Attack at Planned Parenthood Clinic

[Edwardo Piet]

I would argue the fetus already has the right to use someone else's body, because the reproductive system is specifically "designed" for that purpose.

Complete non-sequitur. By that "logic" any man has the right to have sex with any female capable of reproduction that he wants, because the male penis is specifically "designed" for that purpose.

And the fact that you had to put "designed" in quotes shows how irrelevant that "design" is and how weak that "argument" is.

[robvalue]

I think the important thing to remember is a new life doesn't exist in a vacuum. It affects every other life already here, to a lesser or gather extent. So just always saying a new one is a good idea regardless seems impractical. If that was the case, people would be firing them out constantly. Clearly even (most) people who want a lot of children realize there's a point at which having more is daft. And when the adoption system is already overflowing...

[Joods]

I would argue the fetus already has the right to use someone else's body, because the reproductive system is specifically "designed" for that purpose.

Complete non-sequitur. By that "logic" any man has the right to have sex with any female capable of reproduction that he wants, because the male penis is specifically "designed" for that purpose.

Oh shit, don't go there because now we'll have a bunch of rapists running around using that to make a point that they were simply trying to aid in populating the world. 

Note my sarcasm.

[Edwardo Piet]

As with all these issues, the fact that you will always run into is that there are two people involved in any of these situations, two humans, and both have rights. The rights of one of the humans might conflict with the rights of the other. For instance, the right to life of the fetus might conflict with the right of the woman to do what she wants with her own body, if she wants to abort it. In these conflicts, I side with the right which is more important, and in this case, the right to life pretty much trumps all other rights, because without it, all other rights are easily taken away

When it comes to rights of the fetus, the fact of the matter is that fetuses don't have rights.

But I guess you're arguing that they should right?

Fair enough. But should they have rights simply because you consider them to be a "human"? And do you consider a bunch of human cells a "human"?

Surely if other apes become evolved enough and intelligent enough to participate in our society it would make more sense to give them rights and not allow them to suffer, than to give a bunch of human cells rights when they can't even suffer? Let's not be speciesist here...

If other human races couldn't interbreed and were thereby considered separate species, it wouldn't make it any more right to discriminate against them: Speciesism is just as bad as racism. It's all about the ethics of mitigating suffering, the "rights" of a bunch of cells has nothing to do with it, regardless of their species.

[robvalue]

Additional: it seems bizarre that a barely formed human, which couldn't even exist independently, could be considered to have more rights than a fully grown animal in the prime of its life.

I also don't subscribe to the idea that life is automatically a net positive experience. I am never having children, and this is one of the reasons. I would turn this on its head in fact. If I was pregnant, and I couldn't reasonably guarantee a fairly good life for the child, I would consider it my duty to abort it. Being chucked into the adoption system right away because I can't look after it certainly wouldn't qualify to me. There are realistically only so many humans that can be supported in a country, and with new potential ones coming all the time, it makes sense to me to focus on the ones with a better chance of a happy life.

[Edwardo Piet]

Additional: it seems bizarre that a barely formed human, which couldn't even exist independently, could be considered to have more rights than a fully grown animal in the prime of its life.

Yeah it's utterly absurd but IMO this shouldn't even be about rights this should be about ethics, this should be about mitigating suffering and I can't think of any example where a fetus being aborted would suffer more than the mother would if she was forced to give birth... with the exception of a fetus that is about to be born, but at that point it's more of a baby than a fetus, and I think that that is relevant, whether it's a human baby or human suffering is irrelevant, suffering is suffering, humanity is irrelevant. Let's not be speciesist right?

Furthermore, more life being born isn't always an ethically good thing. Whether it's a human or a non-human creature being born, often the life being born will lead to a life of suffering more than a life of joy.

I personally would never have a child if I thought it would in all likelihood experience a life of misery more than a life of joy.

[robvalue]

I agree. "Rights" are a red herring, totally. Rights are a result of laws and morality, more or less.

I consider a situation where a woman has as many children as she can look after already, and accidentally gets pregnant again.

"She shouldn't have!" Yes, she shouldn't. But it has happened. Punishing her for the failure of contraceptives seems bizarre, assuming she's been careful.

What are the options?

1) Have the baby and keep it. Now none of the children can be properly looked after and they all suffer.

2) Have the baby and give it up for adoption. It joins the massive waiting list of children already desperate for a home. This is a poor start to any life.

3) Have an abortion, and go to jail. Now the children have no mother for several years.

There is no desirable outcome whatsoever, and they all involve children suffering, rather than simply "punishing" the mother.

[Edwardo Piet]

When it comes to ethics I'm against punishing people because "they deserve it" anyway, I don't believe in free will so that concept makes no sense whatsoever.

I believe punishing is only useful as a deterrent.

And obviously punishing a woman for aborting a fetus when not doing so would simply cause needless suffering - just causes even more needless suffering.

[Joods]

Abortions are legal in the US. Are they not legal in the UK?

[LastPoet]

I am not pro abortion, I am in favor of a woman having control over her body. What kind of life would that fledgling fetus would have, being born unwanted? Would we take the baby from the unwanting mother? Would we then treat a baby like merchandize?

I would prefer that women that wish to have babies get health support from the Gvt, based on their income, and those that do not, have the choice of termination, instead of being forced to carry it to the end..

And I am not even going into rape pregnancies, fetus malformation and risk to the mom's life. Those are a no brainer to me.