Quote:
Originally Posted by corporatejay
So again. 39 weeks you're okay with an abortion despite the fact they could remove thr baby via c section and it will likely be totally fine?
|
I am not OK with abortion at 39 weeks or 35 weeks or even at 23 weeks. That is my personal opinion based on my own ethics and values. But I definitely want the law to allow it, because other people's bodies are not subject to my opinions.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
What do you mean it's "unambiguous" and "not subject to debate"? Whether the baby has left the womb? I agree, that's unambiguous, but why is that the be all end all deciding factor for you? It's equally unambiguous whether or not there's a heartbeat, there's no subjective judgment involved at all, and most people don't seem to think that should be where the line is drawn. Why is it even relevant whether the baby's inside or outside of the womb? That is, what is the morally relevant factor you're relying on to differentiate the baby's status ten minutes after it's been born, as opposed to twenty minutes earlier, and why's it morally relevant?
|
I'm not making a moral judgment. I'm relying on the only legally clear line that creates no possible moral or "rights of the woman" argument. Every argument about legal rights in utero raises an inherent conflict between the woman and the fetus. The law should not be expected to solve an unsolvable moral/ethical issue.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Azure
I still think from a legal / scientific standard there is more than enough evidence or strong arguments to suggest that the fetus can be considered a human life much sooner than when it is a born.
|
From a scientific and moral perspective, I agree. From a legal perspective, I disagree.