, I think the abortion of a viable fetus should be banned.

But, in the case of a seriously defective infant, I think the option of termination should continue for a brief time after birth. For example, corrective surgery might be attempted. If not successful, the infant could be allowed to die.

Also, from reading some of Sava and other's comments, I see why they do not extend their "hangnail" concepts beyond birth. Before birth, the choice is solely that of the woman under medical advice of her doctor. After birth, the father has an interest that must be consulted. This is an anathema to the woman's movement.

[Ben Kenobi]

A chicken has more consciousness than a fetus.

Che:

So what?

A newborn horse can run, and is way more physically imposing than an infant. Yet would anyone take the horse over their child?

[Ben Kenobi]

In the former, we are terminating a life that would only know misery or be a significant burden to their parents and society.

Ned:

How do you know that the child would only know misery? Just because you perceive someone's life to be worthless does not make it so. In fact, our perceptions can have very little to do with reality, and much more to do with our own prejudices.

"The mind is it's own place, entirely of itself, and can make a heaven of hell or a hell of heaven."

[Ben Kenobi]

As for the burden to society, why then do we not kill everyone who goes on welfare? They are a burden to society.

[Ben Kenobi]

cinch:

There are unjustified abortions. This is a Bad Thing.

Why? If the abortion merely kills a piece of tissue, than it should be allowed for whatever reason the mother wants, for all nine months of pregnacy.

However, legislating abortions, and getting big government involved in the intimate lives of citizens is not the right course of action.

Is it right for the government to protect a child from abuse at the hands of their parents? If so, this means that the well-being of children takes precedence over any perceived right to privacy.

The vast majority of abortions are early and justifiable. Every time a certain story comes out that may or may not be true, about an unjustified abortion, people like to jump on it and start proclaiming that nearly-born babies are being slaughtered every 10 seconds worldwide.

Well, show me what's the difference between an early and justified abortion and a late and unjustified abortion.

When it comes to medical procedures, I like to place my trust in the doctors and patients, not so much the bureaucracy.

If abortion is a medical procedure, what condition does it cure?

[Ben Kenobi]

Drogue:

There are differences between abortion and withholding treatment. If the mother withheld treatment, then she would have the baby. She needs to have a procedure done to her in order to have the abortion.

Secondly, you make abortion sound as clean as unplugging a feeding tube. This is most definitely not the case. Abortions use a suction machine that rips the child into little tiny pieces that must be reassembled to ensure that they have gotten all of the child out of the mother.

Finally, would a mother be arrested for refusing to feed her child due to negligence? Yes. What this means that as her child, the child has a claim to the mother's support.

[Sava]

Also, from reading some of Sava and other's comments, I see why they do not extend their "hangnail" concepts beyond birth. Before birth, the choice is solely that of the woman under medical advice of her doctor. After birth, the father has an interest that must be consulted. This is an anathema to the woman's movement.

Sure, if I had a child that had some sort of massive debilitating disease or condition that would cause extreme pain, I might consider some sort of euthenizing procedure. But then again, I have never been faced with such a decision; so I can't even imagine what that situation would be like or how I would react.

[Berzerker]

if so, perhaps you should learn how to phrase your questions so that you get the answers you are looking for...

You sound like the robot cab driver in "Total Recall".

[TheStinger]

There is a point to this case in that it may enable a better definition of serious disability, which is obviously a bit woolly.

[Ned]

Ben, I think loved ones have the right to pull the plug on their own who are suffering or who would suffer a great deal and who cannot make the decision themselves. In fact, I favor more than this. I favor allowing someone to be put out of their misery if necessary by letal injection or the like if that is their wish.

That's where I start. This is why aborting a serious deformed or retarded fetus is OK in my view.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sava
Sure, if I had a child that had some sort of massive debilitating disease or condition that would cause extreme pain, I might consider some sort of euthenizing procedure. But then again, I have never been faced with such a decision; so I can't even imagine what that situation would be like or how I would react.

Sava, I have had both parents die of cancer. I only wish there was a way to end the suffering more humanely. Our current system of prolonging agony is the height of inhumanity.

[Spiffor]

Both parents?
Now, that must have been a really, really cruel experience

[Ned]

Spiffor, dying is not easy on anyone involved, especially the family. Our sytem today is downright cruel.