I am sick of recreational abortion! Keep my tax dollars away from mass murderers!

Generally speaking, people have a right to do what they want with their bodies,
they have the right to freedom, including the right to choose when they want to reproduce,
but only so long as exercising those rights aren't infringing upon someone else's rights. (liberty 101)

On the question of abortion, we have to balance the rights of the mother with the
rights/potential rights of the unborn. The key questions then become when exactly
does the unborn even gain those rights and why? I'm fairly certain we could all agree
that neither an egg nor sperm cell can be said to have any rights to speak of,
and we should also be able to agree that born babies do in fact at least have the right to not be killed.

So somewhere in between those two extremes, we need to determine at what point,
or within what range, something like abortion should go from being legal, to illegal.
During the Ranked vote we had a while back, folks came up with all sorts of
cutoff points and different arguments to justify them.

Spoiler: Ranked Vote Abortion Thread Options

A. Lovemaking (Week 0): Because Any Form of Abortion is Murder
B. Conception (Week 0): Because Life Begins at Conception
C. Conception (Week 0): Because since no one knows exactly when a zygote becomes a child, it must be assumed to qualify as one
D. Nervous System (Week 12): Because the baby’s senses are developing and it looks pretty human at that stage
E. Viability (Week 20): Because the earliest surviving baby was born at just over 21 weeks
F. Thalamic Afferents (Week 20): Because its been theorized that connections between afferents may be capable of pain transmission
G. Thalamocortical Fibers (Week 23): Because a fetus cannot suffer feel or perceive pain without Thalamocortical Fibers
H. Viability (Week 24): Because that's when the law defines a fetus as becoming a child
I. Viability (Week 24): Because that's when a fetus is able to live outside the woman without artificial means
J. Thalamocortical Fibers (Week 29): Because a fetus cannot suffer feel or perceive pain without Functional Thalamocortical Fibers
K. Pain Perception Dvmnt (Week 23-29): Because a fetus cannot suffer feel or perceive pain without Functional Thalamocortical Fibers
L. Pain Perception Dvmnt (Week 20-29): Because this is the period in which a fetus develops the structures necessary for pain perception
M. Mental Life (Week 29): Because fetal consciousness cannot and has not been observed to occur before this point
@. Medical Community (Week ??): Because the decision should be left to the doctors and patients who are more than capable
N. Birth (Week ??): Because That is When a Baby No Longer Depends On Its Mother to Live
O. Birth (Week ??): Because Women Should Always Have the Right to do What They Want With Their Body
P. There should be Exceptions in cases of Rape
Q. There should be Exceptions if Health of the Mother is Threatened
R. There should be Exceptions if Life of the Mother is Threatened
S. There should be Exceptions for Certain Fetal Abnormalities
T. There should be Exceptions for Incest
U. There should be Exceptions based on Ability of Parent to Afford and Care for the Child
V. There should be No Exceptions to the Cutoff Point
W. Graduated Restrictions and Requirements for Women Seeking Abortion as Gestational Age Increases
X. Use Tech to Remove Human Reproduction to an Industrial Process
Y. General Abortions Paid for by Person Getting It (Not the Government)
Z. Loan Program to Help Fund People Who Want to Get General Abortion
#. Improve Availability of Contraceptives
$. Where Abortions banned, State/Govmt/Taxpayer money used for any costs needed to keep pre-term infants alive
&. Abortion Issue Should be State-by-State Issue NOT Federal
£.
!0. Nothing Needed Beyond Cutoff Point and Exceptions (Status Quo Option)
!1. Don't Feel Qualified/Knowledgeable Enough To Vote In This Poll
!2. No Strong Feelings One Way Or The Other

The fuller arguments for each of those are linked to in this post:
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...te-how-should-the-law-handle-abortion.539893/

In the end though, the consensus after the vote was as follows:
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/pf-abortion-reform-compromise.550627/

I've asked a few people in the thread already, so I guess I'll ask you too...
How does that above compromise proposal differ from what you would view as your ideal resolution on the abortion issue?
And, even if your ideal was slightly different, would you still be able to accept a proposal like this as a compromise?

-Meta

 

Which is precisely why I stated that the percentages don't matter.
As you suggest, the implications of what happens during an abortion are the same either way.

But do try to remember, we're balancing two sets of rights here, or potential rights in the fetus's case.
On one hand, a woman's rights may outweigh a fetus's at a stage where that fetus can't be said to have rights.
Though once the fetus reaches a stage where they do have rights, things change...

During a pregnancy where nothing is going wrong, it can be said
that its the rights of a fetus to live weighed against a mother's rights to reproductive convenience.
It can easily be argued that the right to life is worth much more than the right to a mere convenience.

But... if something goes wrong, and the right to the mother's life becomes seriously threatened,
then its the life of the fetus weighed against the life of the already established mother on top of her reproductive rights.
As more of the mother's rights fall into the jeopardy as such, eventually they stack up and outweigh the fetus's rights.

This is why there should be an exception if the life of the mother is threatened. Its not that the fetus's rights have gone away,
its just that the fetus's rights aren't the only rights to consider here. Health of the mother is similar, and of course fetal abnormalities should also be considered. Personally, I'm not as keen on making exceptions for rape or incest, but the consensus seems to be that exceptions should indeed be made in those cases as well and I can definitely understand why.

Balancing rights like this is never pleasant btw. Ideally, contraception would be used so that scenarios like this could be avoided altogether, or baring that, we would set things up so that all abortions happened earlier in gestation rather than latter so that balancing rights against one another would be unnecessary. Which just underscores the importance of we as a society coming together to form a consensus on this issue.

...which reminds me... I asked you in the thread that bricklayer set up but I don't think you ever got back to me...

What is your opinion on the following abortion reform consensus proposal?
Would it be acceptable to you as a compromise, or is it still too restrictive in your opinion?
And if you do feel like its too restrictive, even for a compromise, then why?

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/pf-abortion-reform-compromise.550627/

-Meta

 

So you have no objection to the proposal then??

-Meta

 

I just want to make sure we're clear here.

You have no issue with the cutoff-point for legal abortion being placed at 24 weeks gestational,
along with there being an exception for life/health of mother, rape, incest, fetal abnormally?
And you're also on board with increasing access to contraceptives?

If you're really OK with all that, then you shouldn't be so argumentative.
My 2 cents anyways...

-Meta

 

I disagree with your assertion that fetuses don't have rights.
But as long as we're in agreement on what the law should be then it doesn't really matter...

Cutoff-point 24 weeks gestational,
exceptions for life/health of mother,
rape, incest, or certain fetal abnormally.
Increased access to contraceptives.

-Meta

 

Going by the proposal,
a fetus that has reached 24 weeks gestational age (viability) at that point has the right not to be killed via abortion except for in cases where the life/health of the mother is threatened, fetal abnormalities are discovered, or if the pregnancy was a product of rape or incest.

You can call that a privilege if you want, but like I was saying before, it doesn't really matter what you call it
as long as we're in agreement on what the law should be;

...that abortion should be legal before the 24th week and illegal after the 24th week
other than in cases that meet one or more of those listed exceptions.​

-Meta