Abortion: Pro-Choice or Pro-Life?

[Geanna]

This sounds like some sort of sales pitch, where the main point smoked a bowl and got high on molly before wandering off into the concrete jungle only to be found several days later scavenging for food in the near-by park with little to no clothing, and honestly trying to convince other people its the next messiah.

[Jute]

Essentially, my proposal is this: instead of tossing away human life, we should harvest the intellectual capacities of the brains of unwanted infants after birth for use in AI experimentation, design, and processing. Thus the desires of both parties on the abortion issue and the needs of AI researchers are satisfied, their minds being used for the advancement of reasonable and prudent scientific endeavors while their bodies no more pollute our society, and no man may ask for more.

Are you sure this doesn't have problematic ethical implications? "Harvesting" brains most likely isn't something that anyone but the most avid progressivists/technophiles/transhumanists will support (and I'm definitely not one of them), and I would bet that this in no way would satisfy the "pro-life" (or pro-birth) advocates, who often (though not nearly always) base their standpoint on religious or quasi-religious views of the sanctity of human life and the inseparability of body and mind.

[Dyakovo]

I don't see how this would fix the issue being raised that a woman might not want to be pregnant, yet happens to be despite her best efforts to avoid a pregnancy.

It doesn't.
An actual solution to the abortion debate:
Don't like abortions? Don't get one. Don't try to impose your morality of everyone else.

[Ifreann]

I saw that the OP had bolded the first letter of every paragraph and immediately decided not to read the post.

[Val Halla]

Oh oh I know! Just get tape and put it over mouths of all debaters!

[Ifreann]

Oh oh I know! Just get tape and put it over mouths of all debaters!

Jokes on you, I type with my fingers.

[-Principality of Zeon-]

I saw that the OP had bolded the first letter of every paragraph and immediately decided not to read the post.

Just realized it reads as a "A Modest Proposal"

[Val Halla]

Oh oh I know! Just get tape and put it over mouths of all debaters!

Jokes on you, I type with my fingers.

You don't even have fingers.

[Geanna]

Essentially, my proposal is this: instead of tossing away human life, we should harvest the intellectual capacities of the brains of unwanted infants after birth for use in AI experimentation, design, and processing. Thus the desires of both parties on the abortion issue and the needs of AI researchers are satisfied, their minds being used for the advancement of reasonable and prudent scientific endeavors while their bodies no more pollute our society, and no man may ask for more.

Are you sure this doesn't have problematic ethical implications? "Harvesting" brains most likely isn't something that anyone but the most avid progressivists/technophiles/transhumanists will support (and I'm definitely not one of them), and I would bet that this in no way would satisfy the "pro-life" (or pro-birth) advocates, who often (though not nearly always) base their standpoint on religious or quasi-religious views of the sanctity of human life and the inseparability of body and mind.

I'm an avid transhumanist, and find the idea rather stupid. Not to mention, brains can be grown through stem cells, and the need to use human embryos for even the harvesting of stem-cells is no longer needed.

[Geanna]

I saw that the OP had bolded the first letter of every paragraph and immediately decided not to read the post.

Well, that makes two of us. I just waited for someone to quote the actual point.

[The Serbian Empire]

This sounds like some sort of sales pitch, where the main point smoked a bowl and got high on molly before wandering off into the concrete jungle only to be found several days later scavenging for food in the near-by park with little to no clothing, and honestly trying to convince other people its the next messiah.

This made me laugh so hard for how to describe the OP post that it's going to Awesome Quotes.

[Ifreann]

Jokes on you, I type with my fingers.

You don't even have fingers.

WHO TOL- I mean, shut up! You're a finger!

[Val Halla]

You don't even have fingers.

WHO TOL- I mean, shut up! You're a finger!

Hmph. Hooves and paws are abortion anyway.

[Kelinfort]

Nah. Just wait until they're born and sell them to be eaten by the rich once they're fat enough.

[Alvecia]

Two things stick out immediately to me.
First

Thirdly, it appears that those on the colloquially appointed “left wing” appreciate open legs at least as much as open mouths.

Are....you saying that the left wing are....sluts?

Second

I am all too infrequently disrespected and disregarded by my peers of lesser social stature, and then find myself in desperate want of an intelligent conversation; I feel a good AI should serve me well, very well in fact.

Arrogant much.

As to the proposal, it doesn't solve the issue of bodily autonomy as the woman will still have to go through pregnancy and birth against her will.
Build artificial wombs first.
Then we'll talk.

[Alvecia]

-snip-

Also note for future reference that this is NSG, not a science journal. You actually lose points for being overly verbose. If you can't find a way of explaining your point to those who haven't swallowed a dictionary then you are putting off people who may have valid points but cannot understand or bring themselves to try and understand what it is you are saying.

[Northumbria]

This issue has already been solved:

[Lunatic Goofballs]

The best way to reduce abortions is to improve access and education regarding contraceptives.

[New DeCapito]

Has anyone noticed yet that the first letter of each paragraph in the OP spells out 'A Modest Proposal'?

[The Grim Reaper]

Some easily excitable persons may instantly and thoughtlessly identify a certain flaw in my proposal, taken at face value: has this audacious, but indisputably well-intentioned man even thought of the logistics of this proposal? Why, yes, in fact, I have! I figure that the best use for this newly discovered resource lies in the creative complexity power of the human mind; by sustaining the brains of the infants we, by extension, preserve their minds. Therefore, we need only maintain and care for them in a rudimentary storage tank. I figure, the volume of an infant brain being approximately 280 cubic centimeters to begin with, but capable of growing to 1400 by adulthood, a tank of approximately ten thousand gallons may hold a raw value of about 27,000 brains; we shall shave this number down to 20,000 to account for the fluids of sustenance that will inevitably be needed to allow them to grow to complete stature. These fluids of sustenance may be supplied with liberal donations of blood and cerebrospinal fluid for the general public, who will, I believe, be more than happy to give to such a worthy cause.

This is the most problematic paragraph, for me.

But in general, my objections are thus:

1. There is no evidence that shows that the 'sustenance of the brain' is equivalent to 'preserving their mind'. We know, in fact, that this cannot be true - it is possible for braindeath to occur without damage to the physical structure of the brain.

2. There is literally no study I know of that suggests greater access to infant brains is at all necessary in artificial intelligence studies. Neural network learning is effectively entirely based on technological networks, rather than actual neural networks, because they're easier to adjust and monitor. There's been research using fly brains to interface with computer systems, but it's specifically for the research of the biological system rather than to further AI research.

3. Your logistics assume that brains can be packed together in any meaningful manner at all, which is not by any means known to be true - certainly not without very, very significant artificial structuring. Furthermore, these brains would have to be all of the same bloodtype to actually structure together in a sensible manner. Furthermore, you would have to specifically gather cerebrospinal fluid for this task - which is not a resource that is gathered in quantity at the current time.

[Ifreann]

Has anyone noticed yet that the first letter of each paragraph in the OP spells out 'A Modest Proposal'?

Oh, OP, that's awful. The tl;dr "obviously modest proposal reference" post was bad enough, but having the first letter of every paragraph spell "A Modest Proposal"? Hang your head in shame.

[Alvecia]

The best way to reduce abortions is to improve access and education regarding contraceptives.

but..but...contraceptives will lead to more immoral pre-marital sex

[Val Halla]

Has anyone noticed yet that the first letter of each paragraph in the OP spells out 'A Modest Proposal'?

Oh, OP, that's awful. The tl;dr "obviously modest proposal reference" post was bad enough, but having the first letter of every paragraph spell "A Modest Proposal"? Hang your head in shame.

I

D
o
n
'
t

s
e
e

a
n

i
s
s
u
e

I'm not good at this

[Angleter]

If there's a single pro-choicer who's satisfied by the idea of the mother having to carry the foetus to term before its mind is harvested 'after birth', or a single pro-lifer who's satisfied by the idea of the infant having its mind harvested and turned into a sort of disembodied slave for 'experimentation', then - to quote someone "on the colloquially appointed 'right wing'" - I'd give them a warm kiss.

At least it'd bring pro-choicers and pro-lifers together on something, if not in the way the OP intended.

[The Black Forrest]

Bigger doesn't make it better. As Ash asked can you make it in 50 words or less.

Nitpicks:

"unborn infants" is a false impression as it suggests all pregnancies are guaranteed births.

As to the Religious caring more? Not really. They care till delivery and they don't seem to want to pay taxes for things like neo-natal care, etc.