Another Abortion Thread

[keltzkroz]

Hi everyone! This topic came up in the Abortion/parental fairness thread. We have gone off topic so I'm starting this one.

The question seems to be pretty simple, or perhaps not so simple. IF the fetus is a person, is abortion ok?

[steen]

Hi everyone! This topic came up in the Abortion/parental fairness thread. We have gone off topic so I'm starting this one.

The question seems to be pretty simple, or perhaps not so simple. IF the fetus is a person, is abortion ok?

Yes.
Person's don't have the right to use another person's bodily resources against their will, so regardless of the fetus' status, it does not hold such a right.

[keltzkroz]

Thank you for the response steen. 18 views with only one response so far!

Anyway, I think I already stated my position on this matter back in the Abortion/parental fairness thread. I was hoping on getting more responses from other points of view, so well see what happens to this thread.

[jerickson314]

From the other thread, referring to the right to use bodily resources.

They should have this right whenever that person created the need for his or her own body. This is simply because only in these situations would "murder" be a true claim. In these situations, it would be this person's fault that the person died. Not so in other situations.

I have yet to see a good response from steen on this point.

I will give an example of the point holding up. Say I do something to someone else that causes them to need my blood in order to survive. If I don't give him or her blood, I will be guilty of murder on account of the original action, if nothing else.

[Nyril]

It could just be me, but I tend to ignore all points made entirely in uppercase letters, overly large fonts, or colored in an obnoxious way. That is not saying I will ignore these things in all instances, but jerickson314 has basically screamed a point that would of been made much better had it been left in default font choices. Although I am much of the opinion that debates should go on as long as necessary, it is when people are reduced to screaming emotional passages across at the other side that I feel no further productive exploration of the idea can occur, and it is time to move on.

[jerickson314]

It could just be me, but I tend to ignore all points made entirely in uppercase letters, overly large fonts, or colored in an obnoxious way. That is not saying I will ignore these things in all instances, but jerickson314 has basically screamed a point that would of been made much better had it been left in default font choices. Although I am much of the opinion that debates should go on as long as necessary, it is when people are reduced to screaming emotional passages across at the other side that I feel no further productive exploration of the idea can occur, and it is time to move on.

I normally feel the same way. However, I have made this point over and over and over again, and steen keeps overlooking it. However, I will edit it here for now.

[otseng]

It could just be me, but I tend to ignore all points made entirely in uppercase letters, overly large fonts, or colored in an obnoxious way.

I would entirely agree. Though there are no rules against such activity, it is discouraged to do such things.

I would recommend using italics as the primary means of emphasizing points as this is the standard practice in most literature.

I normally feel the same way. However, I have made this point over and over and over again, and steen keeps overlooking it. However, I will edit it here for now.

That's good that you'll do it here. And if you could extend that to the entire forum, that'd be appreciated also.

As for people not "listening" to you, it's not your concern. Your only part in the debate is to present your information, not to make sure your listeners concede to your point. If they ask for clarification, you can try to restate it in a different way. But if they simply dismiss it out of hand, then there's no need to reiterate it.

The question seems to be pretty simple, or perhaps not so simple. IF the fetus is a person, is abortion ok?

The answer is pretty simple as well, abortion in not OK if a fetus is a person.

Person's don't have the right to use another person's bodily resources against their will, so regardless of the fetus' status, it does not hold such a right.

Suppose Joe steals something from Samantha. Is Samantha then justified in killing Joe?

[sin_is_fun]

I will give an example of the point holding up. Say I do something to someone else that causes them to need my blood in order to survive. If I don't give him or her blood, I will be guilty of murder on account of the original action, if nothing else.

Adam kills Jacob's son accidentally
Jacob asks Adam's baby for adoption saying he cannot live without a baby
Is Adam guilty if he doesnt give the baby and Jacob dies in depression?

[sin_is_fun]

The answer is pretty simple as well, abortion in not OK if a fetus is a person.

Why not?Even Terry schiavo was a person.

Imagine 2 castaways ina boat.They have no food.So one person kills and eats the other person and survives.Is he guilty?

You can call him guilty,but he wouldnt care.Its better to be an amoral survivor than being a moral martyr.

Suppose Joe steals something from Samantha. Is Samantha then justified in killing Joe?

If joe tries to steal samantha's virginity by force,is she justified in killing joe?

[jerickson314]

Adam kills Jacob's son accidentally

Reckless homicide. The "accidentally" also produces a weak parallel as compared to abortion, since having sex isn't an accident.

Jacob asks Adam's baby for adoption saying he cannot live without a baby

Adam has no particular reason to believe Jacob.

Is Adam guilty if he doesnt give the baby and Jacob dies in depression?

He is guilty of reckless homicide regarding the son, but not regarding Jacob's death. He had no way of knowing that depression would kill Jacob, and it is still probably Jacob's fault for letting his depression kill him rather than seeking psychological help.

Also, the baby isn't an example of "Adam's bodily resources".