Originally Posted by RayA75
In intercourse, here is the series of events that can potentially occur to give the process of becoming:
IF the intercourse was unprotected, then IF the man ejaculates inside, then IF the woman ovulates, then IF the egg gets fertilized.
All these ifs obviously show how intercourse is only of potentiality in relation to life.
Granted all the answers to those "IF" are "yes", then here is the series of events that need to take place for a fetus to give life.
The fetus successfully develops and is born.
This process is what we protect from being aborted. Just because, through accidents to which ethics do not apply, the fetus could stop developing, that does not mean we should do it ourselves.
The fetus is already in the process of becoming. This is what is inevitable. Should an accident happen, and the child be stillborn, there is nothing ethics can do about that.
I know first hand of stillborn children. Had it not happened, I would be the oldest of three siblings.
So,to you it is ehtical that we use our medical advancements to intervene,and help a fetus that might not have developed under normal conditions(without the help of the advancments we currently have)?You can't deny that today that we have helped people stay alive that would have been dead,if not for those advancements etc...And,it is ethically correct because it helps us humans endure our enviroment.
I want to just give my conclusion,about something that I posted before:
Originally Posted by William
A fetus comes from the fertelization of an ovum,right?Your argument is that through killing that fetus,we deprive him from the right to live.But,if it wasn't for the entry of the sperm to the vagina of the women...the baby wouldn't have existed anyway.Meaning that if it wasn't for the "want" of the two people involved in this sexual act,the baby wouldn't have existed.In conclusion,if their was an actual "desire" for the baby to exist,then he would have existed.This case is more related to the case of "oops,I forgot to wear a condom!" in which mistakes happen.There are countless of other situations as well.
Originally Posted by RayA75
No. A fetus is formed from the fertilization of a sperm, not a baby.
I bolded what I will be referring to in that quote: "purely because of nature." Normative moral philosophy cannot and does not apply to natural dice throws. It applies to our actions. Here's a metaphor which can be applied:
A volcano erupts, and kills tons of plants and animals. Can we say that this is ethical or not?
I wanted to conclude is that the fetus isn't of something significant at all since it derives from a high degree ofchance.First,in meiosis if it was in spermatogenesis,their will be the production of four different sperms in the end of the process.In addition,to quote from wikipidia:"This division implicates sources of genetic variation, such as random inclusion of either parental chromosomes, and chromosomal crossover, to increase the genetic variability of the gamete."Same thing for oogenisis(although we have the production of polar bodies,which is not important for my point atm).Without forgetting that the sperm that might perforate the egg might be different everytime.All of that shows,that the fetus is truly nothing important by itself.If we allow it the right to develop then it'll develop to it's potential.In this sense,the fetus is just a "thing" that contains random(ofcourse there are certain guarantees...) genetic information.It has the capability of developing,if it does then great...if it doesn't then why should it matter?Their are endless possibilties of fetus's that can develop.Furthermore,you seem to always be concerned that if it's nature that killed "those people" then that's "OK".But,don't you think we alter our nature everyday?Simply because we existed,we have altered all of our enviroment.
Your messed up world enthrills me
Originally Posted by RayA75
I completely sympathize with those would-be mothers and their families. It is a tough situation, and it sucks either way. I just feel that a basic right to become is more important than these situations, because it is the building block of rights. It is the foundation through which our right to life and everything else comes from.
I gotta say I've never come across this concept of "right to become", and a quick google search doesn't seem to turn up anything.
Do you believe, as I do, that rights are not not inherent and immutable, and instead derived from social conventions?
There's no question whatsoever that fetal development was essential for the survival of our species and eventually the emergence of our rights. What wasn't at all required is a legislated right of every fetus to develop...Abortion doesn't threaten the existence our species, since most women will have children anyway. As such, it doesn't threaten "life".
It simply prevents fertilization. Nothing is becoming already, and nothing is a certainty without taking the pill. It's just preventing an unwanted potential fertilization.
Cool beans.
Why is that? Can you elaborate?
Not much I can add. I just don't think the conclusion follows from the two premises.
P1 Fetuses are indispensable for people
P2 People are deemed important and protected by law
C Fetuses must therefore be deemed important and protected by law
My chief concern is the well-being of actual persons (the people, our society) - not the legal protection of the development of every oblivious fetus.
People will be created regardless of the legal status of abortion, but outlawing it can hurt people by adding to the already bloated population, by harming unwilling mothers, and by increasing the number of people raised in an orphanage.
I agree. If I disagreed with that statement, then I would be protecting every egg and every sperm. That is not the case.
Sperms and eggs have the potential to become a fetus and eventually a person with life.
Fetuses are inevitably becoming people with lives.
It is this inevitability by which I think, I would reasonably endow fetuses with rights to become.
Fetuses may be inevitably developing, but they definitely aren't inevitably becoming people with lives. Miscarriages, traumas, infant deaths during birth, etc. Sure those are accidents, but they make the word "inevitable" inapplicable all the same, at least in relation to the emergence of a living infant.
For me the bottom line is this: even if I agree that potential ('inevitable') persons have a right to become actual, I think the rights of an actual person (the mother) clearly outweigh those of the potential person.
Last edited by Odlov; Mar 20, 2012 at 02:21 AM.
Originally Posted by RayA75
How can you justify that?
In my mind, objective goals such as life much outweigh the subjective goals that any one person has, such as happiness or convenience.
I think goal requires intent, and thus only applicable to sentient beings. 'Life' is no more a goal of the fetus than 'eruption' is a goal of the volcano. "Function" is a more fitting term.
New life is a biological function of the fetus, whereas finding a more suitable father is a goal.
Last edited by Odlov; Mar 21, 2012 at 04:25 AM.
Originally Posted by RayA75
There are many many parts of the world where people cannot be happy.
Happiness in life < Life
As for the legality of abortion, I don't think the practicality of outlawing or in the very least, regulating abortion tips the scale over. I have demonstrated how I think it's unethical, and I'm surprised by the lack of such analyses in political discussions about this topic.
In the end,I view the fetus as a bunch of genetic information that is of no signafance unless it develops.Therefore,killing it is not unethical.
While,you have a different perspective and I respect that.
Sorry for the random quote.
Last edited by William; Mar 21, 2012 at 05:38 AM.
Your messed up world enthrills me
In my uneducated opinion, abortion is up to the mother, whether its ethical or unethical is entirely up to what a person decides is ethical or not, therefore meaning it is an opinion on that persons behalf on if its ethical. yes it is viewed as harsh, and in a sense murder, but its still legal so why argue about it?
[fl0w][OoT][OLDA][Team Wushu]
