(July 3, 2018 at 11:07 pm)JairCrawford Wrote: After you take away the religious and political aspects of the topic, is there still a potential moral dilemma?

I would say yes, to an extent. For instance, if we get to the point that we can know that the fetus can experience pain during the procedure after a certain point of development, should that not raise at least some ethical questions?

What does the least harm?

In my mind it is letting a woman have access to proper provision if she wants an abortion. If that isn't allowed it does not stop abortions, it stops safe abortions.

And you get a vast swathe of unwanted children dumped on the nation to be cared for by the state, which can end up in a hard knock life, for them.

(July 4, 2018 at 10:36 am)Little Rik Wrote:

(July 2, 2018 at 7:20 pm)KristinNirvana Wrote: Hi, I was wondering if there are any other Pro-Life Atheists here?

Oh yes, of course there are.  

In fact many of them are PRO-LIFE.  
Especially when is not them who have to die inside the womb.  

Fuck you’re an idiot.

Don’t try to speak for us,you’re obviously not qualified

(July 4, 2018 at 1:34 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote:

(July 4, 2018 at 10:36 am)Little Rik Wrote: Oh yes, of course there are.  

In fact many of them are PRO-LIFE.  
Especially when is not them who have to die inside the womb.  

Fuck you’re an idiot.

Don’t try to speak for us,you’re obviously not qualified

Rik can be hard to understand.  Basically what he is saying translates best as "DERP".

(July 4, 2018 at 9:49 am)mh.brewer Wrote:

(July 3, 2018 at 11:07 pm)JairCrawford Wrote: After you take away the religious and political aspects of the topic, is there still a potential moral dilemma?

I would say yes, to an extent. For instance, if we get to the point that we can know that the fetus can experience pain during the procedure after a certain point of development, should that not raise at least some ethical questions?

Please define fetal "pain" and "experience".

If the central nervous system is developed enough for it to be noticed and potentially traumatic.

---

(July 4, 2018 at 1:21 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote:

(July 3, 2018 at 11:07 pm)JairCrawford Wrote: After you take away the religious and political aspects of the topic, is there still a potential moral dilemma?

I would say yes, to an extent. For instance, if we get to the point that we can know that the fetus can experience pain during the procedure after a certain point of development, should that not raise at least some ethical questions?

What does the least harm?

In my mind it is letting a woman have access to proper provision if she wants an abortion. If that isn't allowed it does not stop abortions, it stops safe abortions.

And you get a vast swathe of unwanted children dumped on the nation to be cared for by the state, which can end up in a hard knock life, for them.

Right, I understand and to a point agree. And I'm not saying we should do that.

Quote:Oh yes, of course there are.  Indubitably 

In fact many of them are PRO-LIFE.  Popcorn 
Especially when is not them who have to die inside the womb.  Bird 

Nope if you asked anyone on the pro choice side they would die in the womb to maintain a women's right to choose i can't think of a single one who would say no .

---

Quote:After you take away the religious and political aspects of the topic, is there still a potential moral dilemma?

I would say yes, to an extent. For instance, if we get to the point that we can know that the fetus can experience pain during the procedure after a certain point of development, should that not raise at least some ethical questions?

Nope momentary pain does not override the right of bodily autonomy

(July 4, 2018 at 4:31 pm)JairCrawford Wrote:

(July 4, 2018 at 9:49 am)mh.brewer Wrote: Please define fetal "pain" and "experience".

If the central nervous system is developed enough for it to be noticed and potentially traumatic.

Abortion itself is necessarily "traumatic" as it involves the destruction of a living organism. But that's obviously not what you meant by traumatic. The reasonable conclusion would be that you mean that it would be painful, so you've essentially defined fetal pain as being that which would be felt as pain, which tells us nothing. It's essentially just substituting a synonym for pain. I don't know specifically the intent behind the original question, but I suspect he's asking how we know at what point the fetus can have experiences, including experiencing pain, in the same way that we as fully developed humans experience and feel pain. Saying that this stage is developed enough for it to be noticed (essentially another synonym, enough for the fetus to experience it) and for it to be painful (potentially traumatic) is essentially just saying that it becomes pain and experience when the fetus' central nervous system is developed enough to feel pain and have experience. It doesn't tell us anything about when that point is other than that it occurs some time in the development of the central nervous system, which is a long process encompassing the bulk of fetal development. So you haven't really answered the question. You've just said that fetal pain and experience occurs when the CNS is developed enough for fetal pain and experience to occur. It neither defines those two terms, nor, what appears to be the aim of your response, tells us when in the development of the central nervous system that occurs.

(July 4, 2018 at 4:46 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(July 4, 2018 at 4:31 pm)JairCrawford Wrote: If the central nervous system is developed enough for it to be noticed and potentially traumatic.

Abortion itself is necessarily "traumatic" as it involves the destruction of a living organism. But that's obviously not what you meant by traumatic. The reasonable conclusion would be that you mean that it would be painful, so you've essentially defined fetal pain as being that which would be felt as pain, which tells us nothing. It's essentially just substituting a synonym for pain. I don't know specifically the intent behind the original question, but I suspect he's asking how we know at what point the fetus can have experiences, including experiencing pain, in the same way that we as fully developed humans experience and feel pain. Saying that this stage is developed enough for it to be noticed (essentially another synonym, enough for the fetus to experience it) and for it to be painful (potentially traumatic) is essentially just saying that it becomes pain and experience when the fetus' central nervous system is developed enough to feel pain and have experience. It doesn't tell us anything about when that point is other than that it occurs some time in the development of the central nervous system, which is a long process encompassing the bulk of fetal development. So you haven't really answered the question. You've just said that fetal pain and experience occurs when the CNS is developed enough for fetal pain and experience to occur. It neither defines those two terms, nor, what appears to be the aim of your response, tells us when in the development of the central nervous system that occurs.

Correct. There was a hypothetical part to my original question that involves if we get to a point where we know that the fetus is definitely developed enough to feel pain, does that raise a potential ethical issue?

I realize we don't have such knowledge at the moment of when that development takes place.

Nor should this be interpreted as an argument to "shut down PP" or anything ridiculous like that. Just an ethical question is all.

redacted, already been covered

(July 3, 2018 at 11:07 pm)JairCrawford Wrote: After you take away the religious and political aspects of the topic, is there still a potential moral dilemma?

I would say yes, to an extent. For instance, if we get to the point that we can know that the fetus can experience pain during the procedure after a certain point of development, should that not raise at least some ethical questions?

From an ethical perspective, the dilemma would begin and end with the mother.  I believe she should choose.  If, as you say, "we get to the point that we can know that the fetus can experience pain during the [abortion] procedure after a certain point of development", I'm quite confident that more humane procedures, using current medical technology, could be put in place to remove that pain and any associated awareness.  For example, a pain blocking or anesthesia drug could be injected into the fetus before the removal procedure begins.  As I understand it, such molecules would remain in the fetus and not transfer through the umbilical cord to the mother.

Of course, other pregnant women could make different choices, such as carrying the fetus to term, surrendering the born child (who becomes a "person" or "citizen" upon birth (depending on birth location and parental citizenship) under the US Constitution) for adoption, or raising the child herself, hopefully with the help of others.

I'm 100% pro-choice.

Either:

A. A woman should NEVER have an abortion, meaning even when she's been raped, you are expecting a raped 13 year old girl to carry to term a full child.

or

B. It's okay to abort in cases of rape, in which case it's okay to punish the child for the actions of the father.

I don't see how one can remain logically consistent and be anti-abortion. One can be personally opposed to it (as in they would never get one for themselves), and one can even think that we need to reduce the number of abortions. But otherwise I don't see anyone remaining logically consistent and calling themselves 'pro-life'.