That's not the point, Chas. If personhood is established at 7 months, a woman should still be allowed to remove an unwanted fetus from her body in whatever way is most comfortable for her. Even at 7.5 months, even at 8 months, even at 9 months. I don't like it, but it's her body and she doesn't have to share it if she doesn't want to.

(October 4, 2014 at 7:07 pm)Losty Wrote: That's not the point, Chas. If personhood is established at 7 months, a woman should still be allowed to remove an unwanted fetus from her body in whatever way is most comfortable for her. Even at 7.5 months, even at 8 months, even at 9 months. I don't like it, but it's her body and she doesn't have to share it if she doesn't want to.

But if that fetus is legally a person, then that is the killing of an innocent person - it is murder.

If it isn't illegal, it isn't murder.

Ping....... pong..... ping...... pong....ping.... pong....
Don't you guys get tired?

BTW, I sort of agree with Chas.
Everyone agrees that, after a particular temporal threshold, the fetus can be viable.
As such, even if the woman desires to undo the pregnancy, it could be turned into an early birth... If the baby survives by itself, she becomes a mother... if not.... it's an abortion.

I also agree that it is very rare for a woman to carry her pregnancy up to that stage and, only then, decide that she doesn't want to have the baby. She does have a couple of months, since she misses her first period.
Typically, those months are enough to form an informed decision and choose the best course of action.... and that is what typically happens.
On a few occasions, financial or other conditions may alter drastically after viability and the previous decision may have to be changed.
In Portugal, the limit is 10 weeks gestation (technically, 8 weeks after conception and 6 weeks after the missed period). This limit is well before viability so I think it could be expanded.
In the UK, if I'm not mistaken, the limit is at 22 weeks gestation. This is the standard borderline for viability.
In the US, if I'm not mistaken, there is currently no limit. An abortion can be performed just before birth... To me, this seems very nonsensical. You nurture the kid for 9 months and, at the last possible moment, decide you don't want it in your body, leeching your nutrients? If it's viable and you don't want it inside you, give birth to it! After all, you spent 9 months feeding it! It will likely survive and then it is a separate person, with all the protection granted by law. Even a 7 month baby is viable... actually, there are many people who only gestated for 7 months, naturally. My dad is one of them!

Oh, but many people don't just decide that they don't want the kid leeching nutrients... that is of no concern... The problem is the actual raising of the kid, the time the kid consumes, the financial burden imposed on the would-be parents, the social burden, etc. For these, the period until viability is typically more than enough to decide.

On the other hand, there are a few people who only discover they're pregnant right before giving birth... I don't know what to do with these cases. But it seems best to just give birth to the kid. Any other course of action leads to suffering by the kid.


I used the word "typically" a lot... as it is with many details of being a human, each case is a case. Everything should be decided on a case-by-case basis, but with some underlying cohesive background. I think viability is a good threshold for most cases, but others can be made acceptable, depending on particular details of the future parents(s).

Yea, because we are in serious shortage of unwanted children...

(October 4, 2014 at 7:18 pm)Losty Wrote: If it isn't illegal, it isn't murder.

Then I ask you again, when does one become a person?

Well, I guess I'm okay with putting out limits on late term abortions, but there would have to be a couple conditions met.

First, the woman would have to be compensated for her inconvenience for enduring pregnancy beyond that which she would prefer.

Second, the state must agree to make the child a ward of the state if the woman renounces her bonds to the child.

Third, all medical costs incurred for delivering the child in the manner of the woman's choosing must also be shouldered by the state.


The bottom line is, the woman must not be inconvenienced any more than the child's father by the inconvenience of an unwanted pregnancy. It take two hankies to panky, and if our collective moral sensibility can't abide a woman to choose a late term pregnancy, she damn sure had better be shielded from the consequences of parenthood to exactly the same degree as the father is.

The biggest reason I dislike a ban on late term abortion is because it endangers the lives of those in need of emergency abortions for medical reasons.

---

(October 4, 2014 at 7:42 pm)Chas Wrote:

(October 4, 2014 at 7:18 pm)Losty Wrote: If it isn't illegal, it isn't murder.

Then I ask you again, when does one become a person?

Why? What does that have to do with it?

(October 4, 2014 at 7:43 pm)whateverist Wrote: Well, I guess I'm okay with putting out limits on late term abortions, but there would have to be a couple conditions met.

First, the woman would have to be compensated for her inconvenience for enduring pregnancy beyond that which she would prefer.

Second, the state must agree to make the child a ward of the state if the woman renounces her bonds to the child.

Third, all medical costs incurred for delivering the child in the manner of the woman's choosing must also be shouldered by the state.


The bottom line is, the woman must not be inconvenienced any more than the child's father by the inconvenience of an unwanted pregnancy. It take two hankies to panky, and if our collective moral sensibility can't abide a woman to choose a late term pregnancy, she damn sure had better be shielded from the consequences of parenthood to exactly the same degree as the father is.

Nonsense. She had 6 or 7 months to decide.

(October 4, 2014 at 7:31 pm)pocaracas Wrote: I used the word "typically" a lot... as it is with many details of being a human, each case is a case. Everything should be decided by the mother on a case-by-case basis, but with some underlying cohesive background. I think viability is a good threshold for most cases, but others can be made acceptable, depending on particular details of the future parents(s).

Fixed it for you