[Abortion Thread] (POLL 4) A compromising position...

[Senkaku]

That issue is irrelevant. Fetuses are not children. Physical separation is a critical delineation.

Why, exactly? What is different in terms of sentience between a fetus ten minutes before birth and ten minutes after birth?

I mean, if full-blown sapience is the cutoff point, then you should be allowed to kill children up to like, age 3, and not get in more trouble than you would if you killed a dog. If any form of sentience is the cutoff point, then it should be illegal to kill most animals and you should be charged with murder for setting mousetraps or for getting an abortion. These are very subjective definitions you're throwing around as if we have empirical data to support any of them... so we have to come up with some arbitrary distinctions.

[Punished UMN]

Why, exactly? What is different in terms of sentience between a fetus ten minutes before birth and ten minutes after birth?

I mean, if full-blown sapience is the cutoff point, then you should be allowed to kill children up to like, age 3, and not get in more trouble than you would if you killed a dog. If any form of sentience is the cutoff point, then it should be illegal to kill most animals and you should be charged with murder for setting mousetraps or for getting an abortion. These are very subjective definitions you're throwing around as if we have empirical data to support any of them... so we have to come up with some arbitrary distinctions.

That's actually part of a broader point I'm trying to make that physical properties alone clearly are not the only consideration in ethics, and that many of the ethical arguments against killing infants (which I think we all accept) are equally applicable to a fetus. And the issue with arbitrary distinctions is that, by definition, they are unjust.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Why, exactly? What is different in terms of sentience between a fetus ten minutes before birth and ten minutes after birth?

I mean, if full-blown sapience is the cutoff point, then you should be allowed to kill children up to like, age 3, and not get in more trouble than you would if you killed a dog. If any form of sentience is the cutoff point, then it should be illegal to kill most animals and you should be charged with murder for setting mousetraps or for getting an abortion. These are very subjective definitions you're throwing around as if we have empirical data to support any of them... so we have to come up with some arbitrary distinctions.

Easier take: let grown ass people decide what they want to do with the guidance of their medical professionals. I’m sure some will disagree and I don’t care, abortion, like a tooth extraction, is a medical procedure. It’s none of our business what a competent adult chooses to do medically and with their healthcare provider involved. End of story.

[Senkaku]

I mean, if full-blown sapience is the cutoff point, then you should be allowed to kill children up to like, age 3, and not get in more trouble than you would if you killed a dog. If any form of sentience is the cutoff point, then it should be illegal to kill most animals and you should be charged with murder for setting mousetraps or for getting an abortion. These are very subjective definitions you're throwing around as if we have empirical data to support any of them... so we have to come up with some arbitrary distinctions.

That's actually part of a broader point I'm trying to make that physical properties alone clearly are not the only consideration in ethics, and that many of the ethical arguments against killing infants (which I think we all accept) are equally applicable to a fetus.

We kill animals with higher levels of cognition all the time on an industrial scale and don't think twice about it, for the simple reason that they are extremely tasty. Pigs scream when they die, octopuses have dreams, lambs are adorable and cuddly. I don't see any problem with euthanizing the odd fetus here or there, I'm pretty sure women getting them are giving it a hell of a lot more thought than I do when I buy some bacon at the store.

[Latvijas Otra Republika]

I have a question. For those who don't want to allow abortion without medical necessity, should elective plastic surgery also be banned? Because there isn't a medical problem. People have them because they "want" them.
They say they "need" them to live comfortably/ happily.

Yes

[Punished UMN]

That's actually part of a broader point I'm trying to make that physical properties alone clearly are not the only consideration in ethics, and that many of the ethical arguments against killing infants (which I think we all accept) are equally applicable to a fetus.

We kill animals with higher levels of cognition all the time on an industrial scale and don't think twice about it, for the simple reason that they are extremely tasty. Pigs scream when they die, octopuses have dreams, lambs are adorable and cuddly. I don't see any problem with euthanizing the odd fetus here or there, I'm pretty sure women getting them are giving it a hell of a lot more thought than I do when I buy some bacon at the store.

And my argument is that the distinction there is that the fetus is a member of our own species and ultimately, is the offspring of the person who is killing it, which makes abortion particularly grotesque.

[Senkaku]

We kill animals with higher levels of cognition all the time on an industrial scale and don't think twice about it, for the simple reason that they are extremely tasty. Pigs scream when they die, octopuses have dreams, lambs are adorable and cuddly. I don't see any problem with euthanizing the odd fetus here or there, I'm pretty sure women getting them are giving it a hell of a lot more thought than I do when I buy some bacon at the store.

And my argument is that the distinction there is that the fetus is a member of our own species and ultimately, is the offspring of the person who is killing it, which makes abortion particularly grotesque.

Why? Sometimes it's not a good time to have offspring, sometimes you want to spare a creature from enduring unbearable suffering. If we euthanize dogs in animal shelters because no one's adopted them for a few months, or put down old cats who have terminal kidney disease, I really don't see anything wrong with killing a fetus because it would totally derail your career and your life, or because it would have some horrible genetic disease that would cause agonizing pain. I reject the idea that there's something unique about our species' experience of consciousness, more and more studies indicate that lots of animals have subjective experiences and higher-level cognition quite similarly to us. Yes, killing your own offspring sucks, but no one does it lightly, which is more than can be said for other primates who let a new dominant male massacre the old male's kids, or squid who cannibalize each other when they go into a feeding frenzy.

[Senkaku]

I mean, if full-blown sapience is the cutoff point, then you should be allowed to kill children up to like, age 3, and not get in more trouble than you would if you killed a dog. If any form of sentience is the cutoff point, then it should be illegal to kill most animals and you should be charged with murder for setting mousetraps or for getting an abortion. These are very subjective definitions you're throwing around as if we have empirical data to support any of them... so we have to come up with some arbitrary distinctions.

Easier take: let grown ass people decide what they want to do with the guidance of their medical professionals. I’m sure some will disagree and I don’t care, abortion, like a tooth extraction, is a medical procedure. It’s none of our business what a competent adult chooses to do medically and with their healthcare provider involved. End of story.

I don't actually think just blocking out the discussion is a good way to go. There is a real moral dilemma here that I think we have to grapple with honestly, and I think we can find a resolution to it by examining how our species generally treats creatures with similar levels of consciousness to a fetus (i.e., we kill them at the drop of a hat if it's convenient for us or serves a purpose, but we usually try to do it humanely).

[Miku the Based]

I have a question. For those who don't want to allow abortion without medical necessity, should elective plastic surgery also be banned? Because there isn't a medical problem. People have them because they "want" them.
They say they "need" them to live comfortably/ happily.

Yes

Seconding the notion.

[Senkaku]

Yes

Seconding the notion.

No facial reconstruction for burn victims! They should just learn to love themselves as they are!

[Punished UMN]

And my argument is that the distinction there is that the fetus is a member of our own species and ultimately, is the offspring of the person who is killing it, which makes abortion particularly grotesque.

Why? Sometimes it's not a good time to have offspring, sometimes you want to spare a creature from enduring unbearable suffering. If we euthanize dogs in animal shelters because no one's adopted for a few months them, or put down old cats who have terminal kidney disease, I really don't see anything wrong with killing a fetus because it would totally derail your career and your life, or because it would have some horrible genetic disease that would cause agonizing pain. I reject the idea that there's something unique about our species' experience of consciousness, more and more studies indicate that lots of animals have subjective experiences and higher-level cognition quite similarly to us. Yes, killing your own offspring sucks, but no one does it lightly, which is more than can be said for other primates who let a new dominant male massacre the old male's kids, or squid who cannibalize each other when they go into a feeding frenzy.

Then we're at an impasse, as I simply think that humanity is a sacred creature. That said, I think we kill animals far too lightly.

[Senkaku]

Why? Sometimes it's not a good time to have offspring, sometimes you want to spare a creature from enduring unbearable suffering. If we euthanize dogs in animal shelters because no one's adopted for a few months them, or put down old cats who have terminal kidney disease, I really don't see anything wrong with killing a fetus because it would totally derail your career and your life, or because it would have some horrible genetic disease that would cause agonizing pain. I reject the idea that there's something unique about our species' experience of consciousness, more and more studies indicate that lots of animals have subjective experiences and higher-level cognition quite similarly to us. Yes, killing your own offspring sucks, but no one does it lightly, which is more than can be said for other primates who let a new dominant male massacre the old male's kids, or squid who cannibalize each other when they go into a feeding frenzy.

Then we're at an impasse, as I simply think that humanity is a sacred creature. That said, I think we kill animals far too lightly.

I thought you were against drawing arbitrary distinctions, on the basis that they’re unjust. Is there any actual reason to believe we’re sacred among all life, or is that just an arbitrary distinction you’ve introduced from a subjective belief system?

[Punished UMN]

Easier take: let grown ass people decide what they want to do with the guidance of their medical professionals. I’m sure some will disagree and I don’t care, abortion, like a tooth extraction, is a medical procedure. It’s none of our business what a competent adult chooses to do medically and with their healthcare provider involved. End of story.

I don't actually think just blocking out the discussion is a good way to go. There is a real moral dilemma here that I think we have to grapple with honestly, and I think we can find a resolution to it by examining how our species generally treats creatures with similar levels of consciousness to a fetus (i.e., we kill them at the drop of a hat if it's convenient for us or serves a purpose, but we usually try to do it humanely).

^ This as well. Simply saying that something isn't another person's business doesn't address the issue, which is that there is a dilemma, and like many ethical dilemmas, the question is how fair a situation can be, because there is conflicting interests between individuals, and no matter what the outcome, someone has to sacrifice something deeply important for them. That's why, while I don't think there should be an industry for abortion, I wouldn't support jailing women who procure them for several different reasons, because I don't think it would be fair to do so, even if what they did was morally wrong, and even if it is grievously wrong.

[Punished UMN]

Then we're at an impasse, as I simply think that humanity is a sacred creature. That said, I think we kill animals far too lightly.

I thought you were against drawing arbitrary distinctions, on the basis that they’re unjust. Is there any actual reason to believe we’re sacred among all life, or is that just an arbitrary distinction you’ve introduced from a subjective belief system?

The sacrosanctity would of course come from my religious beliefs (which ofc I don't believe to be arbitrary), but as a matter of concession, if I do accept that line of reasoning, it would seem to me that the direction should be to move away from killing animals as brazenly as we do rather than to expand our killing pool to humans.

[Latvijas Otra Republika]

Seconding the notion.

No facial reconstruction for burn victims! They should just learn to love themselves as they are!

yhea mate I agree with u

Probably wrote this down didn’t you, planning a good quality ‘got you’ moment on nsg to save in the screen cap folder

Its common sense that facial reconstruction due to war, burns, suicide attempts and other misfortunes is different than someone privileged wanting to get fillers or sharpen their jawline. Get a grip man.

[Greater Miami Shores]

As a conservative Republican I am apposed to abortion unless it threatens the life of the mother or the baby to be, the kid to be and the person to be, is to be born deformed or with an incurable disease, but I support the right to die with dignity euthanasia law, performed by a licensed doctor, in the least painless way possible as determined by the health experts, with very few if any restrictions, if I am in such a situation put me to sleep like we do with dogs, cats and pets, dogs, cats and pets are family too.

[The New California Republic]

No facial reconstruction for burn victims! They should just learn to love themselves as they are!

yhea mate I agree with u

Probably wrote this down didn’t you, planning a good quality ‘got you’ moment on nsg to save in the screen cap folder

Its common sense that facial reconstruction due to war, burns, suicide attempts and other misfortunes is different than someone privileged wanting to get fillers or sharpen their jawline. Get a grip man.

Strange, because the person who wrote the post that you responded to in the first instance (Thepeopl) is a completely different person, i.e. not Senkaku, so not sure how it could be an elaborate gotcha...

[Senkaku]

No facial reconstruction for burn victims! They should just learn to love themselves as they are!

yhea mate I agree with u

Probably wrote this down didn’t you, planning a good quality ‘got you’ moment on nsg to save in the screen cap folder

Its common sense that facial reconstruction due to war, burns, suicide attempts and other misfortunes is different than someone privileged wanting to get fillers or sharpen their jawline. Get a grip man.

It’s not strictly medically necessary, in the same sense that a woman who wants an abortion because she literally couldn’t afford childcare wouldn’t be getting an abortion out of medical necessity. It’s still ultimately a cosmetic surgery or a non-medically-necessary abortion; if you want more refined restrictions that make this sort of distinction, then you should talk about them with the appropriate precision.

[Neutraligon]

I have a question. For those who don't want to allow abortion without medical necessity, should elective plastic surgery also be banned? Because there isn't a medical problem. People have them because they "want" them.
They say they "need" them to live comfortably/ happily.

Yes

Elective surgeries cover far more then what you think, it covers anything that is not needed to immediately save a person's life. For instance anything to do with removing cancerous tissue would be elective because it is not immediately needed to save a person's life.

[Senkaku]

Yes

Elective surgeries cover far more then what you think, it covers anything that is not needed to immediately save a person's life. For instance anything to do with removing cancerous tissue would be elective because it is not immediately needed to save a person's life.

Hip and knee replacements are also classified as elective surgeries. When hospitals say they're cancelling elective surgeries to free up space for covid patients, that doesn't mean they're cancelling lip-injection appointments.

[Thepeopl]

I have a question. For those who don't want to allow abortion without medical necessity, should elective plastic surgery also be banned? Because there isn't a medical problem. People have them because they "want" them.
They say they "need" them to live comfortably/ happily.

Yes

Why?

And no, I wasn't going to "gotcha". I am honestly wondering whether you would be consequent or why there is a difference between elective surgery.

[Thepeopl]

Yes

Seconding the notion.

Also for you: Why?

[Senkaku]

I thought you were against drawing arbitrary distinctions, on the basis that they’re unjust. Is there any actual reason to believe we’re sacred among all life, or is that just an arbitrary distinction you’ve introduced from a subjective belief system?

The sacrosanctity would of course come from my religious beliefs (which ofc I don't believe to be arbitrary), but as a matter of concession, if I do accept that line of reasoning, it would seem to me that the direction should be to move away from killing animals as brazenly as we do rather than to expand our killing pool to humans.

It's not "expanding" the killing pool, it's just accepting it at the size it's literally always been. This is just circle of life shit, and it sucks just as hard every time it happens for the individual consciousnesses involved, but it's just the reality of being complex organisms at a middling trophic level, and in our case being ones who have the intelligence and will to dominate our environment. We'll kill other species when it suits us, they'll kill us in situations where they have the ability and desire to do so, and sometimes we'll kill our own, hopefully (and I would argue typically) after thinking very long and hard about it and having what we feel is a serious reason for doing so. Unless we invent medicine so far ahead of what we have now that it makes antibiotics and heart surgery look as primitive as leeching to balance the humors, death is going to be with us, and we're going to have to figure out what the appropriate cases are where it can be meted out by one entity to another. To that end, I'd say if you're okay eating meat and dairy (which I am, even though I know they require great slaughter), you should be okay with unrestricted abortion. The moral implications of abortion, in terms of the number of total sentients killed and the complexity of their cognition and experiences, in fact strike me as being far less serious than those of the industrialized mass slaughter of animals as or sometimes more intelligent than our own toddlers.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Easier take: let grown ass people decide what they want to do with the guidance of their medical professionals. I’m sure some will disagree and I don’t care, abortion, like a tooth extraction, is a medical procedure. It’s none of our business what a competent adult chooses to do medically and with their healthcare provider involved. End of story.

I don't actually think just blocking out the discussion is a good way to go. There is a real moral dilemma here that I think we have to grapple with honestly, and I think we can find a resolution to it by examining how our species generally treats creatures with similar levels of consciousness to a fetus (i.e., we kill them at the drop of a hat if it's convenient for us or serves a purpose, but we usually try to do it humanely).

I get that’s how you feel but when you come right down to it, that’s what abortions are: Medical procedures. Why someone seeks an abortion is their business and it need only involve them and their healthcare providers.

[Senkaku]

I don't actually think just blocking out the discussion is a good way to go. There is a real moral dilemma here that I think we have to grapple with honestly, and I think we can find a resolution to it by examining how our species generally treats creatures with similar levels of consciousness to a fetus (i.e., we kill them at the drop of a hat if it's convenient for us or serves a purpose, but we usually try to do it humanely).

I get that’s how you feel but when you come right down to it, that’s what abortions are: Medical procedures. Why someone seeks an abortion is their business and it need only involve them and their healthcare providers.

Yes, that's my view as well, but people like UMN believe this particular medical procedure should be banned and have a moral argument for why they think that, and ultimately, that has to be addressed somehow and refuted if you don't want it to get banned. In the view of anti-abortion types, you could well substitute "lobotomy" for "abortion" into your statement here; it doesn't address their argument at all, and they'll continue making a moral argument (one I think we probably agree is flawed) to the mass public that will go unchallenged. Designating something a "medical procedure" does not necessarily make it sacrosanct or immune from criticism (as well it shouldn't).