Ohio State Sen. says if men are so worried about wombs, then turnabout is fair play

[thaiboxerken]

While I don't doubt there are some who think that way, let's give them a chance to answer first. Unless they previously gave that answer, natch.

I don't doubt that they all (anti-abortionists) think this, they just don't want to say it.

 

[eeyore1954]

Why, out of curiosity?

Because I believe that a new human life begins after conception. From that point the development is continual, there is no time or break when I can see biologically it suddenly becomes a human.

 

[eeyore1954]

Because women only exist to give birth to babies.

I wonder why you immediately think that is the reason someone could feel that way.

 

[eeyore1954]

I don't doubt that they all (anti-abortionists) think this, they just don't want to say it.

I most certainly do not hold that view. I think that you assume that is the only reason says a lot about you.

 

[eeyore1954]

On life support, yes, but if they are brain dead?! It's idiotic to think a body with no brain function is a person.

anyone who holds a different view than you is idiotic or at least evil.

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

A body with no brain holds no views at all.

 

[TheRedWorm]

Because I believe that a new human life begins after conception. From that point the development is continual, there is no time or break when I can see biologically it suddenly becomes a human.

OK. Would it be fair to say that you oppose any deliberate taking of a life?

 

[epepke]

This stuff is stupid. It's just theatre.

Look, this is simple. There is overwhelming evidence that restricting abortion makes it happen more frequently. There is also overwhelming evidence that about as many men as women support its legality. These are facts. Anyone with half a brain can be expected to know them, and the rest aren't worth urinating on if they are on fire.

It's just far too exciting and fun for pro-lifers to get some moral warm fuzzies out of pontificating about it, that they are willing to make as many in their parlance "murdered babies" happen as possible.

It's also far too exciting for pro-choicers to think that they are oppressed by evil men, that they are willing to alienate half of their supporters by posting cute little facebook nonsense about how if you don't have a uterus they don't get to have an opinion.

That is all.

It might be interesting to talk about actual medical, social, moral, and philosophical implications of abortion, but there is simply no way even of starting until these problems are solved. Which they aren't going to be, because everyone is just thinking with their knees.

 

[eeyore1954]

OK. Would it be fair to say that you oppose any deliberate taking of a life?

The word any always makes me hesitate but in general I would say that is a fair assessment of my beliefs. But I do not think that is a certain conclusion just based upon my beliefs about abortion.

Human life should be added because I am an omnivore.

 

[thaiboxerken]

anyone who holds a different view than you is idiotic or at least evil.

On this particular viewpoint, yes. A body without a brain is just a body. Only idiots think it's a person.

 

[RandFan]

i believe a person on Life support is still a person.

That's not what I asked but I assume you are answering my question. A person in a persistent vegetative state who is on life support. Why is that person a person?

If you could remove the brain. I don't know and my brain is too tired too think about it

And I don't mean to take rhetorical advantage but that's the problem, people don't think when it comes to this question, they rely on intuition and beliefs. Beliefs are primarily the result of feelings and subconscious bias and motivations. The problem is that until the question is addressed you have not intellectually dealt with the question of what it means to be human. You are relying on your feelings of what it means to be human.

 

[RandFan]

I don't know anything about the bill but I am against abortion,

Why?

 

[RandFan]

Because I believe that a new human life begins after conception. From that point the development is continual, there is no time or break when I can see biologically it suddenly becomes a human.

Why do you believe that a new human life begins after conception? That's just an arbitrary point. The pregnant woman will abort about 50% of all conceptions before they can attach. Why not choose the point at which the fertilized egg attaches to the uterine wall? Why not choose any number of important points of development (see ANTPogo's link)? Why isn't every sperm and ovum a new life and why shouldn't they be protected? Conception results in a cell that cannot think and cannot feel. You think that the cell is more important than the sperm and egg prior to conception. Why?

These are questions you won't likely be able to answer because your position is based on cultural indoctrination and feelings. There is nothing intellectual about the decision as it is arbitrary and ad hoc.

 

[marplots]

And I don't mean to take rhetorical advantage but that's the problem, people don't think when it comes to this question, they rely on intuition and beliefs. Beliefs are primarily the result of feelings and subconscious bias and motivations. The problem is that until the question is addressed you have not intellectually dealt with the question of what it means to be human. You are relying on your feelings of what it means to be human.

I think this is true - the bit about intuition and beliefs - but I come to the opposite conclusion, that intellectualism or reductionism don't work as well. As soon as we agree that a human being has a different status than merely a collection of cells riding the entropy train, we've left strict materialism behind.

It really is a philosophical question. If I value my own life, how can I then say that another's is less valuable? It's a tough question and one we confront all the time in many different dimensions, from justice to distribution of scarce resources.

 

[RandFan]

I think this is true - the bit about intuition and beliefs - but I come to the opposite conclusion, that intellectualism or reductionism don't work as well. As soon as we agree that a human being has a different status than merely a collection of cells riding the entropy train, we've left strict materialism behind.

It really is a philosophical question. If I value my own life, how can I then say that another's is less valuable? It's a tough question and one we confront all the time in many different dimensions, from justice to distribution of scarce resources.

Thank you for the response. I grew up pro-life and a meat eater. I studied psychology and behavior at the University of Utah. I had a lot of cognitive dissonance trying to reconcile that I was in favor of killing thinking, feeling mammals like pigs and cows but I was against terminating a fetus that didn't have the neural correlates of consciousness. It might be a philosophical question but we have mountains of scientific evidence to inform that question.

Moral consistency. Should the fact that something cannot think or feel have any impact on our decisions about abortions. If not then why don't we save sperm and ovum? IMO: The only answer to that question is an arbitrary ad hoc one. There is no science that would lead one to think that a human cell or any mass of cells is a human being.

 

[marplots]

Moral consistency. Should the fact that something cannot think or feel have any impact on our decisions about abortions. If not then why don't we save sperm and ovum? IMO: The only answer to that question is an arbitrary ad hoc one. There is no science that would lead one to think that a human cell or any mass of cells is a human being.

There's something quite human involved here. I have a stick downstairs I picked up on a shoreline last month. It's a fine stick, long enough to become a walking stick and shaped in interesting ways by the waves. I plan to sand it a bit, varnish it and make a staff out of it. I value it and would be irritated if you threw it out. But it's just a stick.

I accept that I pull out some things from the world and value them more than others. Some things get a kind of status beyond their physical attributes or the arrangement of their molecules. I also seem to have no trouble ranking these things, thinking my stick worthwhile, but not as worthwhile as, say, my Internet connection. Should I be forced to choose, I can easily pick one over the other.

In any case, there's a method to cut through the crap when it comes to abortion. Here's what I do. Since I cannot evaluate the situation without being in the situation, my default is to ask the mother. So long as she is sane and has some minimal facts, it's up to her to decide. It's her value system and ranking that matters, not mine.

So I dodge the absolutes here. It's the only way forward as far as I can tell. Use one set of ungraspables (when life begins) set against another (how a mother evaluates carrying her fetus to term). The only thing left, from a societal point of view, is to make sure her decision isn't subtly driven by circumstance society/culture creates. She has to have room to maneuver.

This puts me in the pro-choice camp, but with one caveat. She should be making an informed, serious decision, with actual options available and the least amount of pressure possible.

It also makes me a moral coward. I can't be brave enough to come up with a firm moral position, so I'm passing the buck to the woman concerned. I'm going with pragmatic and taking the coward's way out.

 

[BStrong]

Off topic, but can someone tell me what that picture is from? I really would like to know the context.

Somebody farted.

It smelled like dust and old money.

 

[RandFan]

There's something quite human involved here. I have a stick downstairs I picked up on a shoreline last month. It's a fine stick, long enough to become a walking stick and shaped in interesting ways by the waves. I plan to sand it a bit, varnish it and make a staff out of it. I value it and would be irritated if you threw it out. But it's just a stick.

I accept that I pull out some things from the world and value them more than others. Some things get a kind of status beyond their physical attributes or the arrangement of their molecules. I also seem to have no trouble ranking these things, thinking my stick worthwhile, but not as worthwhile as, say, my Internet connection. Should I be forced to choose, I can easily pick one over the other.

In any case, there's a method to cut through the crap when it comes to abortion. Here's what I do. Since I cannot evaluate the situation without being in the situation, my default is to ask the mother. So long as she is sane and has some minimal facts, it's up to her to decide. It's her value system and ranking that matters, not mine.

So I dodge the absolutes here. It's the only way forward as far as I can tell. Use one set of ungraspables (when life begins) set against another (how a mother evaluates carrying her fetus to term). The only thing left, from a societal point of view, is to make sure her decision isn't subtly driven by circumstance society/culture creates. She has to have room to maneuver.

This puts me in the pro-choice camp, but with one caveat. She should be making an informed, serious decision, with actual options available and the least amount of pressure possible.

It also makes me a moral coward. I can't be brave enough to come up with a firm moral position, so I'm passing the buck to the woman concerned. I'm going with pragmatic and taking the coward's way out.

As individuals trying to be decent human beings making the right choices the best we can do is to keep discussing the issue and to keep making rational arguments in favor of our position. Eventually the moral zeitgeist will change. There was a time when slavery was accepted by most people. Eventually as people became more and more aware of the humanity of slaves the practice became repugnant and slavery largely disappeared in more advanced nations. Today slavery is outlawed in all modern liberal democracies.

Reason and rationality will eventually trump feelings. Lacking any reason to think that a mass of cells can think and feel then the notion that conception results in a human being will, IMO, diminish.

I could be wrong. Abortion might in the end come to be viewed as we now view slavery and enlightened people will eventually come to see that. I seriously doubt it as modern liberal democracies have moved in the opposite direction.

 

[marplots]

I could be wrong. Abortion might in the end come to be viewed as we now view slavery and enlightened people will eventually come to see that. I seriously doubt it as modern liberal democracies have moved in the opposite direction.

There's other ways, stranger ways it could go too. For example, I own my left hand. No one would claim it's a "human being" either. Still, if I wanted to get it cut off, I would be seen as crazy and might even face forced treatment because of my odd desire.

Or, another possibility: birth rates could fall so low that any pregnancy is seen as a kind of celebrity or honored status. Full ride, reward money, and so on...

Could go the opposite too. Say we find out that carrying a baby to term means the woman will lose some years at the back end. Fetuses as toxic. Pregnancy falls out of favor and artificial wombs take over. Who knows?

 

[RandFan]

There's other ways, stranger ways it could go too. For example, I own my left hand. No one would claim it's a "human being" either. Still, if I wanted to get it cut off, I would be seen as crazy and might even face forced treatment because of my odd desire.

Or, another possibility: birth rates could fall so low that any pregnancy is seen as a kind of celebrity or honored status. Full ride, reward money, and so on...

Could go the opposite too. Say we find out that carrying a baby to term means the woman will lose some years at the back end. Fetuses as toxic. Pregnancy falls out of favor and artificial wombs take over. Who knows?

No argument. We could bring back slavery and child labor also. We could bring back capital punishment for adultery and fornication and unruly children. Anything is possible.