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 | Register | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Special interest discussion   » Dead Horses   » Cleft lip and palate a good reason? (Abortion) (Page 18)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  15  16  17  18  19  20 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Cleft lip and palate a good reason? (Abortion)
Curiosity killed ...

Ship's Mug
# 11770

 - Posted      Profile for Curiosity killed ...   Email Curiosity killed ...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
As there are other people now involved in this discussion ...

I would say that the Psalms are far more likely to be referring to a later stage of the nine months gestation in the womb. Those poetic phrases conjure up for me the description of Mary meeting Elizabeth when she was carrying John - and felt John leap for joy, which certainly suggests after the 19 weeks when quickening is usually felt. The Psalms don't say that a zygote or foetus is known from conception, and what they are expressing that you were known before you were born. That doesn't go against anything I've said about personhood varying as gestation continues.

The passage I was thinking of was Exodus 21:22-25

As a biological aside to that, I would be very surprised if a miscarriage was counted as a miscarriage until after at the earliest 8 weeks gestation in Biblical times. We are very much better at knowing that people are pregnant earlier than at at any stage in history before. Thirty or forty years ago, a mother had to wait until she was at 8 weeks gestation before a pregnancy test would work. Women just thought they might be pregnant.

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

Posts: 13479 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To amber,
quote:
I'm on record already as having had to undergo a life-saving abortion because of ectopic pregnancy.
So that’s not choice and not what I ma addressing; why have you addressed that to me?
Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To Curiosity killed…
quote:
I would say that the Psalms are far more likely to be referring to a later stage of the nine months gestation in the womb. Those poetic phrases conjure up for me the description of Mary meeting Elizabeth when she was carrying John - and felt John leap for joy, which certainly suggests after the 19 weeks when quickening is usually felt. The Psalms don't say that a zygote or foetus is known from conception, and what they are expressing that you were known before you were born. That doesn't go against anything I've said about personhood varying as gestation continues.
Well there is your problem, the scriptures don’t mention zygote or foetus because it’s a human invention probably for deception purposes. If the scripture says God knows us in the womb then its in the womb, zygote and foetus are in the womb.

But I see you failed to address what I asked you.
What would you say to the person who doesnt think the child under 5 is viable either because the child under 5 doesnt have cognitive thought and cant live outside the womb without the help of the mother or someone else either?

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
Hiro's Leap

Shipmate
# 12470

 - Posted      Profile for Hiro's Leap   Email Hiro's Leap   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
the scriptures don’t mention zygote or foetus because it’s a human invention probably for deception purposes.

Words fail me. Well, non-Hellish words fail me.
quote:
the child under 5 doesnt have cognitive thought
Do you not know what cognitive means, or haven't you met any 4 year olds?

[ 04. January 2010, 10:07: Message edited by: Hiro's Leap ]

Posts: 3408 | From: UK, OK | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142

 - Posted      Profile for amber.   Email amber.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ooo, I had no cognitive thought before age 10, and a colleague of mine only managed hers at age 20. Thank goodness we're still here, eh? [Paranoid] I don't see how cognitive thought can be a measure of the value of life, personally-speaking. Nor how one would measure it.
Posts: 5095 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To Hiro’s Leap,
quote:
Do you not know what cognitive means, or haven't you met any 4 year olds?
My question was what would you say to those who suggested it, not for you to assume I am making that claim.
Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To Amber,
quote:
Ooo, I had no cognitive thought before age 10, and a colleague of mine only managed hers at age 20. Thank goodness we're still here, eh? I don't see how cognitive thought can be a measure of the value of life, personally-speaking. Nor how one would measure it.
Thank you.
Similarly many do not see sentience can be the measure of the value of life either .. both after all can come if the life is left to develop.

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549

 - Posted      Profile for Dafyd   Email Dafyd   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
Well there is your problem, the scriptures don’t mention zygote or foetus because it’s a human invention probably for deception purposes. If the scripture says God knows us in the womb then its in the womb, zygote and foetus are in the womb.

I'm going to say this in both the homosexuality thread and the abortion thread because it's important in both.
You cannot say that because a concept comes from outside the Bible it is irrelevant to the correct interpretation of the Bible. A glaring example: Psalm 98:8 'Let the floods clap their hands; let the hills sing together for joy'. If we did not allow knowledge from outside the Bible to determine the way we read the Bible we would be forced to the conclusion that the seas and lakes have hands.
The Bible won't teach us the English language (or Hebrew or Greek). If we don't know a language from outside the Bible we won't understand the Bible at all.
So you can't say that just because a concept comes from outside the Bible it is irrelevant to the Bible.

In this case, you can't say that scientific knowledge is irrelevant. (And you certainly shouldn't say that scientific concepts have been developed for 'deception purposes' (sic) if you don't understand them. That's bearing false witness.)
Besides, as I said earlier, just because God knows us in the womb that doesn't mean that whatever is in the womb is us. (Is the placenta us?) As I pointed out in an earlier post, the Bible says that God puts us together in the womb. Suppose you take that at the same face value that you take everything else except divorce. That would mean that at some point, what's in the womb is not yet us - we only become us when God finishes making us.

By the way, which part of Proverbs do you think talks about us in the womb?

[ 04. January 2010, 10:56: Message edited by: Dafyd ]

--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams

Posts: 10307 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
aggg
Shipmate
# 13727

 - Posted      Profile for aggg   Email aggg   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So let us just be clear what we're saying here.

A frog produces millions of sperm, of which tens of thousands become zygotes, but a small proportion become viable tadpoles (most get eaten or die or whatever).

Assuming this is 'natural', presumably this is the Way God Intended - ie the vast destruction of frog zygotes.

However, mankind is something entirely unique in that God Intends every viable zygote to become a human.

How is this assessment of what God Intends being made?

Or maybe it just shows that God hates Frogs [Big Grin]

--------------------
Myrrh: please, in future refrain from replying to anything I might write

Posts: 567 | Registered: May 2008  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To aggg,
quote:
So let us just be clear what we're saying here.

A frog produces millions of sperm, of which tens of thousands become zygotes, but a small proportion become viable tadpoles (most get eaten or die or whatever).

Assuming this is 'natural', presumably this is the Way God Intended - ie the vast destruction of frog zygotes.

The frog doesn’t produce any zygotes. A zygote is the cell resulting from the union of gamates. A frog needs another frog of the opposite sex to produce a zygote.

quote:
However, mankind is something entirely unique in that God Intends every viable zygote to become a human.
The issue is that no same sex couple can produce any zygotes.
Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
Hiro's Leap

Shipmate
# 12470

 - Posted      Profile for Hiro's Leap   Email Hiro's Leap   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
The issue is that no same sex couple can produce any zygotes.

That might be your issue, but what's it got to do with this thread?
Posts: 3408 | From: UK, OK | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142

 - Posted      Profile for amber.   Email amber.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
The issue is that no same sex couple can produce any zygotes.

Cloning: What about cloning, then?
Posts: 5095 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
aggg
Shipmate
# 13727

 - Posted      Profile for aggg   Email aggg   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
To aggg,
quote:
So let us just be clear what we're saying here.

A frog produces millions of sperm, of which tens of thousands become zygotes, but a small proportion become viable tadpoles (most get eaten or die or whatever).

Assuming this is 'natural', presumably this is the Way God Intended - ie the vast destruction of frog zygotes.

The frog doesn’t produce any zygotes. A zygote is the cell resulting from the union of gamates. A frog needs another frog of the opposite sex to produce a zygote.

quote:
However, mankind is something entirely unique in that God Intends every viable zygote to become a human.
The issue is that no same sex couple can produce any zygotes.

My goodness, a case study in how to monumentally miss the point.

In case you hadn't noticed, this particular thread is about abortion.

--------------------
Myrrh: please, in future refrain from replying to anything I might write

Posts: 567 | Registered: May 2008  |  IP: Logged
Louise
Shipmate
# 30

 - Posted      Profile for Louise   Email Louise   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
hosting
Please do not discuss homosexuality on this thread. This is the main abortion thread, it doesn't belong here.

Thank you.
Louise
Dead Horses Host

hosting off

--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.

Posts: 6891 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
RooK

1 of 6
# 1852

 - Posted      Profile for RooK   Author's homepage   Email RooK   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
The issue is that no same sex couple can produce any zygotes.

Another issue is that you've convinced the Adminisphere that you're crusading. Please consider the full ramifications of what we mean by Commandment 8 during your suspension.

-RooK
Admin

Posts: 15095 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
To amber,
quote:
I'm on record already as having had to undergo a life-saving abortion because of ectopic pregnancy.
So that’s not choice and not what I ma addressing; why have you addressed that to me?
How very insensitive, even by BMS's own standards.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23019 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142

 - Posted      Profile for amber.   Email amber.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
To amber,
quote:
I'm on record already as having had to undergo a life-saving abortion because of ectopic pregnancy.
So that’s not choice and not what I ma addressing; why have you addressed that to me?
How very insensitive, even by BMS's own standards.
Kind of you to say so, Leo [Smile]
Posts: 5095 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm not glad that you had that 'choice' thrust upon you but I'm glad you had the operation (hope that comes out right!).

--------------------
"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
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm glad you lived to tell the tale!

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62941 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  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'm glad you had the option to have the operation, Amber. Because there are those (though admitedly, a small minority) who think that not even the potential death of the mother is a legitimate reason to have an abortion.

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

Posts: 11620 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
When I lived in Chicago with my first wife, the man who ran our apartment building on behalf of its owner was a member of a very conservative Evangelical church. He and his wife had had an acephalic (is that the right term? no brain at all?) child, which was discovered in utero. They decided to have an abortion. They were devastated by this, deeply mourning the loss of their child, but there was nobody they could tell because if they had mentioned it at church they would have been drummed out. (They had seen others drummed out for similar reasons.)

They could have carried the child to term, with relatively little risk to the mother's life (unless the child "died" and turned septic), only to watch it die within seconds of being delivered. But they didn't think they could endure that additional heartbreak. (And myself since having had two children who died within seconds of being delivered, I now know how horribly painful that can be.)

They were seriously hurting, as was evidenced by even mentioning this to mere tenants in a building they supered. We had them over for dinner and they poured out their hearts to us. And we at the time were evangelicals ourselves.

I've heard it said that Christianity is the only religion which kills its own wounded. These people needed comfort and peace, and (with good reason) could only expect enmity and rejection.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62941 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemrw:
I'm glad you had the option to have the operation, Amber. Because there are those (though admitedly, a small minority) who think that not even the potential death of the mother is a legitimate reason to have an abortion.

Such people have formed an electoral majority in some countries:

quote:
A policy that criminalizes all abortions has a flip side. It appears to mandate that the full force of the medical team must tend toward saving the fetus under any circumstances. This notion can lead to some dangerous practices. Consider an ectopic pregnancy, a condition that occurs when a microscopic fertilized egg moves down the fallopian tube — which is no bigger around than a pencil — and gets stuck there (or sometimes in the abdomen). Unattended, the stuck fetus grows until the organ containing it ruptures. A simple operation can remove the fetus before the organ bursts. After a rupture, though, the situation can turn into a medical emergency.

According to Sara Valdés, the director of the Hospital de Maternidad, women coming to her hospital with ectopic pregnancies cannot be operated on until fetal death or a rupture of the fallopian tube. "That is our policy," Valdés told me. She was plainly in torment about the subject. "That is the law," she said. "The D.A.'s office told us that this was the law." Valdés estimated that her hospital treated more than a hundred ectopic pregnancies each year. She described the hospital's practice. "Once we determine that they have an ectopic pregnancy, we make sure they stay in the hospital," she said. The women are sent to the dispensary, where they receive a daily ultrasound to check the fetus. "If it's dead, we can operate," she said. "Before that, we can't." If there is a persistent fetal heartbeat, then they have to wait for the fallopian tube to rupture. If they are able to persuade the patient to stay, though, doctors can operate the minute any signs of early rupturing are detected. Even a few drops of blood seeping from a fallopian tube will "irritate the abdominal wall and cause pain," Valdés explained. By operating at the earliest signs of a potential rupture, she said, her doctors are able to minimize the risk to the woman.

One doctor, who asked to remain anonymous because of the risk of prosecution, explained that there are creative solutions to the problem of ectopic pregnancies: "Sometimes when an ectopic pregnancy comes in, the attendant will say, 'Send this patient to the best ultrasound doctor.' And I'll say, 'No, send her to the least-experienced ultrasound doctor.' He'll say, 'I can't find a heartbeat here.' Then we can operate."

Bear in mind that this is not some hypothetical horror story, this is actual policy in a nation that has adopted pro-life* positions into its law.


*Offer expires at birth

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

Posts: 10334 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28

 - Posted      Profile for Nicolemr   Author's homepage   Email Nicolemr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
True, Cro. What I meant, and should have said, was "a small minority in this country".

BTW *ahem* You owe me e-mail big time at this point.

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

Posts: 11620 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142

 - Posted      Profile for amber.   Email amber.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
MT, there are no words enough for what you've been through [Votive]

Luckily/unluckily for me re the ectopic, we were already at medical emergency blue light ambulance status, so the question wouldn't have arisen. Can't remember a lot of the following few weeks. Probably just as well.

It's a hot topic for me generally because of the reality that I'm already considered to be 'not the sort of future person we want on the planet' through my own genetic type. Much ethical and religious debate still to be had about those grey areas between "terrible suffering - almost no question that this is the right decision" and "just might suffer somehow, at some unspecified point, perhaps, so that's reason enough".

Posts: 5095 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
{Looping back to the OP for a minute.}

There are organizations like Operation Smile that fix cleft lips and palates for kids whose families can't afford the surgery.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?"--Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon"
--"I'm not giving up--and neither should you." --SNL

Posts: 17647 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
When I lived in Chicago with my first wife, the man who ran our apartment building on behalf of its owner was a member of a very conservative Evangelical church. He and his wife had had an acephalic (is that the right term? no brain at all?) child, which was discovered in utero. They decided to have an abortion. They were devastated by this, deeply mourning the loss of their child, but there was nobody they could tell because if they had mentioned it at church they would have been drummed out. (They had seen others drummed out for similar reasons.)

They could have carried the child to term, with relatively little risk to the mother's life (unless the child "died" and turned septic), only to watch it die within seconds of being delivered. But they didn't think they could endure that additional heartbreak. (And myself since having had two children who died within seconds of being delivered, I now know how horribly painful that can be.)

They were seriously hurting, as was evidenced by even mentioning this to mere tenants in a building they supered. We had them over for dinner and they poured out their hearts to us. And we at the time were evangelicals ourselves.

I've heard it said that Christianity is the only religion which kills its own wounded. These people needed comfort and peace, and (with good reason) could only expect enmity and rejection.

'King Hell! [Mad] [Votive]

--------------------
"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
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Beg pardon?

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62941 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr Clingford
Shipmate
# 7961

 - Posted      Profile for Mr Clingford   Email Mr Clingford   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Short form of Fucking Hell. Expressing, I think, how terrible the situation that poor couple were in. How awful Christians can be. Such little humanity.

--------------------
Ne'er cast a clout till May be out.

If only.

Posts: 1635 | From: A Fleeting moment | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Louise
Shipmate
# 30

 - Posted      Profile for Louise   Email Louise   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
bumping the general thread up

--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.

Posts: 6891 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357

 - Posted      Profile for Justinian   Email Justinian   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Matt,

Quick question:

If you believe as you say in the other thread, you support the pro-choice movement on every goal except one. And oppose the pro-life movement on every goal except one.

Further the methods the pro-choice movement are trying to implement are far better at lowering the actual abortion rate than those of the pro-life movement. And abortion to save the life of the mother (as for an ectopic pregnancy) can be necessary, so I assume you do not support banning it.

With all the above taken into account, why do you define yourself as pro-life rather than pro-choice when you agree with the pro-choice movement on almost everything including the desirability of lowering the abortion rate as much as possible?

--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.

Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.

Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Because (a) I think that that is a more accurate description of the pro-life position (at least for me) and (b) I consider abortion to be the deliberate ending of a human life, which I believe most of those in the pro-choice position do not.

--------------------
"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
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I know more pro-choice people who DO believe that abortion is ending a human life than those who don't. A lot of pro-choice people would never choose abortion for themselves, but do not want to impose their morals on others.

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

Posts: 5302 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Because (a) I think that that is a more accurate description of the pro-life position (at least for me) and (b) I consider abortion to be the deliberate ending of a human life, which I believe most of those in the pro-choice position do not.

Given that we usually classify "the deliberate ending of a human life" as murder (if premeditated, as most medical abortions would be), would you consider it appropriate that abortion carry the same criminal penalties as murder?

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

Posts: 10334 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ah, I see what you're trying to do there - the 'Libertyville Gambit': if I say 'yes', I will come across as unbelievably harsh and draconian but if I say 'no', you will say "Aha! So a foetus isn't as valuable a human life as a post-natal individual". Let me pose you a question by way of reply: do we apply the same penalties to a mother who kills her three-month-old baby whilst suffering from post-natal depression as we do to a gunman who kills many children at a school in Connecticut? If not, why not? Your answer will give you a clue as to how I might answer your question.

--------------------
"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
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357

 - Posted      Profile for Justinian   Email Justinian   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Because (a) I think that that is a more accurate description of the pro-life position (at least for me) and (b) I consider abortion to be the deliberate ending of a human life, which I believe most of those in the pro-choice position do not.

Quick corollary question: What about either encephalopathic (literally brainless) foetuses or ectopic pregnancies?

--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.

Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.

Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
1. I have no problem with abortion here as non-viable at term

2. No problem here either - non-viable again plus of course mother's life in danger

--------------------
"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
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357

 - Posted      Profile for Justinian   Email Justinian   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
1. I have no problem with abortion here as non-viable at term

2. No problem here either - non-viable again plus of course mother's life in danger

That's about what I expected. Abortion needs to remain on the medical books for obvious reasons because it is sometimes a medical necessity. And you don't like it. Neither do I and in that it's little different from limb amputation.

Your position is little different from what I see as the mainstream pro-choice position. That position is that no one who doesn't want a child should get pregnant. Abortion should ideally not happen. But there are regrettable cases where it is so it must not be banned. And short of a full public inquiry for every case it's up to the doctor and patient to work out what is necessary.

--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.

Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.

Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Let me pose you a question by way of reply: do we apply the same penalties to a mother who kills her three-month-old baby whilst suffering from post-natal depression as we do to a gunman who kills many children at a school in Connecticut? If not, why not? Your answer will give you a clue as to how I might answer your question.

The penalties in each situation are different for two reasons.
  1. Multiple counts of a crime usually carry multiple sentences.
  2. In the former case the woman can argue diminished capacity.

I'm guessing that point #2 is what you're getting at, the Susan Smith defense. Essentially arguing that all women, by nature, have a diminished capacity to judge the morality of their own actions would be consistent with most pro-life* regulations and legal regimes. I'm not sure this "women are moral incompetents" argument would be applied to other situations, which reinforces my suspicion that the pro-life* movement is mostly about controlling women.


--------------------
*Offer expires at birth, especially if female.

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

Posts: 10334 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Are you suggesting, therefore, that a woman, say, who has been raped who kills the resulting child (let's say post-birth to avoid confusion with the whole 'is the foetus a person' debate) carries the same moral culpability as, say, a random stranger who kills a child (again, let's keep child in the singular to avoid confusion)?

--------------------
"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 Matt Black:
Are you suggesting, therefore, that a woman, say, who has been raped who kills the resulting child (let's say post-birth to avoid confusion with the whole 'is the foetus a person' debate) carries the same moral culpability as, say, a random stranger who kills a child (again, let's keep child in the singular to avoid confusion)?

Moral culpability is a tricky question, but the pro-life* position would suggest a similar level of blame. As far as legal culpability, which was the basis of my original point, yes, killing your relatives is usually considered just as much a crime as killing strangers.


--------------------
*Offer expires at birth.

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

Posts: 10334 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Not in certain circumstances (legally): there is diminished responsibility for example and (in England and Wales at least) there is the lesser crime of infanticide/ child destruction which is a lesser crime than murder.

--------------------
"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
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[Missed edit window]...both offences carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment but this is rarely imposed eg: the case of Sainsbury in 1989 resulted in the teenage girl concerned being given probation.

And the pre-1967 abortion law (The Offences Against the Person Act 1861) distinguished abortion from murder in that it was not (then) a capital crime; the post-1967 legislation, whilst likewise it provides for a maximum sentence of life imprisonment for breach of the 1967 Act (as since amended), again, a three year term of imprisonment was imposed inScrimaglia (1971)

--------------------
"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
Invictus_88
Shipmate
# 15352

 - Posted      Profile for Invictus_88     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Are you suggesting, therefore, that a woman, say, who has been raped who kills the resulting child (let's say post-birth to avoid confusion with the whole 'is the foetus a person' debate) carries the same moral culpability as, say, a random stranger who kills a child (again, let's keep child in the singular to avoid confusion)?

Children of rapists still deserve to not be killed by their mothers, pre or post birth.

I think all this hair-splitting over relative culpabilities and relative degrees of wrong distracts somewhat from the main point; ending the life of your unborn child because of the wrongdoing of its father is not a just act. Some may find it understandable, but it is not just.

Posts: 206 | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
art dunce
Shipmate
# 9258

 - Posted      Profile for art dunce     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Invictus_88:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Are you suggesting, therefore, that a woman, say, who has been raped who kills the resulting child (let's say post-birth to avoid confusion with the whole 'is the foetus a person' debate) carries the same moral culpability as, say, a random stranger who kills a child (again, let's keep child in the singular to avoid confusion)?

Children of rapists still deserve to not be killed by their mothers, pre or post birth.

I think all this hair-splitting over relative culpabilities and relative degrees of wrong distracts somewhat from the main point; ending the life of your unborn child because of the wrongdoing of its father is not a just act. Some may find it understandable, but it is not just.

It's not about punishing the wrongdoing of the father but protecting the innocent girl or woman from involuntary servitude. Slavery is unjust and immoral.

[ 30. September 2013, 15:57: Message edited by: art dunce ]

--------------------
Ego is not your amigo.

Posts: 1283 | From: in the studio | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Invictus_88
Shipmate
# 15352

 - Posted      Profile for Invictus_88     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by art dunce:
quote:
Originally posted by Invictus_88:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Are you suggesting, therefore, that a woman, say, who has been raped who kills the resulting child (let's say post-birth to avoid confusion with the whole 'is the foetus a person' debate) carries the same moral culpability as, say, a random stranger who kills a child (again, let's keep child in the singular to avoid confusion)?

Children of rapists still deserve to not be killed by their mothers, pre or post birth.

I think all this hair-splitting over relative culpabilities and relative degrees of wrong distracts somewhat from the main point; ending the life of your unborn child because of the wrongdoing of its father is not a just act. Some may find it understandable, but it is not just.

It's not about punishing the wrongdoing of the father but protecting the innocent girl or woman from involuntary servitude. Slavery is unjust and immoral.
Slavery is unjust and immoral, but motherhood is not slavery.

And if the mother hates the idea so much, and still feels the same way once the child has been born, then that child could be put up for adoption.

Rather than dismembered in the womb and thrown away.

(...just sayin'.)

Posts: 206 | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
art dunce
Shipmate
# 9258

 - Posted      Profile for art dunce     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Motherhood is a relationship you can choose to participate in or not. Forced gestation is slavery.

--------------------
Ego is not your amigo.

Posts: 1283 | From: in the studio | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331

 - Posted      Profile for Jane R   Email Jane R   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Slavery is unjust and immoral, but motherhood is not slavery.
You are obviously not a mother.

Now, if you will excuse me, my offspring requires the presence of her personal slave to read her a bedtime story.

Posts: 3866 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
art dunce
Shipmate
# 9258

 - Posted      Profile for art dunce     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
quote:
Slavery is unjust and immoral, but motherhood is not slavery.
You are obviously not a mother.

Now, if you will excuse me, my offspring requires the presence of her personal slave to read her a bedtime story.

Just wait until they can drive and then you can get your payback. My oldest was complaining the other day that she feels like a gofer and a chauffeur for siblings.

--------------------
Ego is not your amigo.

Posts: 1283 | From: in the studio | Registered: Apr 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 
quote:
Originally posted by Invictus_88:
Slavery is unjust and immoral, but motherhood is not slavery.

And if the mother hates the idea so much, and still feels the same way once the child has been born, then that child could be put up for adoption.

Rather than dismembered in the womb and thrown away.

(...just sayin'.)

  1. being forced to carry an unwanted foetus through pregnancy is a form of slavery - the mother is being forced into work that she does not want to do and has her body and life taken over by that foetus for at least a year, even if the baby is given up at birth;
  2. a vanishingly small number of abortions require the dismemberment of a foetus in utero. The vast majority - over 90% in the UK - are carried out in the first semester when the aborted foetal sac is smaller than an inch across and does not require dismemberment. That particular bit of propaganda is just that - propaganda.


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

Posts: 13479 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
art dunce
Shipmate
# 9258

 - Posted      Profile for art dunce     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
quote:
Originally posted by Invictus_88:
Slavery is unjust and immoral, but motherhood is not slavery.

And if the mother hates the idea so much, and still feels the same way once the child has been born, then that child could be put up for adoption.

Rather than dismembered in the womb and thrown away.

(...just sayin'.)

  1. being forced to carry an unwanted foetus through pregnancy is a form of slavery - the mother is being forced into work that she does not want to do and has her body and life taken over by that foetus for at least a year, even if the baby is given up at birth;
  2. a vanishingly small number of abortions require the dismemberment of a foetus in utero. The vast majority - over 90% in the UK - are carried out in the first semester when the aborted foetal sac is smaller than an inch across and does not require dismemberment. That particular bit of propaganda is just that - propaganda.

I agree with all you posted. In the case of rape the girl/woman did not even consent to the sexual act that impregnated her. I do not see how it is ethical to use another human being, against their will, as merely a means to an end.

--------------------
Ego is not your amigo.

Posts: 1283 | From: in the studio | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  15  16  17  18  19  20 
 
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

 
Check out Reform magazine
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
  ship of fools