[quote]tedro wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
No, it’s not my decision. Why should it be YOURS instead of the MOTHER’S with the advice of her doctor? Who are you to say that a mother should bear a severely compromised child to term whether or not she has the funds to make sure it will even be minimally comfortable. There are a lot of different diseases out there of all levels of severity. The pain and suffering of those with them varies. As does the financial and emotional strain on families. This does not necessarily mean that a woman in this situation should choose to abort or that those who don’t choose this aren’t very admirable. But the choice should be for them and not for some stranger to make. These are not individuals who are reaping the consequences of their own carelessness. They are in a very tough situation and it’s not for some unknown stranger to make blankte determinations of what the best resolution is in all situations.
There are a couple of problems here. First, you have chosen a very small percentage of abortions to defend, we are talking about abortion in general. Second, Why stop there? Let’s say a 6-month old is badly-injured and will spend the rest of his life in pain. Does the mother have the choice to kill him? Having said that, since when did the mother or doctor get to decide whether or not the child should live?
As far as the other issues go, we should certainly work to get to the root of the problem. But rape and incest continue to occur. The two are not mutually exclusive. The fact that we are working to solve these problems and have a long way to go does not mean we should force pregnant women to carry these babies [living reminders of traumatic rape or likely to be severely compromised with gentic abnormalities] to term in the meantime.
As far as incest without rape, this is a conscious decision and can be grouped into any of the other reasons for abortion.
For pregnancy from rape, while it is truely a tragic event, it was not the baby that chose to be conceived this way. Yet, this is one time where you can make a good argument for abortion. I’ll let you do the research to come up with it, though. My feelings are two wrongs don’t make it right, it is not the fetus’ fault and we should not punish it. Let’s create much tougher rape sentencing. A mandatory life sentence should work well. I would even be for cutting off a convicted rapists penis, similar to cutting off a hand for stealing. Obviously that would never fly in this country, but I am sure it would work wonders as a deterrent.
[/quote]
Well, I can see where you are coming from. But you seem to believe that no matter what the situation that the fetus is entitled to live and indeed that it is always in its best interest to live. I disagree.
I also disagree that this is something that the general public should get to determine and apply to all indivudals rather than it being something for the mother, the doctor, and all those who are actually involved to wrestle with and decide. So, I don’t think we’re going to see eye to eye on this. I do agree that there should be much tougher sentences for rape.
But I still don’t think this would end rape by any means. Some rapists may just be out for a cheap thrill and because they are amoral don’t care about consent. If the punishment is big enough maybe it’d deter them. But I think some rapists are just truly sick and deranged just like pedohpiles and some murderers. They have a compulsion that defies all rationality and they are going to act on it. Consequences be damned.
As far as killing children, you bring up a good point. No, I don't think a mother should actually get to kill a child that has already entered this world. But the issue does get easier as the child gets older. At some point, the child or the child who has become an adult can determine whether or not they want to live. I do believe in euthanasia, for example.
If someone has deadly cancer or a disease that robs them of all bodily fuction (can’t move, can’t go to the bathroom, etc…) I do think it should be their choice whether they want to stay alive. A six-month old obviously can’t make this determination. But they have been alive for 6 months. They have actually experienced life. Killing them is actually taking away something they have already experienced. Rather than just preventing them from ever experiencing anything. It’s definitely a tough issue.
But I just see a distinction between destroying something that has come into this world and preventing something from ever coming into this world at all, particularly if the pregnancy is terminated in the early stages. I have a hard time vocalizing and putting into words what the difference is. But I feel strongly that it exists.