Blizzhackers

We're going over abortion in my ethics class, and I have to say I'm undecided. I think, for sure, that it should be allowed regardless (I'm a consequentialist and a bit of a utilitarian), but I don't know whether or it's actually moral to allow abortion. The thing that gave me this doubt was a summary of an essay by Don Marquis titled "Why Abortion Is Immoral."

The essay (which can be found here: http://philosophy.wisc.edu/shapiro/Phil101/Marquis.pdf) basically states that after conception a fetus or whatever it's called has a "Future Like Ours," and that depriving it of that future is wrong. I wish I could remember better what the teacher was talking about, and I will check my notes when I can tomorrow, but I can't. If you're going to attack that principle I highly recommend you read the article or at least the summary to see if he has already addressed it.


http://stairs.umd.edu/140/marquis.html

There's a summary of the article, which hopefully should help.


I'm not asking whether or not we should allow abortion, but whether or not it is immoral.

Well it comes down to what you think about adoption, I don't think abortion should be used as birth control, however when it comes to unwanted kids.

Personally, I know people that have gone through adoption; and their life is miserable. Is it immoral to prevent an untrained life from misery by killing it?

In my opinion no, because a life time of pain/problems from being an unwanted child shouldn't be outweighed by selfish conservatives or pro-lifers.

It is immoral to set a life to this course because you think it is right.

oh please... adopted children are not better off dead... most of them go on to live happy and productive lives. It's quite obvious that they'd prefer to live than to be killed... after all, the suicide rate of adopted children is pretty damn low. I think it's just sick that you're trying to justify murder by saying "they're better off dead."

The Sorites Paradox

We all accept that a human is a person at the moment of birth. However, it’s reasonable to accept that a human was a person a moment before when it had one toe still within its mother. And if you accept that, it’s reasonable to accept that a human was a person a moment before that when it had one foot inside its mother. Continuing with the argument, you get to a point where you accept that a human was a person when a small part of its head is exposed and if you accept that, then, you have to accept that it was a person a moment before that when it was completely within its mother.

The paradox lies in the fact that you start with an acceptable statement (a human is a person once fully birthed), take a number of seemingly reasonable steps (back in time) but end up with an unacceptable (to the person who argues from position) result (that a human isn’t a person before being birthed).

The issue is undecidable. Both sides of the argument can be reduced to absurdity. It is impossible to draw a 'morally correct' line, so the next best thing to do is to draw a utilitarian line. And the utilitarian line is to legalize abortion. For reasons to numerous and obvious to mention.

EDIT: youngstar reduced one side of the argument to absurdity. The other side of the argument is that if you can call it a human at the point of conception, why not call it a human before conception? Why not make it illegal for fertile women to spend any time not being pregnant? There is nothing magical about the moment of fertilization. And if anyone is going to say "well, at the moment of fertilization it will become a human without any human intervention". But that is not so. Its' progression to a fully born human being is still dependent on the actions of the host mother.

Agreed.



Considering that adoption agencies are beyond lame and derogating, there is no point to bringing a child into
a world, that even until they are adopted; live a sad life.

If we go into it, a Fetus is not a human being until the later stages of the pregnancy; even then, it will come down
to this.

Would you rather spare an unwanted child the pain of being unwanted (minus pre-arranged adoptions of course)
before he/she gets the chance to grow up and learn in that environment.

or

Would you rather not think from THEIR point of view, obviously not all these adoption agencies are miracles.
Obviously you are not taking into consideration the kids that are born as drug babies, etc; such as kids who develop
cancer at the age of 4 and die a miserable death.

But, no I presume pro-lifers don't take that into consideration when saying killing untrained lives is wrong.
Personally, little babies are adorable creatures, however letting them suffer is wrong.

You think you're promoting life, but you are promoting human suffering, and that, that is immoral; condemning a
life to suffering is wrong.

As noted of course, for if there is Life, there is ALWAYS Death; you do well to remember that, because when a
life is ignited into the world, another is snuffed out.

Pointless undecidable debate topic in my opinion... i could try to regurgitate all the familiar arguments for choice, but what it really comes down to, personally, is i don't hold any inherent value in individual foetal life as there are way too many people on this planet; many of whom live in miserable conditions. This doesn't mean i'm in favour of just killing these little things because they're an inconvenience to the carrier, its just hard to give them significant weighting....

I also don't take any argument from "anti-abortionists" seriously as they usually come from middle-to-upper-class persons who are safe and secure in their little world (i.e. America) with no real understanding of how irrelevant these sorts of issues are compared to many other things that go on that involve life and suffering.

Abortion is the murder of a POTENTIAL life. We have no way of knowing whether the baby to be would even be, or be what. If you want to say stopping potential life is wrong, then don't use a condom or you are a hypocrite. In fact, if you are ever not trying to conceive a child at any point in time, you are denying that possible baby the right to live. So every second you have, inadvertently "killed" hundreds of babies. Being fully aware of ones actions does not make them any worse, so how can abortion be wrong?

Personally to me I don't care if its immoral or wrong or whatever if I don't want the kid the bitch is having an abortion.

As for adoption I haven't met one person who was adopted that isn't majorly fucked up.

Do I see a unborn baby as a person? No, I don't care if it has a heart beat if it has feelings or any of that bullshit until you actually come out you are not a person. If my mother aborted me I honestly feel it would be fine.

There are plenty legitimate reasons for getting an abortion. However something like getting an abortion just because eating chocolate milkshakes makes you sick while pregnant, and you really want that chocolate milkshake, so you get an abortion. That's immoral.

fuck i am usually so for abortion, i usually see retarded people and wish they were never born, but fuck i couldnt have an abortion if i was a girl. i would feel bad bringing life into this world because its way too much of a responsibility and i cannot care for a life, but right now i just fucking feel like everyone should live and be happy but everything is so morally grey, i usually just say fuck it and say live and let die, but right now i feel like everyone should live

Abortion isn't killing someone, it's killing the potential to create someone. It's like scooping the sperm out a lady only after a couple of months. If the guy just wore a condom it would have done the exact same thing. Are condoms immoral?

The choice isn't immoral, the judgment is. Abortion exists regardless of right or wrong, but the choice is neither moral nor immoral. Judgment leading into the decision can be moral or immoral. If you cannot give your potential child a healthy growth process, I feel you are morally bound to abort the fetus. We choose to pull the plug on someone who is of no use as a human being, and as such so too should the "plug" be pulled on a life that will exist simply to be a burden on itself and society.


On the other hand, it is immoral to abort a fetus for which you have the means to provide a healthy growth process. Irregardless of the means of fertilization (rape or consensual sex), if the mother can provide the means for the child to grow into a contributing adult member of society it is immoral to deprive anyone of it's presence.


More or less anyway...

People who are forced to do something rarely do it right. Abortion lowers crime rates for this reason. Having someone carelessly raise a child and teach it nothing, but lavish it with what ever it wants will undoubtedly create an immoral bastard child.

boi u ignant