I wanted to respond to this separately. I am not an absolutist either, but in the cases of cancer, or high blood pressure, or an ectopic pregnancy, it is not the abortion that saves the mothers life. It is the treatment of the disease. For example a mother with cancer who has chemo will lose her baby as a result of the treatment, not from a desire to kill the baby. The same is true of a woman who has to have her tubes removed due to an ectopic pregnancy. The necessary treatment to save the woman results in the unwanted death of the baby. I fully object to aborting babies due known birth defects. Eugenics is for sickos, not civilized society.
lol my bad, i thought we were talking about humans, I didnt know you were a vegan or maybe you dont eat anything that was alive at once.
I can't believe embryologists use the term human being for a fertilized egg. That is a social and religous term in that context not scientific. However regardless, reality demands there be judgement allowed in this as in anything. Don't you create a line with the death punishment? Yes we create a line and always have. We do it now as many states that allow late term abortions also make it a crime to kill a fetus in other than medical events like a car wreck, shooting or beating. What sense does that make? The sense is that the society has made a judgement about how we look at life and value life. I don't agree with all of it but realize there cannot be absolutism in such a large and diverse society as we have now.
Even if you were talking only about humans you are still wrong. Ask an embryologist when life begins. It isn't when a heart starts beating. That is a landmark event in the developmental life cycle, but it is not the begining of life. The standard embryologu texts used in major medical schools and universities proove what I am saying. Consult Moore and Persaud’s The Developing Human, Larsen’s Human Embryology, Carlson’s Human Embryology & Developmental Biology, and O’Rahilly and Mueller’s Human Embryology & Teratology. If either of you can source one embryology text that states human life begins at a point other than conception I'll just shut up, but you can't so I'll continue to bloviate.
I agree with your first statement. However haven't you read about babies born with only brain stems due to cysts that prevent the upper brain from developing or other horribly malformed fetuses that have zero, no , nada chance at surviale beyond a few hours or days? I can see the value of aborting those babies to save grief of the parents. To refuse could be cruel. These extreme cases are the ones I am talking about. As far as allowing abortions for more treatable problems or congential issues such as Downs syndrome, I fully agree with you they should NOT be allowed. I am not a fan off the slippery slope argument as every discussion about limiting rights can use that and history has shown the slope is a worst very gentle.
Don't try to avoid the point that even the smallest social units need governance. Also don't avoid the argument that every right has limits and we need government to balance competing rights.
BTW since I am arguing with both MM & LSU SF who hold completly different views from each other I must be right in the middle and most likely to be correct.
