(July 3, 2015 at 4:55 pm)answer-is-42 Wrote: Let me begin by stating that I am not a theist (the most common as-homin attack I get when opposing abortion on secular grounds is that I am secretly a theist again I am not).
Most people oppose abortion based in the right to bodily autonomy. Regardless of your beliefs on that, once the fetus is out of the maternal womb, bodily autonomy no longer applies. 20 weeks has arbitrairly been considered the limit of viability, however infants born at 21 weeks have clearly survived and case reports of younger (less developed) infants surviving are also available. Additionally not all abortions occur before 20 weeks.
Therefore my moral question is why is resuscitation and medical support with held from an aborted fetus if there is a chance of survival? We do not allow this in any other situations. certainly we would not allow a parent to stop feeding or withhold medical care from a child because they simply do not want the child. It is actually considered child abuse even if they want the child and are following their misguided religious convictions
this is not a financial question so I would ask that cost not be an arguement. We use more expensive therapies for similar success rates all the time. This is a moral and philosophical question
Our society has decided that a woman's right to control her own body takes precedence over any potential right the fetus might have.
As to CPR, it isn't performed because it doesn't assist in terminating the pregnancy, which is, after all, the goal of the operation.
