Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Abortion Discussion, Part the Fourth

1…1617192122…101

Comments

  • #542
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,563 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    In the not too distant future we will have artificial wombs, so my scenario is one that will probably actually to pass one day. There are already sheep growing from gestation to maturity in artificial wombs.


    So does anyone want to take a stab at my fictitious dilemma?

    Statistically the chances of other life in the universe or even in our own Galaxy is actually pretty high. Many different species even on earth uses other species as hosts for their off spring so an alien species doing the same isn't all that crazy.

    Do you also want to take a stab at my fictitious dilemma? Or do you just value alien life as less then human....its a case of all life is important....except when you believe its not?




    I'll take a stab at your example.
    The artificial womb would be provided by a third party company, accordingly to utilize the services the artificial womb provider would have the users of it sign contracts and pay for the services.
    Accordingly, it would depend on what the contracts state. If however the contracts allow for either person involved in the contract to terminate the contract then so be it.
    No such service would be provided without contracts in real life.


    Expanding on your artificial womb dilemma,
    If there was a power failure at the artificial womb providers facility and backup generators also failed and this caused the artificial womb to fail. Would you propose that the artificial womb company is charged with manslaughter or something more serious?


  • #543
    uptherebels
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,063 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Yes your all hilarious. My situation was intended to inspire discussion not p*isstaking (which I suspect is an attempt to avoid the really difficult dilemma I am pondering and yet another example of people on this forum hiding away from reality) Humor is often used to help us deal with the really difficult realities of life.



    In the not too distant future we will have artificial wombs, so my scenario is one that will probably actually to pass one day. There are already sheep growing from gestation to maturity in artificial wombs.


    So does anyone want to take a stab at my fictitious dilemma?

    If you want to inspire discussion then maybe come up with a scenario that is realistic. You can't expect to be taken seriously otherwise.


  • #544
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    Cabaal wrote: »
    Since we're now moved away from the reality comparisons here's another situation.

    A human male becomes impregnated by an alien and becomes host to their off spring (think. Aliens I suppose), the alien sees any attempt to remove its off spring as the worst thing in the world. The alien race also requires a host in this manner to have its off spring.

    Does the human have a right to not be a host to the alien off spring?


    As someone who has had to mention that they are pro choice in almost every post I make, I believe that the human in this situation has the right to remove the alien baby, regardless of the consequences to the entire human race.


    How about a more grounded scenario. A girl is raped, impregnated and for whatever traumatic reasons, only decides to abort at 38 weeks. I believe she should be given an abortion, regardless of the consequences to the child.


  • #545
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,563 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    As someone who has had to mention that they are pro choice in almost every post I make, I believe that the human in this situation has the right to remove the alien baby, regardless of the consequences to the entire human race.


    How about a more grounded scenario. A girl is raped, impregnated and for whatever traumatic reasons, only decides to abort at 38 weeks. I believe she should be given an abortion, regardless of the consequences to the child.

    So you also believe the girl that is raped should be allowed to terminate then surely? After all I set no time limit on the alien/human host and you said that was fine.

    Honestly I'm not seeing the point in your questions. You admit that you believe the right to terminate should be there.

    Your hypothetical situations seem as pointless as my alien/human host one.


  • #546
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,637 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    So in a situation like that, the father could turn off the machine without consent from the mother and the mother could turn off the machine without the consent of the father, what do you think?

    I don't know, there's so much extra context still needed to imagine there, but none of it is relevant to the male-female "imbalance" with human pregnancy and abortion so I don't see the point of going off down that track.

    Abortion is about the woman's rights to avail of her own body, not about ownership of the fetus.

    That's why the imaginary alien scenario is far more relevant, because it is currently the only way that the man can be put in the same situation as the woman is.

    So do you see a difference between that and an unwanted pregnancy for a woman? If not, what's the point of the question?

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • Advertisement
  • #547
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    Cabaal wrote: »
    So you also believe the girl that is raped should be allowed to terminate then surely? After all I set no time limit on the alien/human host and you said that was fine.


    Ah dude seriously, did you read my post? I literally said that!


  • #548
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,637 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    As someone who has had to mention that they are pro choice in almost every post I make, I believe that the human in this situation has the right to remove the alien baby, regardless of the consequences to the entire human race.


    How about a more grounded scenario. A girl is raped, impregnated and for whatever traumatic reasons, only decides to abort at 38 weeks. I believe she should be given an abortion, regardless of the consequences to the child.

    At 38 weeks the baby will be born alive. What's the problem?

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • #549
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    volchitsa wrote: »
    At 38 weeks the baby will be born alive. What's the problem?


    I never said there was a problem


  • #550
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    volchitsa wrote: »
    So do you see a difference between that and an unwanted pregnancy for a woman? If not, what's the point of the question?


    Yes I see the difference. My situation is hypothetical, if you don't want to ponder it that's fine.


  • #551
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,854 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    If you read my posts today you would see that I am in complete agreement with you. I believe a woman should have every right to end a pregnancy. I voted in favor of legalizing abortion despite believing that it is the termination of a life. I understand the contradictory nature of what I am saying, abortion is such a fascinating and that it leads to such contradictions. I am simply trying to express that I do not hide behind the clump of cells argument or the "its not murder" argument. It may be a clump of cells or it may turn out that a 12 week old fetus is conscious on some level, we don't know yet. Either way, a woman should have a choice. It may not be murder in the legal sense of the word but in my opinion, it is a form of murder.


    I keep getting taken out of context and misrepresented. I feel like I have to keep explaining my beliefs on abortion. It is possible to be pro choice but still hold the belief the abortion is not an ideal situation...


    How about this for a scenario....


    We invent an artificial womb that allows a fertilized egg to grow from insemination to full term. A fetus is growing in said machine for the last 12 weeks. Should the father of that fetus have the right to turn off the machine, meaning the fetus will die, without the consent of the mother? Should the mother have the same right ie. to turn off the machine without the consent of the father?

    In this scenario it would need to be a joint decision.


  • Advertisement
  • #552
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    In this scenario it would need to be a joint decision.


    But its just a clump of cells? Surly anyone could walk in off the street and turn the machine off and face no consequences?


  • #553
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,563 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    But its just a clump of cells? Surly anyone could walk in off the street and turn the machine off and face no consequences?

    You do understand that in your example the services are provided by a third party company, accordingly they would not allow "anybody to walk off the street".

    Contracts would exist for this type of service and those contracts would include who can make decisions regarding operation.


  • #554
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,854 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    But its just a clump of cells? Surly anyone could walk in off the street and turn the machine off and face no consequences?

    When the clump of cells is in the mothers womb it is (in my opinion) a parasite feeding off the mother and using her body to grow. If the woman does not wish for this then she has the right to remove.

    In an artificial womb there is no danger to the woman hence why both sperm and egg donors should have the choice.


  • #555
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    Cabaal wrote: »
    You do understand that in your example the services are provided by a third party company, accordingly they would not allow "anybody to walk off the street".

    Contracts would exist for this type of service and those contracts would include who can make decisions regarding operation.


    Are you avoiding the question? It looks that way. This is my scenario, my rules, there are no contracts... Now if it is a clump of cells, terminating it has no effect on the mother or father, should it be allowed? If not, why not?


  • #556
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,989 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    When the clump of cells is in the mothers womb it is (in my opinion) a parasite feeding off the mother and using her body to grow. If the woman does not wish for this then she has the right to remove.
    In an artificial womb there is no danger to the woman hence why both sperm and egg donors should have the choice.
    Danger here is a relative term, as its an entirely natural process. There is an element of danger in just walking down the street.
    Its true the foetus is a parasite if you want to view it that way. But then so is a new born baby. Even teenagers can be, when you think of it.


  • #557
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,458 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Mod:
    Charles Ingles wrote: »
    No need to get personal I haven't insulted anybody personally, but it seems it's ok because I'm pro life.
    Personal insults are against both boards policy and the A+A forum charter. If you feel another poster has posted in an uncivil fashion about you, then please report the post and forum moderators will review and take action if the report is upheld.


  • #558
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    In the ridiculous artificial womb scenario it would be a joint decision between at least 2, probably 3, parties.

    @KD what’s your opinion? You seem to want the man, in this situation, to have more rights than the woman, why is that?


  • #559
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,989 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Here's another analogy.
    You are the captain of a ship heading for South America. You spot a shipwrecked sailor in a liferaft, out in the middle of nowhere. If you turn round to pick him up, you'll lose the best part of a day and he'll be a parasite on you for the rest of trip. Major inconvenience.

    On the other hand if you don't stop, there's little or no chance of anyone else being able to help him. What do you do? Do you have a choice?

    No, you don't have a choice.


  • #560
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    recedite wrote: »
    Here's another analogy.
    You are the captain of a ship heading for South America. You spot a shipwrecked sailor in a liferaft, out in the middle of nowhere. If you turn round to pick him up, you'll lose the best part of a day and he'll be a parasite on you for the rest of trip.


    On the other hand if you don't stop, there's little or no chance of anyone else being able to help him. What do you do? Do you have a choice?


    No, you don't have a choice.

    Asked and answered.


  • #561
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    recedite wrote:
    Here's another analogy. You are the captain of a ship heading for South America. You spot a shipwrecked sailor in a liferaft, out in the middle of nowhere. If you turn round to pick him up, you'll lose the best part of a day and he'll be a parasite on you for the rest of trip.


    No comparison to the discussion here and a ridiculous analogy tbh.


  • Advertisement
  • #562
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,854 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    recedite wrote: »
    Danger here is a relative term, as its an entirely natural process. There is an element of danger in just walking down the street.
    Its true the foetus is a parasite if you want to view it that way. But then so is a new born baby. Even teenagers can be, when you think of it.

    That's true, but if you choose not to walk down the street then there is no danger, and if a woman chooses not to stay pregnant there is no danger to her.

    Childbirth is a natural process but it takes both a physical toll on a womans body and also a mental toll. Some women for whatever their reasons choose not to go through with this and it's their wishes that should be respected.


  • #563
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,854 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    recedite wrote: »
    Here's another analogy.
    You are the captain of a ship heading for South America. You spot a shipwrecked sailor in a liferaft, out in the middle of nowhere. If you turn round to pick him up, you'll lose the best part of a day and he'll be a parasite on you for the rest of trip. Major inconvenience.

    On the other hand if you don't stop, there's little or no chance of anyone else being able to help him. What do you do? Do you have a choice?

    No, you don't have a choice.

    Of course you pick up the sailor, he is a grown adult:confused:


  • #564
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,989 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Of course you pick up the sailor, he is a grown adult:confused:
    Seems ageist. Would you rescue a child?


  • #565
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    recedite wrote: »
    Seems ageist.

    To you maybe, not to most other people.


  • #566
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    amcalester wrote: »
    In the ridiculous artificial womb scenario it would be a joint decision between at least 2, probably 3, parties.

    Its not that ridiculous. It will happen sooner rather than later. It is already happening in the animal kingdom.


    https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/25/15421734/artificial-womb-fetus-biobag-uterus-lamb-sheep-birth-premie-preterm-infant


    https://jme.bmj.com/content/44/11/751
    amcalester wrote: »
    You seem to want the man, in this situation, to have more rights than the woman, why is that?

    Looking over my posts I don't see how I have given that impression. I don't want anyone to have any more rights than any other party.
    amcalester wrote: »
    @KD what’s your opinion?

    I haven't quite fully formulated an opinion on it yet, it is something I am thinking about. At the moment, I am conflicted. Why should a man be charged with fetal homicide or child destruction if he slips abortion pills into a woman's drink? Why not just be charged with the effect his actions have on the woman concerned? Why does the fetus get consideration if it is just a clump of cells?

    https://www.preciouslife.com/news/76/man-who-killed-his-unborn-child-by-tricking-girlfriend-into-taking-abortion-drug-gets-14-years/


    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/killer-of-unborn-baby-has-appeal-dismissed-1.304969


    Why do clumps of cells get considered in these situations?

    amcalester wrote: »
    @KD what’s your opinion?


    My opinion right at this moment is that the mother or the father in the artificial womb situation should be able to end the life of the fetus without the consent of the other party.


  • #567
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,854 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    recedite wrote: »
    Seems ageist. Would you rescue a child?

    Yup,

    I see where you're going with this silly scenario and it's a waste of both your time and mine. A grown child/man/woman is exactly that! A 12 week old clump of cells is something totally different.


  • #568
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    recedite wrote: »
    Here's another analogy.
    You are the captain of a ship heading for South America. You spot a shipwrecked sailor in a liferaft, out in the middle of nowhere. If you turn round to pick him up, you'll lose the best part of a day and he'll be a parasite on you for the rest of trip. Major inconvenience.

    On the other hand if you don't stop, there's little or no chance of anyone else being able to help him. What do you do? Do you have a choice?

    No, you don't have a choice.


    Personally I say fu*ck him, let him drown.


  • #569
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,989 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    A grown child/man/woman is exactly that! A 12 week old clump of cells is something totally different.
    What's your cut-off point?
    A week after birth, a week before birth, a month before....


    We're back to the same old chestnut; at what point does humanity begin, and when does a human get some human rights.
    Obviously we're not all going to agree on that.


  • #570
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Its not that ridiculous. It will happen sooner rather than later. It is already happening in the animal kingdom.


    https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/25/15421734/artificial-womb-fetus-biobag-uterus-lamb-sheep-birth-premie-preterm-infant


    https://jme.bmj.com/content/44/11/751



    Looking over my posts I don't see how I have given that impression. I don't want anyone to have any more rights than any other party.



    I haven't quite fully formulated an opinion on it yet, it is something I am thinking about. At the moment, I am conflicted. Why should a man be charged with fetal homicide or child destruction if he slips abortion pills into a woman's drink? Why not just be charged with the effect his actions have on the woman concerned? Why does the fetus get consideration if it is just a clump of cells?

    https://www.preciouslife.com/news/76/man-who-killed-his-unborn-child-by-tricking-girlfriend-into-taking-abortion-drug-gets-14-years/


    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/killer-of-unborn-baby-has-appeal-dismissed-1.304969


    Why do clumps of cells get considered in these situations?





    My opinion right at this moment is that the mother or the father in the artificial womb situation should be able to end the life of the fetus without the consent of the other party.

    Apologies, I misread a post. There’s no indication you want the man to have more rights than the woman.

    Why do you think either should be able to end it? Is it safe to assume both parties were aware of what was happening and agreed to it?

    If so, why should 1 get to unilaterally decide to take an action that the other doesn’t agree with or isn’t aware of?


  • Advertisement
  • #571
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    recedite wrote: »
    Here's another analogy.
    You are the captain of a ship heading for South America. You spot a shipwrecked sailor in a liferaft, out in the middle of nowhere. If you turn round to pick him up, you'll lose the best part of a day and he'll be a parasite on you for the rest of trip. Major inconvenience.

    On the other hand if you don't stop, there's little or no chance of anyone else being able to help him. What do you do? Do you have a choice?

    No, you don't have a choice.

    Your lot really do Love Boats.


Advertisement