Abortion -cpr on the fetus?

[Ravenshire]

but my facts are sound how about you address those.

Until you address the points I made, that you then demanded, get bent.

Oops, that's right. I've already addressed yours

And don't curse because I can give as well as I get,

Oh, I'm shaking...

[answer-is-42]

@mh. I haven't read any legislation on this point. I'm not a lawyer nor am I arguing legality , I'm raising a moral question not a legal one. I would go so far as to say I don't care about the legal definition. Morality and legality not synonymous and this is a philosophy thread not a legal forum. Regarding PMing you. I don't know you well enough to trust you. This is not a slight but a statement of fact. You can choose to believe me or not, again it does not change the facts nor do my claims hinge on my degree. They stand on their own.
Regarding outcomes, poor kids. Etc. As I have stated before, if your goal is to reduce poverty and overcrowding then there are other methods that accomplish this that are much more morally dubious so it is a poor argument to use this as a justification. Additionally it does nothing to address my questions. Finally, I know cpr is not the right term, that was a title for the thread to Draw interest in more layman speak. Agreed that speciality care and a NICU with pediatric vent, surfactant, etc would be required. My point is why should we not arrange it as much as possible to have those resources available and philosophically why is moral not to?

[Thumpalumpacus]

You sure have a funky smell about you, "Doc" ... Bovine fecal matter, to be exact.

[answer-is-42]

@snakeoil I did address your financial point you stupid, dim witted, leg less, bottom dwelling, cold blooded, vermin. If you don't believe that emergency health care is a right regardless of availability to pay then fine the fetus cannot pay. However that is at odds with the general morality of the United States and most industrial countries. Is that your stance? Now address my points or go duck off
@Cato. Thanks at least for seeming to try to clarify. I am intentionally "shrinking my arguement" to this one point. Im not nor have i I tried to on this thread argue either way about the broad term of abortion. I have not addressed anything about a fetus that is completely not viable outside the womb. I have chosen to only ask this one specific question. I have my views and am always interested in getting other people's feedback to either refine, change, or confirm my views. Unfortunately this discussion devolves into a general abortion arguement that i have repeatedly stated I am not making.
It is sad to see a bunch on atheists react to an arguement because they don't like the conclusions rahter then addressing the points. It's not unlike a hard theist who resorts to name calling when they can't defend their religion any better.
Anyway if you have anything on point I'm interested to listen. Else this is all unfortunately just noise.

[answer-is-42]

Perhaps the best way of restating the same question I have been asking is if abortion is moral due to the mothers bodily autonomy and there is a way to terminate the pregnancy to allow the fetus a chance to remain viable ex utero then why is killing the fetus (removing life from a living thing) moral instead of a preterm delivery to attempt to salvage the fetus?

[popsthebuilder]

The point is that abortion in any form other than a conclusion to physical rape is wrong. We should be accountable for our own actions.

A child of rape did not choose that course of events, but you state that you're okay with aborting them. Why?

Are their lives less valuable?

Not less valuable at all. A negative thing happened to the mother. That could bring negative to the child. Also the mother is not responsible. And cannot be held accountable for something she couldn't help. She may not be able to provide for the child. These all become feasible, legitimate reasons to abort at a very early stage of pregnancy do to circumstances that were really out of the mother's hands.

[Minimalist]

Okay, let's try this.

For argument's sake let's say you can actually breathe life into this gob of goo you insist be saved.  Who is going to pay the costs of its hospitalization?  The mother?  Fuck, she doesn't want any part of it.  You?  I doubt it.  Some church?  You've got to be kidding me.  They don't waste their money on stuff like that.

And before you start with the "you can't put a monetary value on human life," routine, remember  the insurance companies do it all the time.

[rexbeccarox]

A child of rape did not choose that course of events, but you state that you're okay with aborting them. Why?

Are their lives less valuable?

Not less valuable at all. A negative thing happened to the mother. That could bring negative to the child. Also the mother is not responsible. And cannot be held accountable for something she couldn't help. She may not be able to provide for the child. These all become feasible, legitimate reasons to abort at a very early stage of pregnancy do to circumstances that were really out of the mother's hands.

Do you really think the best way to raise a child is through punishment for having sex?

[Minimalist]

It's a very biblical outlook, Rex.  Whenever the king fucked up his 'god' always killed a lot of innocent people to punish him.  I bet pops thinks that's a great idea.

[Ravenshire]

@snakeoil  I did address your financial point you stupid, dim witted, leg less, bottom dwelling, cold blooded, vermin.

What about all the other points I made ass-hat? And, is that the best you've got? Very weak sauce. Though I do commend your spirit.

If you don't believe that emergency health care is a right regardless of availability to pay then fine the fetus cannot pay. However that is at odds with the general morality of the United States and most industrial countries. Is that your stance? Now address my points or go duck off

I have addressed your point, but like the fucking moron you are, you keep missing mine. Fuck the hospital costs, they're a drop in the bucket. Who is going to pay for the kids upbringing? You know, all the financial cost that comes after the initial hospital cost. Those little luxuries like food, clothes and a roof overhead. Is the doctor who "saves" the abortion gonna be on the hook? If so, fine. If it falls back on the mother, fuck you and the horse you rode in on.

Duck off? Seriously? Can't even commend your spirit here. That just majorly weak assed shit. You "give as good as you get" about as much as you're a doctor.