homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » A somewhat different position on abortion (Page 1)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: A somewhat different position on abortion
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thus far I am not sure I know anyone else who holds this position.

At least in the US, it seems to be a standard dichotomy: either one believes that abortion is morally acceptable, and that it should be legal, or one believes that abortion is morally wrong, and that it should be illegal.

Does anyone hold the position that abortion is morally wrong but that making it illegal will do more harm than good, and that reducing the number of abortions by focusing on things like the social safety net, education, the adoption process, and new medical techniques would be the best way to approach the matter?

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yep, me for starters. I thought that this was the position of many Christians - it was certainly the position that led to the 1967 Abortion Act being passed in the UK, permitting abortion in certain circumstances. One can be pro-choice without agreeing that all choices made are morally equal.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984

 - Posted      Profile for Doublethink.   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
*raises hand*

--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell

Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Curiosity killed ...

Ship's Mug
# 11770

 - Posted      Profile for Curiosity killed ...   Email Curiosity killed ...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think you'll find that's pretty much the position of many people in the UK - that abortion is far from ideal and not really what should happen, but it can be the least bad option in bad situations, so should be allowed with that understanding.

--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat

Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That's a pretty common position in my experience (and is pretty close to my own.) I've heard exactly that opinion in person from a number of Americans, and it seems to be pretty much what President Clinton was aiming for with "safe, legal and rare".
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Robert Armin

All licens'd fool
# 182

 - Posted      Profile for Robert Armin     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
"Safe, legal - and rare" sounds excellent to me. While I have no wish to see abortion made illegal, I am concerned about the number that happen in the UK, 196,000 in 2011.

--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin

Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153

 - Posted      Profile for Eliab   Email Eliab   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
My experience is also that this is a very common position in the UK. I think it's pretty rare to find anyone who thinks abortion per se (as opposed to legal access to abortion) is a good thing. Almost everyone I know thinks it better to avoid conception than terminate a pregnancy, not merely because its a more radical intervention, but also because they mostly think that the unborn entity has some inherent worth, even though most would deny it the rights of personhood.

--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"

Richard Dawkins

Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think it would be better to not be pregnant than to not have an abortion, but only because all medical procedures carry risk. An abortion is simply a medical procedure and is no more bad or negative than cataract removal.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984

 - Posted      Profile for Doublethink.   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
"Safe, legal - and rare" sounds excellent to me. While I have no wish to see abortion made illegal, I am concerned about the number that happen in the UK, 196,000 in 2011.

quote:
They show, for instance that under half of abortions (49%) were to women with partners while 26% were to single women and 16% of abortions occurred within marriage. The numbers of abortions to girls under 16 are down too, 3,258 in 2011, down from 3,718 the previous year.
I found this break down of those figures mildly interesting. I wonder what percentage of the partnered pregnancy terminations are related to issues with people thinking they are not fertile at the time of conception. I had a relative who got pregnant because she thought breastfeeding would prevent conception.

--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell

Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Curiosity killed ...

Ship's Mug
# 11770

 - Posted      Profile for Curiosity killed ...   Email Curiosity killed ...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I suspect a significant percentage of abortions follow contraception failure - and checking that gives me this story which indicates 2/3 of all women seeking abortions were using contraceptives. Certainly that's what I'd heard anecdotally.

--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat

Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984

 - Posted      Profile for Doublethink.   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Interesting, given the low percentage failure rates for contraception I wonder how many abortions they think there would be without it. Absolute numbers seem high - but out of how many sexual encounters for how many people.

I do wonder if sterilisation ought to be pushed a bit harder though. As in: have you completed your family ? Consider the benefits of a simple operation ...

--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell

Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
*raises hand*

Another hand raises here. This is the position of most of the women I know.

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28

 - Posted      Profile for Nicolemr   Author's homepage   Email Nicolemr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I agree too. I have no data but I would suspect that most people think that way to some degree.

--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!

Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
LeRoc

Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216

 - Posted      Profile for LeRoc     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Once a colleague of mine had an abortion, I think it was a case of contraception failure. She was rather upset about it, in fact she stayed away from work for two weeks. I don't know, I can imagine that the health consequences of an abortion make you bedridden for a couple of days, but in her case it was definitely the psychological consequences also.

I tried to support her in my limited way (like in the Norah Jones song, I tried some tea and sympathy), but I also thought: maybe it is good in some sense that she felt bad about this for some time. This isn't something that should be taken lightly, and feeling bad about it isn't only natural, but also reflects the moral complexity of the situation.

Am I strange in thinking this?

--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)

Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290

 - Posted      Profile for Horseman Bree   Email Horseman Bree   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
ISTM that the dichotomy between pro-choice and pro-life* was stated on the Ship one time as (paraphrase, because I can't remember the exact phrasing): Pro-choice would prefer that nobody would need an abortion (because of effective education/contraception, etc.) while pro-lifers would prefer that nobody would want an abortion (because of effective religious proscription?)

always remembering that pro-life* indicates "offer expires at birth"
since the pro-lifers have such a high proportion of people who don't actually care about the woman in question in the first place.

--------------------
It's Not That Simple

Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Once a colleague of mine had an abortion, I think it was a case of contraception failure. She was rather upset about it, in fact she stayed away from work for two weeks. I don't know, I can imagine that the health consequences of an abortion make you bedridden for a couple of days, but in her case it was definitely the psychological consequences also.

I tried to support her in my limited way (like in the Norah Jones song, I tried some tea and sympathy), but I also thought: maybe it is good in some sense that she felt bad about this for some time. This isn't something that should be taken lightly, and feeling bad about it isn't only natural, but also reflects the moral complexity of the situation.

Am I strange in thinking this?

But why shouldn't it be taken lightly? Why is it morally complex? As I said upthread, to me it is no more negative or morally complex than cataract removal. It's simply a medical procedure to remove some unwanted cells. If I got pregnant it would be rather a bother but I wouldn't feel bad about an abortion or even think about it that much. I would certainly take it fairly lightly.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
I had a relative who got pregnant because she thought breastfeeding would prevent conception.

Lactation Amenorrhoea is a real thing, and in most women does indeed prevent ovulation while you're breastfeeding around the clock. If that's not what you're doing - if you're breastfeeding, but supplementing with formula, or if you've started giving your baby solids so he's feeding less, it usually stops working.

Oh, and your first ovulation comes before your first postpartum period, so it's not terribly difficult to have a "surprise".

If you're not prepared to accept a surprise baby, you should be using condoms postpartum.

Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
Interesting, given the low percentage failure rates for contraception I wonder how many abortions they think there would be without it. Absolute numbers seem high - but out of how many sexual encounters for how many people.

I do wonder if sterilisation ought to be pushed a bit harder though. As in: have you completed your family ? Consider the benefits of a simple operation ...

It's definitely far too difficult to get sterilised while you're still fertile, at least in the UK. I would get sterilised if I could, but the chances of me getting approved for it (25 and single) are nil.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
LeRoc

Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216

 - Posted      Profile for LeRoc     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Jade Constable: But why shouldn't it be taken lightly? Why is it morally complex?
I don't know, biology can do strange things sometimes.

quote:
Jade Constable: I would certainly take it fairly lightly.
Can you be sure about this? I'm going to assume that you haven't been in this situation yet. I have the feeling that you can only know how you'll react to this after you've been through it.

--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)

Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
Thus far I am not sure I know anyone else who holds this position.

At least in the US, it seems to be a standard dichotomy: either one believes that abortion is morally acceptable, and that it should be legal, or one believes that abortion is morally wrong, and that it should be illegal.

Does anyone hold the position that abortion is morally wrong but that making it illegal will do more harm than good, and that reducing the number of abortions by focusing on things like the social safety net, education, the adoption process, and new medical techniques would be the best way to approach the matter?

That's a fairly common pro-choice position. I'm a little confused as to how you see yourself as outside what you call the "standard dichotomy" since you regard abortion as "morally acceptable" (insofar as you indicate your willingness to accept it) and oppose criminalizing the procedure.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But why shouldn't it be taken lightly? Why is it morally complex? As I said upthread, to me it is no more negative or morally complex than cataract removal. It's simply a medical procedure to remove some unwanted cells. If I got pregnant it would be rather a bother but I wouldn't feel bad about an abortion or even think about it that much. I would certainly take it fairly lightly.

There were periods during my fertile years when I would certainly have had an abortion if I had gotten pregnant, but there's a big difference between "unwanted cells" that could grow into a human being that would have a whole life of her or her own and fingernail clippings.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
That's a fairly common pro-choice position. I'm a little confused as to how you see yourself as outside what you call the "standard dichotomy" since you regard abortion as "morally acceptable" (insofar as you indicate your willingness to accept it) and oppose criminalizing the procedure.

[Confused] I must have not explained myself.

There are two axises (axes?) here.

(1) Is abortion a morally wrong act?

and

(2) Should abortion be legal?

What I have seen exclusively, at least here in the US, is either

(A) Abortion is morally wrong, and therefore it should be illegal

or

(B) Abortion is morally right, and therefore it should be legal.

(I think we can eliminate the position that abortion is morally right but should be illegal; I don't think I've ever encountered that one.)

I'm talking about a position C which would hold that abortion is morally wrong, but that making it illegal will cause more harm than good.

It is even a position which can hold that abortion is indeed taking a human life--yes, a kind of infanticide--but that, again, making it illegal causes more harm than good.

I never, ever, ever heard anyone advocate this position, at least not in the US.

When people argue that abortion should be legal, they almost always seem to focus on the reason for it being that a fetus is "merely" an array of cells, or part of the woman's body, not a human being, and that it is part of a woman's civil rights to be able to abort the fetus.

When people argue that abortion is taking a life, they almost always seem to focus on making abortion illegal, or as hard to legally obtain as possible. (In the latter case, we've had some situations in the US recently in which states have passed or tried to pass laws which are ostensibly about other things (requiring doctors who perform abortions to be connected to certain hospitals, etc.) but are not even subtly but openly, when the lawmakers talk in interviews, about eliminating abortion from the state.)

In, again, the US, abortion laws have become a very hot-button issue, in some cases the only issue, for some people. (I've literally known people--in this case on the "anti-abortion" side--who have told me that that's the main litmus test they use in voting for someone.) Among many religious people, it's one of the most critical issues they're focused on when considering voting for a candidate, and so I think it's also become a very convenient thing for candidates to say they're against--even when it has nothing to do with the issues the candidate will be dealing with. But that's another matter, and perhaps more relevant to the "Can the US Republican Party be Saved?" thread in Purgatory.)

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
always remembering that pro-life* indicates "offer expires at birth"
since the pro-lifers have such a high proportion of people who don't actually care about the woman in question in the first place.

Taking my comments on this to the Repub Party thread in Purgatory.

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But why shouldn't it be taken lightly?

First, even from a totally detached POV as you claim, it is ridiculous to consider surgery as a prophylactic.
Second, there are physiological reasons many women who have abortions do not feel as you describe.
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:

Why is it morally complex? As I said upthread, to me it is no more negative or morally complex than cataract removal.

This is a strange claim. At some point, that lump of cells becomes a human. I think it safe to say this is generally regarded as true. The argument is when. All legally acceptable times are arbitrary, even those that go as far as birth. The labia are not magical doors which confer a soul and person-hood, there is little real difference between a child 8.5 months in the womb and one 3 minutes out. So, yes, it is a moral dilemma for many.
That you do not see it as such is certainly valid for you, but to not see why it as so for others is a very strange POV.

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
May I suggest that as we have other threads on abortion itself, that this one stay focused on this particular "not quite A or B" position (or other similar positions that are not quite A or B)? (he said, hopefully...)

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
May I suggest that as we have other threads on abortion itself, that this one stay focused on this particular "not quite A or B" position (or other similar positions that are not quite A or B)? (he said, hopefully...)

[Razz]

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Jade Constable: But why shouldn't it be taken lightly? Why is it morally complex?
I don't know, biology can do strange things sometimes.

quote:
Jade Constable: I would certainly take it fairly lightly.
Can you be sure about this? I'm going to assume that you haven't been in this situation yet. I have the feeling that you can only know how you'll react to this after you've been through it.

I have the feeling that I'd rather not be patronised by you, and that I might like to have my own feelings respected as valid.

And how on Earth can you assume anything about my reproductive history?? [Confused]

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But why shouldn't it be taken lightly? Why is it morally complex? As I said upthread, to me it is no more negative or morally complex than cataract removal. It's simply a medical procedure to remove some unwanted cells. If I got pregnant it would be rather a bother but I wouldn't feel bad about an abortion or even think about it that much. I would certainly take it fairly lightly.

There were periods during my fertile years when I would certainly have had an abortion if I had gotten pregnant, but there's a big difference between "unwanted cells" that could grow into a human being that would have a whole life of her or her own and fingernail clippings.
But at the stage where I could legally get an abortion here (barring a serious deformity), the foetus could not grow into a human being outside of me. That's the whole point. In any case, fingernail clippings contain human DNA so are perfectly capable of being grown into a human being via cloning! There's not much difference between the two to me.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But why shouldn't it be taken lightly?

First, even from a totally detached POV as you claim, it is ridiculous to consider surgery as a prophylactic.
Second, there are physiological reasons many women who have abortions do not feel as you describe.
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:

Why is it morally complex? As I said upthread, to me it is no more negative or morally complex than cataract removal.

This is a strange claim. At some point, that lump of cells becomes a human. I think it safe to say this is generally regarded as true. The argument is when. All legally acceptable times are arbitrary, even those that go as far as birth. The labia are not magical doors which confer a soul and person-hood, there is little real difference between a child 8.5 months in the womb and one 3 minutes out. So, yes, it is a moral dilemma for many.
That you do not see it as such is certainly valid for you, but to not see why it as so for others is a very strange POV.

I meant 'why shouldn't it be taken lightly by me'. I'm not suggesting that everyone feel the way I do.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
LeRoc

Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216

 - Posted      Profile for LeRoc     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Jade Constable: And how on Earth can you assume anything about my reproductive history?? [Confused]
The fact that I announced it as an assumption is a recognition of the fact that I know nothing about your reproductive history.

I apologize for calling aspects related to your reproductivity into question, but I also suggest that if you don't wish this to happen, you don't put them on a thread as an example.

quote:
Jade Constable: I have the feeling that I'd rather not be patronised by you, and that I might like to have my own feelings respected as valid.
I do respect your feelings and I believe they are valid.

I'll rephrase it more generally then. I have the feeling that what a person will feel about having an abortion is something she will only really know after she has been through it.

[ 18. August 2014, 10:37: Message edited by: LeRoc ]

--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)

Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688

 - Posted      Profile for la vie en rouge     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Going back to the original question:

I personally consider abortion to be morally wrong in all but exceptional circumstances, but have no desire to see it made illegal.

There are pragmatic reasons, apart from anything else. Making abortion illegal doesn't stop women from aborting. It just makes them do it in more dangerous and unregulated ways.

--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France

Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153

 - Posted      Profile for Eliab   Email Eliab   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
It is even a position which can hold that abortion is indeed taking a human life--yes, a kind of infanticide--but that, again, making it illegal causes more harm than good.

I've heard that argued, though I think it's more rare than the immoral-but-should-be-legal view.

There seem to be shades of opinion within that view, though:

Someone could hold that abortion = 'taking a human life' in the strict and technical sense, but not feel that as an atrocity equivalent to murder: which I would see as a triumph of intuition over analysis (because there is a distinction to be made, which has not been explicitly made, between "a human life" as a biological definition, and "a human life" as a moral entity with rights).

Someone else could say that abortion really is morally equivalent to murder and ought, ideally, to be illegal for that reason, but that we cannot (for pragmatic reasons) afford the social cost of doing that. I'd be a little suspicious of such an argument: we wouldn't entertain pragmatic arguments against any other sort of murder, and I suspect that someone permitting what, on their philosophy, amounts to hundreds of thousands of murders ever year doesn't really feel about all those deaths as strongly as their ethics would suggest that they should.

There is also the aggressively pro-choice position (occasionally argued for here) that even if abortion is murder it's still up to the mother to do it or not. Sometimes it's said that because the foetus is 'parasitic' upon the mother, it has no right to an independent existence. I very much hope that this is argued only as an "even if" and that its proponents don't actually believe that a murder is taking place, but sometimes (especially when it carries on into a defence of actual infanticide) I have my doubts.

[ 18. August 2014, 13:04: Message edited by: Eliab ]

--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"

Richard Dawkins

Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
iamchristianhearmeroar
Shipmate
# 15483

 - Posted      Profile for iamchristianhearmeroar   Author's homepage   Email iamchristianhearmeroar   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
My view is basically as la vie en rouge has put it.

I personally think the latest term for an illegal abortion in the UK is too high - some babies will be viable at 24 weeks: my son's godfather was - he can only walk with sticks but is a lecturer and tutor in law at Cambridge University. I call that viable.

My view is also that the existing law on abortion (in the UK) should actually be applied and enforced. The Abortion Act in the UK was passed allowing abortion in specific circumstances only - it was not an open doors policy shift. We have had no Roe v Wade moment here.

--------------------
My blog: http://alastairnewman.wordpress.com/

Posts: 642 | From: London, UK | Registered: Feb 2010  |  IP: Logged
Curiosity killed ...

Ship's Mug
# 11770

 - Posted      Profile for Curiosity killed ...   Email Curiosity killed ...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
iamchristianhearmeroar - in the last couple of pages of this thread the discussion moved to late abortions in the UK abortion. I originally thought as you do, but that thread, particularly the posts by birdie and NorthEastQuine changed my mind. And looking at the statistics. There are very, very few, like a handful, very late abortions carried out.

--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat

Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
That's a fairly common pro-choice position. I'm a little confused as to how you see yourself as outside what you call the "standard dichotomy" since you regard abortion as "morally acceptable" (insofar as you indicate your willingness to accept it) and oppose criminalizing the procedure.

[Confused] I must have not explained myself.

There are two axises (axes?) here.

(1) Is abortion a morally wrong act?

and

(2) Should abortion be legal?

What I have seen exclusively, at least here in the US, is either

(A) Abortion is morally wrong, and therefore it should be illegal

or

(B) Abortion is morally right, and therefore it should be legal.

(I think we can eliminate the position that abortion is morally right but should be illegal; I don't think I've ever encountered that one.)

I'm talking about a position C which would hold that abortion is morally wrong, but that making it illegal will cause more harm than good.

It is even a position which can hold that abortion is indeed taking a human life--yes, a kind of infanticide--but that, again, making it illegal causes more harm than good.

I never, ever, ever heard anyone advocate this position, at least not in the US.

You've obviously never come across William Saletan's various droppings on the subject at Slate (some analysis here). I'm guessing that part of the reason that position is rarely stated so boldly is the self-centeredness involved. The basic premise seems to be that the most important factor in discussing abortion is that everyone knows that you personally find other people's abortions immoral and icky (and that the women who have them are irresponsible sluts). While I'm sure it may dismay a few women to know that they've lost your personal stamp of moral approval, I doubt any of them will decide to adopt that as the fixed star of their reproductive choices.

quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
When people argue that abortion should be legal, they almost always seem to focus on the reason for it being that a fetus is "merely" an array of cells, or part of the woman's body, not a human being, and that it is part of a woman's civil rights to be able to abort the fetus.

These are, of course, two separate questions. Even if it were conceded that a fœtus is a person with legal rights, it does not necessarily follow that those rights include unrestricted use of someone else's internal organs.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Robert Armin

All licens'd fool
# 182

 - Posted      Profile for Robert Armin     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
My position (and I think this maybe the official Anglican position, if such a thing exists) is that the foetus is a potential human. Therefore it should be treated with the utmost care and respect, but getting rid of it is not the same as murder (it isn't human), and it isn't as important as an existing human life (particularly if continued pregnancy threatened the life of the mother). To my mind this makes the best sense of all the available data, scientific and theological, and moves the discussion on from the impasse "murder is always wrong".

--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin

Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
[QUOTE]If I got pregnant it would be rather a bother but I wouldn't feel bad about an abortion or even think about it that much. I would certainly take it fairly lightly.

That's how you sincerely believe you'd feel .... if it did happen the reality might well be different.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Another hand pretty much raised here.

--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)

Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
The Abortion Act in the UK was passed allowing abortion in specific circumstances only - it was not an open doors policy shift. We have had no Roe v Wade moment here.

Arguably the Abortion Act does not legalise Abortion but grants immunity from prosecution under "Offences Against the Person Acts", for those performing such activities.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
...provided certain conditions are met.

--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)

Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
There is also the aggressively pro-choice position (occasionally argued for here) that even if abortion is murder it's still up to the mother to do it or not. Sometimes it's said that because the foetus is 'parasitic' upon the mother, it has no right to an independent existence.

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that because the fœtus is parasitic upon the mother it has no capability of an independent existence? The question remaining is whether it has a right to the use of its mother's/host's body to sustain its dependent existence that can be forcibly protected by state action.

quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
I'll rephrase it more generally then. I have the feeling that what a person will feel about having an abortion is something she will only really know after she has been through it.

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
If I got pregnant it would be rather a bother but I wouldn't feel bad about an abortion or even think about it that much. I would certainly take it fairly lightly.

That's how you sincerely believe you'd feel .... if it did happen the reality might well be different.
This is, of course, patronizing in multiple senses of the term. The underlying idea is that women are emotionally-driven idiots who need to have (typically male) representatives of the state limit their choices for their own good. What usually goes unacknowledged in these kinds of assertions are other possibilities, such as the idea that some women may sincerely believe they'll regret having an abortion but don't, or that women might sincerely regret not being able to get a much wanted or needed abortion.

Unfortunately this kind of paternalism isn't limited to internet busybodies. Those shaping policy seem willing to use this hypothetical future regret as a basis for official action.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I have been persuaded over the years to change my ideas from any moral judgement at all. I can't find it within myself to judge anyone any more.

I thought in the past along the lines many of you have written. I am viewing this presently as a "It's my body, and I will do what I want with it", bluntly, that a woman may do anything she so chooses without explanation or justification, privately as health and personal decision.

This video is a good summary, rather moving, at least to me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2ME8sR-bnY

--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/

Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
LeRoc

Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216

 - Posted      Profile for LeRoc     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Crœsos: This is, of course, patronizing in multiple senses of the term. The underlying idea is that women are emotionally-driven idiots who need to have (typically male) representatives of the state limit their choices for their own good.
I still fail to see what's patronizing here. I don't have an underlying idea that women are emotionally-driven idiots, and I haven't tried to argue for limiting their choices. FWIW, I am very much pro-choice. Abortion really isn't a subject that is hotly debated in my country anymore.

--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)

Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106

 - Posted      Profile for Jemima the 9th     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
My position (and I think this maybe the official Anglican position, if such a thing exists) is that the foetus is a potential human. Therefore it should be treated with the utmost care and respect, but getting rid of it is not the same as murder (it isn't human), and it isn't as important as an existing human life (particularly if continued pregnancy threatened the life of the mother).

This is my view also. When I had a miscarriage, I felt that what I had lost was not a human life, nor a bundle of cells, but some sort of 3rd option. It was the potential for a life. Opportunities for treating such things with respect once you've miscarried them, though, are very slim indeed....

The trouble with reducing the upper age limit, as iamchristianhearmeroar, suggests, is the anatomy scan at 20 weeks. If you wish to terminate a pregnancy based on the results of that scan, you would need to make your decision very quickly.

Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Abortions for congenital defects are already exempted from the 24 week limit in the UK, if memory serves. That presumably wouldn't change if the limit were lowered to 20 weeks.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Going back to the original question:

I personally consider abortion to be morally wrong in all but exceptional circumstances, but have no desire to see it made illegal.

There are pragmatic reasons, apart from anything else. Making abortion illegal doesn't stop women from aborting. It just makes them do it in more dangerous and unregulated ways.

Agreed. What basically would happen would be back alleys, coat hangers, drinking bleach, throwing oneself down the stairs, and all of the other horrible things of the past.

quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
You've obviously never come across William Saletan's various droppings on the subject at Slate (some analysis here).

Never heard of him, but then I don't really read Slate.

quote:
I'm guessing that part of the reason that position is rarely stated so boldly is the self-centeredness involved. The basic premise seems to be that the most important factor in discussing abortion is that everyone knows that you personally find other people's abortions immoral and icky (and that the women who have them are irresponsible sluts). While I'm sure it may dismay a few women to know that they've lost your personal stamp of moral approval, I doubt any of them will decide to adopt that as the fixed star of their reproductive choices.
I was going to be all coy and passive-aggressive about it but decided to just cut to the chase--please knock off personally attacking me and my motives for trying to come up with a coherent approach to what is arguably one of the more thorny issues of our present day. I'll assume you hold your positions as a rational and caring person, and I'd appreciate the same. Deal?

quote:

These are, of course, two separate questions. Even if it were conceded that a fœtus is a person with legal rights, it does not necessarily follow that those rights include unrestricted use of someone else's internal organs.

That's technically true, though I don't think we'd generally approve of, say, someone cutting off someone's electrical supply for their oxygen machine on those grounds. (Not to mention that use of the organs isn't quite unrestricted, since we're talking about nine months, max.)

At any rate my own point here is that one can believe abortion is morally wrong, even that it is taking another human being's life, but that to make it illegal causes more problems than it solves. Those of us who believe abortion is indeed wrong don't have to express that by trying to bring back laws against it, which is what many people in the US are trying to do.

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106

 - Posted      Profile for Jemima the 9th     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Abortions for congenital defects are already exempted from the 24 week limit in the UK, if memory serves. That presumably wouldn't change if the limit were lowered to 20 weeks.

Nhs choices confirms this. My mistake - I should have thought of this. My apologies.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
I was going to be all coy and passive-aggressive about it but decided to just cut to the chase--please knock off personally attacking me and my motives for trying to come up with a coherent approach to what is arguably one of the more thorny issues of our present day. I'll assume you hold your positions as a rational and caring person, and I'd appreciate the same. Deal?

quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
These are, of course, two separate questions. Even if it were conceded that a fœtus is a person with legal rights, it does not necessarily follow that those rights include unrestricted use of someone else's internal organs.

That's technically true, though I don't think we'd generally approve of, say, someone cutting off someone's electrical supply for their oxygen machine on those grounds.
I have to admit you're right there. No one would argue that the self-determination rights of an oxygen machine should be respected or that it shouldn't be treated like a piece of property with no say in what happens to it. Of course, most people regard oxygen machines as non-sentient, inanimate objects without rights or opinions. Exactly why you think this is an argument that's equally applicable to women is a bit opaque. Clarification, please?

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772

 - Posted      Profile for Palimpsest   Email Palimpsest   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The concept that because a large number of people find something immoral, it should be illegal presumes that everyone should be subject to the morality of this group. In the past and the present, divorce, contraception, alcohol, pot, homosexu8al loan interest, and abortion have been illegal.

I'm not saying nothing should be illegal. But morality is a slippery reason for banning things.

Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290

 - Posted      Profile for Horseman Bree   Email Horseman Bree   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Would you care to elucidate homosexual loan interest?

--------------------
It's Not That Simple

Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools