A comment beyond belief?

[Lotuspetal_uk]

Drive by post based on the OP....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsTFv1k4y5k

I've taught children with Downs and basically Dawkins was talking out of the wrong orifice yet again, then tried to back-peddle after he was slated on Twitter for it.

 

[tonybeer]

The fetus (I'll call it a baby) does not have extra rights - it has the same rights as everyone else...

Good, it doesn't actually matter what you call it.

Now, do you think that one person has the right to use another persons body to sustain their own life, regardless of the wishes of the person providing their own body?

Example:

I have an illness that requires my blood stream to be hooked up to yours, otherwise I die. Do you get a choice as to whether I am hooked up to you or not?


Note, in this example, if person B does not want to provide their body to keep person A alive, person B could try and find person C that would.

In the abortion example, we may perhaps one day have the technology where an 8week old Fetus could be transported from an unwilling host to a willing one. Would you be happy with this outcome? (This would still be termed abortion)

 

[Danny777]

Good, it doesn't actually matter what you call it.

Now, do you think that one person has the right to use another persons body to sustain their own life, regardless of the wishes of the person providing their own body?

Example:

I have an illness that requires my blood stream to be hooked up to yours, otherwise I die. Do you get a choice as to whether I am hooked up to you or not?


Note, in this example, if person B does not want to provide their body to keep person A alive, person B could try and find person C that would.

In the abortion example, we may perhaps one day have the technology where an 8week old Fetus could be transported from an unwilling host to a willing one. Would you be happy with this outcome? (This would still be termed abortion)

Except for the case of rape, there is no such thing as an unwilling host. The over-whelming majority of abortions are performed on women who willingly had sex in the full knowledge that it could lead to a baby being conceived. Both the man and the woman has responsibility for the baby. If a women permits her body to be used for the purposes of sex, surely she also permits her body to be used for the results of sex (ie. supporting a baby)? Your example of blood streams is irrelevant...

 

[tonybeer]

Except for the case of rape, there is no such thing as an unwilling host. The over-whelming majority of abortions are performed on women who willingly had sex in the full knowledge that it could lead to a baby being conceived. Both the man and the woman has responsibility for the baby. If a women permits her body to be used for the purposes of sex, surely she also permits her body to be used for the results of sex (ie. supporting a baby)? Your example of blood streams is irrelevant...

It is not irrelevant, it is the closest example using adult human beings I can give to demonstrate the principles in question. If you fail to understand it, then you cannot grasp the reason why abortion is allowed up to viability.

 

[Danny777]

It is not irrelevant, it is the closest example using adult human beings I can give to demonstrate the principles in question. If you fail to understand it, then you cannot grasp the reason why abortion is allowed up to viability.

OK, leaving that aside, what about the rest of my comment?

 

[tonybeer]

Well, that is the reason I believe people should have the choice to abort a Fetus or not. Equal rights for all.

In my example, let's say you initially agree to let me use your body. At a later date you decide that you do not wish to let me use your body. Are you allowed to make that decision, even if it means my death?

I would say Yes, I have no right to demand the use of another human beings body, against their wishes, regardless of the initial agreement.

In the same manner, a Fetus has no right to use the Mothers body to sustain life against her wishes, regardless of how the arangement first started.

 

[Danny777]

Well, that is the reason I believe people should have the choice to abort a Fetus or not. Equal rights for all.

In my example, let's say you initially agree to let me use your body. At a later date you decide that you do not wish to let me use your body. Are you allowed to make that decision, even if it means my death?

I would say Yes, I have no right to demand the use of another human beings body, against their wishes, regardless of the initial agreement.

In the same manner, a Fetus has no right to use the Mothers body to sustain life against her wishes, regardless of how the arangement first started.

I suppose it comes back to the status of the fetus - if you believe the fetus is simply a blob of jelly, it doesn't matter what you do with it. For me, it is a living baby (made in the image of God) and it therefore has rights.

I really don't think you example is valid here - the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies occur between two people who fully know that if they sleep together they is a chance a baby will be made. This is a choice - there surely has to be some responsibility with choices and actions.

Surely we all have a responsibility and duty of care for the well-being of others. If our actions have bought another person into existence, we have a responsibility to care for that person - not the choice to kill it...

A new born baby cannot survive without the care of others. If parents don't want baby and no-one else wants to look after baby, I suppose you would argue that it's OK to kill new born babies in this instance as well? After all, why should anyone be forced to care for someone they don't want to care for?

 

[tonybeer]

I suppose it comes back to the status of the fetus - if you believe the fetus is simply a blob of jelly, it doesn't matter what you do with it. For me, it is a living baby (made in the image of God) and it therefore has rights.

I really don't think you example is valid here - the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies occur between two people who fully know that if they sleep together they is a chance a baby will be made. This is a choice - there surely has to be some responsibility with choices and actions.

Surely we all have a responsibility and duty of care for the well-being of others. If our actions have bought another person into existence, we have a responsibility to care for that person - not the choice to kill it...

A new born baby cannot survive without the care of others. If parents don't want baby and no-one else wants to look after baby, I suppose you would argue that it's OK to kill new born babies in this instance as well? After all, why should anyone be forced to care for someone they don't want to care for?

IMHO the example is very valid and highlights the exact same rights issues. The Fetus has the same rights as everyone else. It just doesn't have the right to use someone else's body against their will. This is a right that none of us have. If you did grant this right then we are into a world where dying people can make any demand on other people that they like.

With that reasoning you could just as well say that the Condom manufacturer has to look after the baby, in the case of a condom split, because they have supplied a duff condom. After all, they also know that a duff condom could result in an unwanted pregnancy.


If you think I would suggest killing a baby, then you have totally misunderstood what I am saying. Up to viability it should be the Mothers choice. After that then any abortion will result in a birth.


Ps, not relevant to my argument at all, but I find the idea that Humans are made in God's image is laughable. Humans are nothing like the God described by Theists. We don't have magic powers. We aren't invisible. We don't create universes. And the major one - we're not supernatural and God supposedly is.


PPS Another aside, Pro-lifers frequently do get abortions, hence the phrase regarding cases that should be an exception being "Rape, Incest and Me". "The Only Moral Abortion Is My Abortion"

This contains anecdotes ( and a study) about all the pro-lifers who protest abortion clinics on day 1, go and get an abortion on day 2, then return to protest on day 3.

 

[Danny777]

IMHO the example is very valid and highlights the exact same rights issues. The Fetus has the same rights as everyone else. It just doesn't have the right to use someone else's body against their will. This is a right that none of us have. If you did grant this right then we are into a world where dying people can make any demand on other people that they like.

With that reasoning you could just as well say that the Condom manufacturer has to look after the baby, in the case of a condom split, because they have supplied a duff condom. After all, they also know that a duff condom could result in an unwanted pregnancy.


If you think I would suggest killing a baby, then you have totally misunderstood what I am saying. Up to viability it should be the Mothers choice. After that then any abortion will result in a birth.

You make it sound as though the fetus has deliberately invaded the woman's body uninvited in order to exploit her!

Where consensual sex has taken place and a pregnancy is the result, you can hardly blame the baby for relying on the body of it's mother...this is ridiculous, why should baby suffer a death penalty for the actions of others?

What do you mean by viability?

 

[Robban]

IMHO the example is very valid and highlights the exact same rights issues. The Fetus has the same rights as everyone else. It just doesn't have the right to use someone else's body against their will. This is a right that none of us have. If you did grant this right then we are into a world where dying people can make any demand on other people that they like.

With that reasoning you could just as well say that the Condom manufacturer has to look after the baby, in the case of a condom split, because they have supplied a duff condom. After all, they also know that a duff condom could result in an unwanted pregnancy.


If you think I would suggest killing a baby, then you have totally misunderstood what I am saying. Up to viability it should be the Mothers choice. After that then any abortion will result in a birth.


Ps, not relevant to my argument at all, but I find the idea that Humans are made in God's image is laughable. Humans are nothing like the God described by Theists. We don't have magic powers. We aren't invisible. We don't create universes. And the major one - we're not supernatural and God supposedly is.


PPS Another aside, Pro-lifers frequently do get abortions, hence the phrase regarding cases that should be an exception being "Rape, Incest and Me". "The Only Moral Abortion Is My Abortion"

This contains anecdotes ( and a study) about all the pro-lifers who protest abortion clinics on day 1, go and get an abortion on day 2, then return to protest on day 3.

Made in the image of God,

To love thy neigbour,
How can anyone say they love God, but not their neigbour,

who was made in the image of God.

If we all are made in the image of God, to hate one,s neigbour and at the same time to say, "I love God"

does not add up.

It is like going through fire to be cleansed.

Or the ultimate test.

 

[tonybeer]

You make it sound as though the fetus has deliberately invaded the woman's body uninvited in order to exploit her!

Where consensual sex has taken place and a pregnancy is the result, you can hardly blame the baby for relying on the body of it's mother...this is ridiculous, why should baby suffer a death penalty for the actions of others?

What do you mean by viability?

Viability - the ability of the Fetus to survive without the help of the Mother. My argument is only applicable to Fetuses before viablilty. Any abortion after viability is also termed birth. It is also where the abortion cutoff is currently.

This is why there are suggestions that due to medical advances, the 28 week cutoff is reduced to say 24 weeks. This isn't something that I would be against

The Fetus hasn't done anything deliberately, but it can be there "uninvited" if that's the term you wish to use. I'm not blaming the Fetus. It has no choice how it is living (neither did it get a choice as to whether it should come into existence or not). This still doesn't give it extra rights.


Of course you could decide that anyone who relies on another persons body to survive gets extra rights. The problem then is that people are, for example, forced to donate kidneys to other people that need them, against their own wishes.