RolePlay onLine RPoL Logo

, welcome to Community Chat:Religion

08:14, 29th March 2024 (GMT+0)

abortion issues.

Posted by TychoFor group 0
Grandmaster Cain
player, 915 posts
Meddling son of
a bezelwort
Tue 22 Dec 2015
at 16:19
  • msg #376

Re: abortion issues

Well, consider it a spectrum.

If we're going to end a human life, there's a amount of value we'd place on them.  A mass murderer, cleanly convicted, would fall at the low value; while Little Sally would probably be considered much higher.  Raher you consider it "not evil" or "less evil" doesn't really matter, the point is that we value these lives very differently.

Same thing applies to abortion.  It's not a question of rather or not a fetus is a human life, it's a question of how much we value said life.  I think every abortion is a tragedy, but what makes it a tragedy is that it's a necessary evil.

And for the record: I do think the Catholic position of opposing both is self-consistent, unlike those who oppose abortion but call for the doctors to be killed.  However, on a practical level, I think humans need birth control to survive as a species.  And on a religious level, I don't think God would have allowed humans to develop birth control if it weren't part of The Plan.
TheMonk
player, 129 posts
Atheist
Most of the time
Tue 22 Dec 2015
at 16:27
  • msg #377

Re: abortion issues

Grandmaster Cain:
The pro-choice movement is at least consistent, they value the fetus less than the mother.


I've always favored the idea that the mother has the right to deny the fetus access to support.

Grandmaster Cain:
someday, you will not be able to become pregnant unless you actively choose to do so.  That means there's no such thing as an unwanted pregnancy, and demand for abortions will dry up.


At which point MRA vs Feminist groups will pretty much go to war over who exactly gets to make the final call on that.
katisara
GM, 5744 posts
Conservative human
Antagonist
Tue 22 Dec 2015
at 19:01
  • msg #378

Re: abortion issues

Grandmaster Cain:
And on a religious level, I don't think God would have allowed humans to develop birth control if it weren't part of The Plan.


I've not seen this argument made before. Would you care to expound on it? How does that incorporate other things, like the development of the atomic bomb?
katisara
GM, 5745 posts
Conservative human
Antagonist
Tue 22 Dec 2015
at 19:03
  • msg #379

Re: abortion issues

TheMonk:
Grandmaster Cain:
The pro-choice movement is at least consistent, they value the fetus less than the mother.


I've always favored the idea that the mother has the right to deny the fetus access to support.


I've seen this argument before, and frankly, I find it disingenuous. If I'm hanging off a cliff, clinging to your hand, and you decide to deny me access to your hand, everyone would agree that's murder.
TheMonk
player, 130 posts
Atheist
Most of the time
Tue 22 Dec 2015
at 19:21
  • msg #380

Re: abortion issues

katisara:
TheMonk:
Grandmaster Cain:
The pro-choice movement is at least consistent, they value the fetus less than the mother.


I've always favored the idea that the mother has the right to deny the fetus access to support.


I've seen this argument before, and frankly, I find it disingenuous. If I'm hanging off a cliff, clinging to your hand, and you decide to deny me access to your hand, everyone would agree that's murder.


Maybe, but I'm not fond of degrees of valuation, particularly when it comes to life. Of course, when you nix that you wind up with people who would rather die than harm ANY life or psychopaths. Hmmm... maybe I am fond of degrees.

But those arguments don't exist in a vacuum. Has anyone attempted to transplant fetus's to a new Uterus? Regardless of the outcome or likely outcome, it would be more similar to the hand extended to the cliffhanger. Arguably the mother was the one who put you on that cliff in the first place and you are more reasonable for expecting her to let you die than not.
Grandmaster Cain
player, 916 posts
Meddling son of
a bezelwort
Wed 23 Dec 2015
at 21:17
  • msg #381

Re: abortion issues

katisara:
Grandmaster Cain:
And on a religious level, I don't think God would have allowed humans to develop birth control if it weren't part of The Plan.


I've not seen this argument made before. Would you care to expound on it? How does that incorporate other things, like the development of the atomic bomb?

Well, it's like this: if God is omniscient, then he knew Original Sin would happen, and humans would get free will.  That means God allowed it to happen as part of The Plan.

So, given that God is omniscient and omnipotent, The Plan isn't like a battle between good and evil, because He can win any time.  Rather, it's more like a very complicated game of solitaire.  Basically, human will is all about the journey, not the destination-- the Plan is already in motion, we can't change that, but we can take it some interesting places along the way.
Grandmaster Cain
player, 917 posts
Meddling son of
a bezelwort
Wed 23 Dec 2015
at 21:23
  • msg #382

Re: abortion issues

TheMonk:
katisara:
TheMonk:
Grandmaster Cain:
The pro-choice movement is at least consistent, they value the fetus less than the mother.


I've always favored the idea that the mother has the right to deny the fetus access to support.


I've seen this argument before, and frankly, I find it disingenuous. If I'm hanging off a cliff, clinging to your hand, and you decide to deny me access to your hand, everyone would agree that's murder.


Maybe, but I'm not fond of degrees of valuation, particularly when it comes to life. Of course, when you nix that you wind up with people who would rather die than harm ANY life or psychopaths. Hmmm... maybe I am fond of degrees.

But those arguments don't exist in a vacuum. Has anyone attempted to transplant fetus's to a new Uterus? Regardless of the outcome or likely outcome, it would be more similar to the hand extended to the cliffhanger. Arguably the mother was the one who put you on that cliff in the first place and you are more reasonable for expecting her to let you die than not.

Well... technically, the technology to remove and freeze an embryo exists now.  It's not easy, though, nor is it cheap. I'm not sure of the exact costs, but I'm more than certain that it's many times more expesnive than simply aborting.

Plus which, it's common knowledge that a great number of embryos spontaneously end in the early stages.  The reasons why aren't known, but quite a few are simply not viable, and they simply self-terminate before they get very far along, usually before the woman even knows she's pregnant.  If you spend that much time and energy recovering an embryo that's not viable, you've wasted a lot of money and effort.
Grandmaster Cain
player, 918 posts
Meddling son of
a bezelwort
Wed 23 Dec 2015
at 21:25
  • msg #383

Re: abortion issues

katisara:
TheMonk:
Grandmaster Cain:
The pro-choice movement is at least consistent, they value the fetus less than the mother.


I've always favored the idea that the mother has the right to deny the fetus access to support.


I've seen this argument before, and frankly, I find it disingenuous. If I'm hanging off a cliff, clinging to your hand, and you decide to deny me access to your hand, everyone would agree that's murder.

Maybe.  But if I don't think I can pull you up safely?  If I think you'll [accidentally] pull me over the edge?  Is that murder, or is it self-preservation?
Doulos
player, 553 posts
Wed 23 Dec 2015
at 21:27
  • msg #384

Re: abortion issues

So all of creation, of any type, is then completely 'allowed' by God as being part of the plan? That's the standard view of omniscience that was a large part of me losing my own faith.
Grandmaster Cain
player, 919 posts
Meddling son of
a bezelwort
Thu 24 Dec 2015
at 00:55
  • msg #385

Re: abortion issues

Doulos:
So all of creation, of any type, is then completely 'allowed' by God as being part of the plan? That's the standard view of omniscience that was a large part of me losing my own faith.

Unfortunately, it's a necessay step if you believe in omniscience.

Or, you can think of it as writing a story.  Even though the writer knows how it'll end, they're never quite certain how the story will get there.  That kind of leaves room for agency, although the writer has to leave room for the twists along the way.
Doulos
player, 554 posts
Thu 24 Dec 2015
at 03:49
  • msg #386

Re: abortion issues

Not really true I don't believe, but not the debate for this particular thread.

Both omniscience and omnipotence have different meanings and versions depending on what you believe.  Open Theism does a better job (though still an insufficient one in my mind) of dealing with some of those issues.
katisara
GM, 5747 posts
Conservative human
Antagonist
Fri 25 Dec 2015
at 15:11
  • msg #387

Re: abortion issues

Grandmaster Cain:
katisara:
TheMonk:
Grandmaster Cain:
The pro-choice movement is at least consistent, they value the fetus less than the mother.


I've always favored the idea that the mother has the right to deny the fetus access to support.


I've seen this argument before, and frankly, I find it disingenuous. If I'm hanging off a cliff, clinging to your hand, and you decide to deny me access to your hand, everyone would agree that's murder.

Maybe.  But if I don't think I can pull you up safely?  If I think you'll [accidentally] pull me over the edge?  Is that murder, or is it self-preservation?


Now you're bringing up special exceptions. Abortions due to medical necessity are their own discussion, but they are also far less common.

In at least 80% of the cases, the mother is able to safely bring the pregnancy to term, but elects not to do so.

Regarding transplants, zygote and embryo transplants I /believe/ are possible (don't quote me), but fetus transplants are not. And they are all very expensive and add significant risk to the zygote/embryo. But I do think, morally, it's a very interesting question. I play a lot of Eclipse Phase and they have 'exowombs'. It's a machine that brings an embryo to term. I have to wonder, if exowombs existed in real life, would they be good or bad for the situation?
Grandmaster Cain
player, 920 posts
Meddling son of
a bezelwort
Sat 26 Dec 2015
at 06:21
  • msg #388

Re: abortion issues

quote:
Now you're bringing up special exceptions. Abortions due to medical necessity are their own discussion, but they are also far less common.

In at least 80% of the cases, the mother is able to safely bring the pregnancy to term, but elects not to do so.

Actually, I'm not.

Let's say you're falling off a cliff.  I don't know if I'm strong enough to pull you up, so there's a substantial chance that if I try, I'll fail.  Which means I get to look you in the eye as you fall, knowing that I consigned you to death-- or worse, life as a cripple.

Same thing here.  There are women who look at their fetus, and realize they'd be horrible mothers.  If they try and fail to raise a child, they find the horrors of ruining a child's life to be less traumatic than simply not allowing it to start.

Now, the problem is that we can't really judge if someone is right or wrong in these cases. It's not murder, it's self-preservation from psychological harm.  That's why we can't judge, or call it murder in even the majority of cases.

quote:
Regarding transplants, zygote and embryo transplants I /believe/ are possible (don't quote me), but fetus transplants are not. And they are all very expensive and add significant risk to the zygote/embryo. But I do think, morally, it's a very interesting question. I play a lot of Eclipse Phase and they have 'exowombs'. It's a machine that brings an embryo to term. I have to wonder, if exowombs existed in real life, would they be good or bad for the situation?

Under current technology, removing a pre-implanted embryo is easy.  Fetus "transplant" kinda depends on the stage, but in general it's not too difficult to remove a fetus.  The big problem is that exowombs don't exist, so we'd have to freeze and store it for later, and I don't think the technology yet exists to place a more developed fetus into a real womb.

Now, if we caught it early enough, we can (in theory) remove an embryo and freeze it, and then implant it into a woman later.  This would be very, very expensive however.  Plus, it's fairly hard on the woman, and there's no guarantee that the fetus will be viable forever.   On top of that, it costs money to store the embryo.  So, from a technology standpoint, it's not practical to do on a regular basis, let alone replace every abortion with this.
katisara
GM, 5749 posts
Conservative human
Antagonist
Sat 26 Dec 2015
at 12:24
  • msg #389

Re: abortion issues

Grandmaster Cain:
quote:
Now you're bringing up special exceptions. Abortions due to medical necessity are their own discussion, but they are also far less common.

In at least 80% of the cases, the mother is able to safely bring the pregnancy to term, but elects not to do so.

Actually, I'm not.

Let's say you're falling off a cliff.  I don't know if I'm strong enough to pull you up, so there's a substantial chance that if I try, I'll fail.  Which means I get to look you in the eye as you fall, knowing that I consigned you to death-- or worse, life as a cripple.

Same thing here.  There are women who look at their fetus, and realize they'd be horrible mothers.  If they try and fail to raise a child, they find the horrors of ruining a child's life to be less traumatic than simply not allowing it to start.

Now, the problem is that we can't really judge if someone is right or wrong in these cases. It's not murder, it's self-preservation from psychological harm.  That's why we can't judge, or call it murder in even the majority of cases.


Three issues here;
1) You just said disabled people are better off dead.
2) You're implying here that someone who gives birth is now required to raise the child.
3) Your actual counter to the "I'm dangling off the cliff holding onto your hand" metaphor is "if I try and help you up and fail, I will feel bad, so it is morally justified to just push you".



[quote]
Now, if we caught it early enough, we can (in theory) remove an embryo and freeze it, and then implant it into a woman later.  This would be very, very expensive however.
</quote>

I had a discussion with my dad and a bio PhD about this recently, and I thought the conclusions were... odd.

Many people make the case that abortion is murder (obviously), but removing the embryo and freezing it indefinitely is not, because the embryo still has the /potential/ to be implanted and brought to term.

Honestly, I find this to be hypocritical. The vast majority of embryos aren't ever used, and we know it. It's abortion through procrastination. But it's a step with many methods of IVF, so I'm wondering how much of that decision may be political.
Doulos
player, 556 posts
Sat 26 Dec 2015
at 15:04
  • msg #390

Re: abortion issues

My sister-in-law called my wife a few years ago, worried that she was pregnant and that she would probably have an abortion since she was doing her masters and it was really not a good time in her life to have a child.  This is someone who is a good mother and has two daughters already.

I don't buy this whole idea that she was worried about destroying the life of a child after the fact. She made it clear that she was worried about how inconvenient it would be to have a child at that point in her life (her words almost exactly if I recall, it was a few years back now).

This is more like not wanting to rescue someone hanging from a cliff because it might get your favorite outfit dirty. That's about as morally repugnant as you can get in my books IF the value of a fetus is on par with the rest of human life post-birth.

It's clear it is not though for the vast majority of people, and that seems to be where the disconnect is.  I've never been able to determine exactly how I feel about it all and likely never will. It feels like an impossible discussion sometimes.
Grandmaster Cain
player, 921 posts
Meddling son of
a bezelwort
Sat 26 Dec 2015
at 23:51
  • msg #391

Re: abortion issues

katisara:
1) You just said disabled people are better off dead.
2) You're implying here that someone who gives birth is now required to raise the child.
3) Your actual counter to the "I'm dangling off the cliff holding onto your hand" metaphor is "if I try and help you up and fail, I will feel bad, so it is morally justified to just push you".

1.  No.  I'm saying that I'd have a harder time living with myself if I left you crippled than if I left you dead.

2.  Not exactly, but those are really the two main options.  Adoption is not really that popular of a choice, and there's thousands of kids waiting to be adopted as we speak, so it's not a guarantee either.

3.  No, you're saying it's always murder.  But if I don't think I can help you without harming myself (physically or mentally), that is justification to not help.


[quote]
Now, if we caught it early enough, we can (in theory) remove an embryo and freeze it, and then implant it into a woman later.  This would be very, very expensive however.
</quote>

I had a discussion with my dad and a bio PhD about this recently, and I thought the conclusions were... odd.

Many people make the case that abortion is murder (obviously), but removing the embryo and freezing it indefinitely is not, because the embryo still has the /potential/ to be implanted and brought to term.

Honestly, I find this to be hypocritical. The vast majority of embryos aren't ever used, and we know it. It's abortion through procrastination. But it's a step with many methods of IVF, so I'm wondering how much of that decision may be political.
</quote>
I don't know about political, but I can assure you it's not practical.  The technology exists, but it's very tricky and expensive.  Even leaving out how few frozen embryos are actually used, there's no guarantee that any of them will be viable.

Basically, it's a huge gamble, costs a lot of money and medical resources, and is no better for the woman's health.  As such, the technology is not currently a viable repalcement for abortions.  Maybe someday in the future, but definitely not today.
Grandmaster Cain
player, 922 posts
Meddling son of
a bezelwort
Sat 26 Dec 2015
at 23:56
  • msg #392

Re: abortion issues

Doulos:
My sister-in-law called my wife a few years ago, worried that she was pregnant and that she would probably have an abortion since she was doing her masters and it was really not a good time in her life to have a child.  This is someone who is a good mother and has two daughters already.

I don't buy this whole idea that she was worried about destroying the life of a child after the fact. She made it clear that she was worried about how inconvenient it would be to have a child at that point in her life (her words almost exactly if I recall, it was a few years back now).

This is more like not wanting to rescue someone hanging from a cliff because it might get your favorite outfit dirty. That's about as morally repugnant as you can get in my books IF the value of a fetus is on par with the rest of human life post-birth.

It's clear it is not though for the vast majority of people, and that seems to be where the disconnect is.  I've never been able to determine exactly how I feel about it all and likely never will. It feels like an impossible discussion sometimes.

Well, here's where I'm going to rant a little.

I've known many women who've had abortions.  And while I didn't always agree, I never have met a woman for whom it was an easy choice.  It's a brutal, hard decision.  Even your sister in law, I suspect she's spent many long sleepless nights fighting herself over this.  In fact, I'm certain she thought about this a lot more than she chose to share with you.

That's why I think people really need to stop judging women who have abortions.  Or worse, punishing them.  Women who've been there have beaten themselves up enough over the choice, they don't need to be beaten further.    If you want to solve the problem, fix the situation that led to them having to make that choice.
Doulos
player, 557 posts
Sun 27 Dec 2015
at 00:20
  • msg #393

Re: abortion issues

Maybe she thought about it lots.  Maybe not.  Who knows.  All I know is what she communicated to my wife, and that was that she was likely going to choose to have an abortion since it was upsetting her plans of finishing her masters promptly.

Fitting that into your analogy of refusing to help someone who is dangling off of a cliff seems really awkward to me, that's all.

EDIT:  The whole issue goes back to the actual value of the fetus vs a child anyways.  This whole conversation is absurd when you substitute the word infant in for fetus.
This message was last edited by the player at 00:26, Sun 27 Dec 2015.
Grandmaster Cain
player, 923 posts
Meddling son of
a bezelwort
Mon 28 Dec 2015
at 01:03
  • msg #394

Re: abortion issues

Doulos:
Maybe she thought about it lots.  Maybe not.  Who knows.  All I know is what she communicated to my wife, and that was that she was likely going to choose to have an abortion since it was upsetting her plans of finishing her masters promptly.

Fitting that into your analogy of refusing to help someone who is dangling off of a cliff seems really awkward to me, that's all.

EDIT:  The whole issue goes back to the actual value of the fetus vs a child anyways.  This whole conversation is absurd when you substitute the word infant in for fetus.

Well, it's never safe to assume you know everything she went through.  Since I don't know what kind of relationship you have with your sister in law, it may be awfully presumptious of me to assume that she automatically tells you every aspect of every personal decision she makes.  I know for me personally, I seldom bore people with all the details of my thinking, most people just get the cliff's note version,.

And for the record, it's not my analogy.  It's katisara's, and I think you see why i feel it's inadequate.

But to get to your point, it's more a matter of when you consider that the fetus now has the value of full human being.  In some societies across history, that's sometimes well after birth.  There are cultures that practiced infanticide in times of famine, based on the logic that an infant was less valuable than a working adult, so if you had to chooce you should let the infant starve.

As you can see, the point at which you get full human consideration varies considerably.
Doulos
player, 558 posts
Mon 28 Dec 2015
at 01:44
  • msg #395

Re: abortion issues

Agreed, it certainly does vary greatly and seems to be the main source of the disagreement among folks.
katisara
GM, 5750 posts
Conservative human
Antagonist
Mon 28 Dec 2015
at 15:06
  • msg #396

Re: abortion issues

I definitely agree with that last point. Honestly, the fact that a third-trimester abortion is out-patient surgery, but euthanizing a newborn is 20 years in prison is logically inconsistent.

Tycho brought up the idea of a sliding scale, which at least seems to recognize this, although has its own complexities. I'd argue the division is testable, but the vagina isn't a test, it's just dealing with a problem while it's out of sight.
Grandmaster Cain
player, 924 posts
Meddling son of
a bezelwort
Tue 29 Dec 2015
at 08:31
  • msg #397

Re: abortion issues

katisara:
I definitely agree with that last point. Honestly, the fact that a third-trimester abortion is out-patient surgery, but euthanizing a newborn is 20 years in prison is logically inconsistent.

Tycho brought up the idea of a sliding scale, which at least seems to recognize this, although has its own complexities. I'd argue the division is testable, but the vagina isn't a test, it's just dealing with a problem while it's out of sight.

In theory, a sliding scale is a good idea.  In practice, we'll still have the same problem-- different stages of development mean different things to different people.
Tycho
GM, 4004 posts
Sun 3 Jan 2016
at 10:21
  • msg #398

Re: abortion issues

Grandmaster Cain:
In theory, a sliding scale is a good idea.  In practice, we'll still have the same problem-- different stages of development mean different things to different people.

I think just realizing/admitting those two things would make a huge difference in the way the debate is handled in the states.  If people could agree that:
1. the value of the cells-fetus-baby changes continuously throughout development, rather than all at once
2. different people put different value on it at different points

then the debate people would have would be very different.  Instead of fighting over what magic instant it changes from "totally okay" to "murder," it'd be an issue of "how do we make value-based decisions when we don't share the same values?"  Instead of a binary "is it perfectly okay, no harm at all" vs. "it's absolute evil of the highest order," we'd realize that it's a matter of balancing up two undesirable things, and deciding when one of them starts to out weigh the other.

If we managed to get out of the binary "I'm right, you're a monster" style of debate (which is all you can really have if you take the binary view both sides prefer) we could start to come to some sort of reasonable middle ground that tries to take into account the views of both sides.
TheMonk
player, 131 posts
Atheist
Most of the time
Sun 3 Jan 2016
at 10:28
  • msg #399

Re: abortion issues

I realize this might take it out of the realm of the board, but complex moral issues are hard to sell to a constituency. Political institutions are thus less likely to represent an issue like abortion in such a manner and within the realm of politics is where such issues seem to be largely discussed, probably because that's where action can be achieved.
Grandmaster Cain
player, 925 posts
Meddling son of
a bezelwort
Mon 4 Jan 2016
at 04:18
  • msg #400

Re: abortion issues

Tycho:
Grandmaster Cain:
In theory, a sliding scale is a good idea.  In practice, we'll still have the same problem-- different stages of development mean different things to different people.

I think just realizing/admitting those two things would make a huge difference in the way the debate is handled in the states.  If people could agree that:
1. the value of the cells-fetus-baby changes continuously throughout development, rather than all at once
2. different people put different value on it at different points

then the debate people would have would be very different.  Instead of fighting over what magic instant it changes from "totally okay" to "murder," it'd be an issue of "how do we make value-based decisions when we don't share the same values?"  Instead of a binary "is it perfectly okay, no harm at all" vs. "it's absolute evil of the highest order," we'd realize that it's a matter of balancing up two undesirable things, and deciding when one of them starts to out weigh the other.

If we managed to get out of the binary "I'm right, you're a monster" style of debate (which is all you can really have if you take the binary view both sides prefer) we could start to come to some sort of reasonable middle ground that tries to take into account the views of both sides.

The problem is law vs. morality.

Morality can (and should) have shades of gray.  It's a philosphical construct.  But law requires specific definitions.  We need to clearly draw a line between legal and illegal, otherwise things become useless.

We need clear standards.  We need to say: "This is fine" "This is manslaughter" "This is murder".  That's how our laws work in many other areas, so we'd need something similar.  Of course, getting that agreement would be very difficult.
Sign In