The only people that read this blog anymore are going out with me, so why not talk about abortion?
There is a guy on YouTube who calls himself The Amazing
Atheist. I'm not sure how he became so popular, but his videos
always have a trillion hits, and he's usually just arguing with
someone about their views on politics or religion. I'm not a big
fan or anything, but I occasionally listen to what he has to say.
I recently came across this video where he tells a story and talks about abortion:
Now, I'm an atheist and my social views are mostly left-wing,
but when it comes to abortion I have no idea. How did abortion become a partisan issue? It seems crazy to me that someone
like The Amazing Atheist would tell a story like this and then
say, "That kid should have been aborted."
What?
Who has the right to say that?
If a kid was happy for four years and "died happy," fuck it! Let him be happy. He was important to at least one person. Isn't
that enough? You got a story out of it....?
No one has the right to say who lives and dies.
I've never been able to wrap my head around the pro-choice
hyper-feminist arguments against abortion. I see bumper
stickers that say "Keep Your Laws Off My Body" in reference to
abortion laws. At what point does the baby stop being "your
body" and have "its own body?" The only definition I've ever
heard is that the baby is considered alive once it is born.
???
I just don't buy that.
A day before the baby is born it isn't alive? It's brain and
heart work the same way. Just because it's not floating
around in a uterus, it's different somehow?
Pro-lifers at least have a decent definition of the beginning
of life. "Life begins at conception." That makes sense to
me. I can see that.
The downside is that in order to be consistent with their
arguments and avoid slippery-slopes, pro-lifers are against
fertility clinics and stem cell research.
I am very much in favor of fertility clinics and stem cell
research. If someone wants to have a baby and we can make
it happen scientifically, then I would love nothing more than
to allow everyone to be able to experience it.
Whatever stem cells are left over after the procedure used
to be thrown out, but are now available for stem cell
research.
The following problem is then the opposite of the "babies
aren't alive until birth" argument. Is a six day old clump of
cells with no brain function considered a baby? Is it wrong
to use these cells for the advancement of medicine and well
being? I feel that there is no harm being done here. There
is no pain inflicted or brain activity that is being terminated.
To conclude, I don't know if there is an answer to abortion
that makes sense to me. I think it's a very grey-area issue
with a lot of angles to consider. Abortion should not be a
partisan issue. It is an ethical issue.
What do you think... America (the two of you Americans that
read this blog)?
What am I missing?
(246)
I would say that most pro-lifer's (myself included) aren't against the idea of fertility clinics. But what we have today is horrible. Fertility clinic were created for the purpose of helping married couples conceive, that's great. Only the number of embryos that were going to be implanted, were created and then implanted (no left overs). But as a result of people demanding their "right" to fertility clinics, anyone above 18, married, single, homeless, jobless, depressed are all allowed free access to this science. If fertility clinics were still ethical in their approach and practice, pro-lifers wouldn't be against them. There is no reason to have extra embryos, it's just stupid and a destruction of unlimited potential(human life).
ReplyDeleteSure thing, what do you view as unethical about them? Because there are cases where in order to obtain an embryo that you know will survive, you need to make multiple copies.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think about those cases?
Also, I've never heard of this service being free. In fact I've only heard of it being really expensive. Do you have a source, or can you clarify what you mean?
I know tone doesn't transfer to the internet very well, so I want to clarify that I'm not trying at all to argue with you.
ReplyDeleteI'm sympathetic and just trying to hear your point of view. That's why I'm asking questions.
I didn't mean free as in money, but free as in no restrictions. In the process of Invetro-Fert several embryos are inserted in hopes of one (sometimes more) will take to the woman's body. I'm not suggesting that one one embryo be made, but that all embryos that are made are created the the intent to insert, and then are actually inserted. These "left over" embryos were purposely created to save for "future research". It is the unnecessary creation, storage, and ulitmatly the destruction of these extra embryos I find to be unethical.
ReplyDeleteAlright, thanks for your input.
ReplyDeleteIf one had the choice to save a 7 year old kid from a burning fire OR 1000 human embryos from the same fate, most would likely chose the child. I think this example clearly illustrates which is more valuable.
ReplyDeleteSo I don't really have a problem with excess embryo creation, especially if it could lead to potentional advances in medicine.
While I do consider embryos to be fully human, I don't really place much more value upon them then I do a semen stain. Therefore unnecessary creation, storage, and destruction is about as unethical as doing the laundry.