|
|
Post by lubbockgoper on Mar 1, 2012 20:07:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by elalacran on Mar 2, 2012 10:54:43 GMT -5
Libs? You mean liberals? I'd say liberals are conflicted on abortion. Abortion is not a liberal cause though the right of a woman to make a decision is. There are liberals who come down on the side of fetal rights and liberals who weigh the rights of the mother more heavily.
So let's drop this "lib" nonsense.
An embryo is not a baby.
A fetus is not a baby.
An embryo or fetus has the potential to become a baby if circumstances favor that, but so do unfertilized ova.
Any egg that goes unfertilized is a baby lost. Do you want to start compelling continual pregnancy beginning at age 11?
I do have problems with permissive killing of infants. It is surprising that "medical ethicists" advocate this view, though they may only be saying that there ought to be debate about it.
My own view is that we ought to be more lenient toward mothers who kill their children and not necessarily prescribe death penalties or life emprisonment; but that is more because there is little deterrence accomplished and minimal threat to others if they are released; and because living carries its own penalty for them; they are ostracized forevermore.
|
|
|
|
Post by lubbockgoper on Mar 4, 2012 8:36:04 GMT -5
So please distinguish why a baby within hours of being born differs from one that is a few days old.
|
|
|
|
Post by elalacran on Mar 5, 2012 14:36:18 GMT -5
Why? I don't see any dispute there. Where abortion is legal, it is legal only in the early stages of development and not near term.
And yes, the line drawing --saying this one is human and entitled to legal protection while this one is not --has a lot to do with how developed the fetus is. If it looks like a baby then hardly anyone would approve of abortion. If it is a tiny thing with a tail and gill slits and an undeveloped brain and does not look human, then "tough luck, kid-to-be!"
This is what I've said all along, that whatever one's stand on abortion, it is based on arbitrary line-drawing.
Over in that other forum there is a thread about abortion. One of the posts cites the commandment "Thou shalt not kill." Well, that doesn't decide the issue. The Bible is not inarguably clear on the rights of the fetus.
And the word "kill" in the commandment is the Hebrew word ratsach, which means according to Strong, "to dash in pieces," and especially, "to murder." Merely killing a human being is not necessarily murder, because in various places in the Bible one is commanded to kill or execute a human being or great numbers of human beings including pregnant women and sometimes children.
SO, we are left to our own assumptions and interpretations and trying to decide what is right and wrong.
My point being that there is no absolute unarguable standard. The only standards are those we choose to adopt.
|
|
