Abortion: Legal or Illegal

Henry Plainview wrote:   Finnforest wrote: CPicard wrote: Henry Plainview wrote: I feel this is not a thread that we need to have. Any sensible person on this forum must feel the same. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised to see this thread closed in a couple of hours. It's been discussed numerous times in other threads.  We all survived.  *Most* people are able to have a debate without the cheap shots. No, nothing good has ever come from any abortion thread on any forum.

By that criteria you'd remove a lot of threads. 

I'm sure some of the guys who participated in the threads enjoyed debating it.  Not that I care Henry, you're probably right.

Man With Hat wrote: Fun thread.   A vote for legal.

 

Finnforest wrote:  By that criteria you'd remove a lot of threads.

No, abortion is like Israel and Palestine: people feel so strongly about it it always becomes pointless and terrible very quickly. We do not need to have this argument again.
 

The Quiet One wrote: Man With Hat wrote:   A vote for legal. Reasons, please. This is not a poll.

Does it matter?   

Henry's right.

Edited by KoS - November 01 2011 at 21:13

Except that I don't believe it became all that horrible in the Libertarian thread.  Seems like people made some good points and it ended naturally, with little fireworks.  But since we're sitting here arguing about whether we should argue, your point is well made

Henry Plainview wrote:   Epignosis wrote: If you think a thread is not worth of being here, then report it. I can't report it because it doesn't violate the rules. But just because someone does not violate the rules also does not mean it is a good idea.

I will accept that as your stance on abortion in America. 

Finnforest wrote: Except that I don't believe it became all that horrible in the Libertarian thread.  Seems like people made some good points and it ended naturally, with little fireworks.  But since we're sitting here arguing about whether we should argue, your point is well made

Only a few people open the Libertarian thread, that is different from there being a dedicated thread to a subject.
 

Epignosis wrote: If you think a thread is not worth of being here, then report it.

I can't report it because it doesn't violate the rules. But just because someone does not violate the rules also does not mean it is a good idea.

I'm for the legal side of this argument.  First, whether life begins at conception or not, I believe should be irrelevant.  The question should be when does sentience begin, and I'm not a doctor, but I am The Doctor,  I don't think sentience in any way can be said to begin at conception.  I would put sentience much later on in the pregnancy.   We destroy life all the time.  I just had bronchitis a few weeks ago and took a nice round of antibiotics, committing what amounted to genocide of the creatures in my bronchial tubes.  A fetus, prior to sentience is a parasite.  It simply lives on the mother's body.  Like my bacteria were doing to me a few weeks ago.  Pregnancy is a medical condition.  Nothing more until such time as a fetus can be said to have developed its own self-awareness.  That does not come early in the pregnancy. 

Of course, unlike my bacteria, a fetus has the potential to become sentient.  But if we're simply talking about potential, then I've committed mass murder throughout my life, not through abortion, but through other means.  And my guess is that most men have. 

Henry Plainview wrote:     The Quiet One wrote: Man With Hat wrote:   A vote for legal. Reasons, please. This is not a poll. Does it matter?

I'm sure there is scientific research on the subject, but I'd guess quite near the end of the pregnancy.  But as I said, I'm not a doctor.  Just The Doctor.  One thing I can say for certain is that there is no sentience at conception.  And in the early stages, it's pretty much just a formed blob of cells.