Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Some states protect women's rights
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 31 of 286 (853297)
05-25-2019 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Sarah Bellum
05-25-2019 9:15 AM


Re: Is the fetus a human being? Is it a living creature that we allow you to kill?
Sarah Bellum writes:
Here's another question. Suppose you were introduced to Sandy, an adult human being who suffered from a terminal illness that could be cured by hooking Sandy's circulatory system up to a healthy individual's circulatory system for nine months....
The real question is, Who gets to decide? Would you force the healthy person to keep Sandy alive?
Sarah Bellum writes:
For some reason, however, they leave the switch to the machine in your reach. Do you have the right to flip the switch to OFF?
Even if the healthy person originally consented, does he have the right to change his mind?

Izquierdo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-25-2019 9:15 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-26-2019 6:28 PM ringo has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 286 (853301)
05-25-2019 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Sarah Bellum
05-25-2019 11:36 AM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
Of course. In the examples you mentioned a person is being reasonably ask to make a relatively small effort or to make a relatively small personal contribution that will have a huge impact on the well-being or life another person.
That is different than the medical examples we are talking about here. In this case we are forcibly violating the sanctity of a person's very body. No one is, in my opinion, obligated morally to allow that.
-
When it comes to the abortion argument, there are two reasons I am pro-choice. These reasons are independent of one another; neither relies on the other. A forced birther needs to overcome both.
The first is that a fetus is not an entity about which we can discuss "well-being" in any meaningful way. In that case, the well-being of the mother, as defined by herself, is the only thing we need consider.
The other is that no person has a moral duty to allow their body to serve as a "life-support" machine for another person.
The first point, admittedly, is based on my understanding of the nature of consciousness and what makes something a "person" whose well-being is something I need to consider. Conceivably, new information could change my mind on this without causing huge problems in my entire philosophical outlook.
The second point, though, is closer to being an "axiom" of my ethical framework. It would take a lot to get me to change that since it would involve having to reexamine a lot in my moral outlook.

If this was a witch hunt, it found a lot of witches. -- David Cole, writing about the Mueller investigation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-25-2019 11:36 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-26-2019 6:24 PM Chiroptera has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 33 of 286 (853364)
05-26-2019 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Chiroptera
05-25-2019 12:44 PM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
Why can't we discuss the "well-being" of the fetus? How does the fetus compare with a pet dog? How does the fetus compare with a severely handicapped Rubella baby aged one year? Does your opinion about the "well-being" apply equally to a one-month gestation fetus and an eight-month gestation fetus?
Is your assertion that nobody has a moral duty to be a "life-support" machine a matter of degree? Does someone have a moral duty to tell someone to get out of the street if a speeding truck is approaching?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Chiroptera, posted 05-25-2019 12:44 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Chiroptera, posted 05-26-2019 9:51 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 34 of 286 (853365)
05-26-2019 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by ringo
05-25-2019 11:41 AM


Re: Is the fetus a human being? Is it a living creature that we allow you to kill?
The question of forcing someone to keep Sandy alive is a much different question. I might, for example, think it a good thing that someone donate a kidney to someone else that they might live, but that is not the same as thinking we ought to force that person to undergo surgery to extract their kidney against their will.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by ringo, posted 05-25-2019 11:41 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by AZPaul3, posted 05-26-2019 7:20 PM Sarah Bellum has replied
 Message 41 by ringo, posted 05-27-2019 12:00 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 35 of 286 (853366)
05-26-2019 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Sarah Bellum
05-26-2019 6:28 PM


Re: Is the fetus a human being? Is it a living creature that we allow you to kill?
that is not the same as thinking we ought to force that person to undergo surgery to extract their kidney against their will.
Is this different from forcing an unwilling person to carry an unwanted fetus to term. Is the invasion of bodily sovereignty any different in these two scenarios?

Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-26-2019 6:28 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-27-2019 8:20 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 36 of 286 (853368)
05-26-2019 9:51 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Sarah Bellum
05-26-2019 6:24 PM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
Why can't we discuss the "well-being" of the fetus?
In the first trimester, the central nervous system is still pretty rudimentary, I can't imagine (admittedly, this may say more about my limitations than the status ofa fetus) that it would be possible fora fetus to have any of the cognitive functions we associate with self-awareness or consciousness. It makes as much sense to worry about the well-being of a fetus as it does the well-being of a carrot.
What do you think? What is it about a "one-month gestation fetus" that makes you think we need to worry about the ethics of terminating its life? We can discuss the other points you bring up in a bit; right now I want to see where our viewpoints are similar and where they are different.

If this was a witch hunt, it found a lot of witches. -- David Cole, writing about the Mueller investigation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-26-2019 6:24 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-27-2019 8:16 AM Chiroptera has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


Message 37 of 286 (853385)
05-27-2019 8:16 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Chiroptera
05-26-2019 9:51 PM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
It's always appropriate to discuss the ethics of any medical procedure, don't you agree?
In answer to your question about my position: I take the position that just because something's morally wrong, that doesn't mean government should (necessarily) prohibit it.
That's a stance most people take, even if they don't recognize it consciously. Religious people, for example, often think it's morally wrong to believe in a deity other than their preferred one. But they don't want their government to follow the Islamic example and punish certain kinds of worship!
On abortion, I don't think much about the "woman's right to do what she wants with her body." It sounds nice, but it's not relevant. If she were nursing a month-old baby and decided to stop and let it starve nobody would say she has a "right" to starve it!
I think about the old days, the back-alley abortions, the coat hangers, the home remedies like ergot and turpentine, the resulting injuries, sterility, infection, deaths. Nobody wants to see those days again. The pro-life people may be sincere, saying all a woman has to do is give up the baby for adoption. That only happens in an ideal world. And we don't live in an ideal world.
The ethics of it still worry me. Imagine a death-penalty supporter who supports it because they believe it works (prevents crime, appropriate punishment, etc.) and makes the world a better place, but they still have qualms because . . . it's just a nasty thing to do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Chiroptera, posted 05-26-2019 9:51 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Chiroptera, posted 05-27-2019 9:40 AM Sarah Bellum has replied
 Message 45 by Dogmafood, posted 05-27-2019 7:25 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 596 days)
Posts: 826
Joined: 05-04-2019


(1)
Message 38 of 286 (853388)
05-27-2019 8:20 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by AZPaul3
05-26-2019 7:20 PM


Re: Is the fetus a human being? Is it a living creature that we allow you to kill?
I would say, yes, there is a definite difference. Childbirth is a natural procedure that women have been going through for quite a long time. Your mother went through it, probably.
Removing a kidney requires a deliberate act. It won't happen if you just sit around and do nothing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by AZPaul3, posted 05-26-2019 7:20 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by AZPaul3, posted 05-27-2019 9:26 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 286 (853398)
05-27-2019 9:40 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Sarah Bellum
05-27-2019 8:16 AM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
On abortion, I don't think much about the "woman's right to do what she wants with her body."
Obviously, this is where we disagree. As I said, bodily integrity is a pretty important concept to me. I'm pretty sure we could spin out some far-fetched scenarios to test where the boundaries of this "right" exist - no right is absolute, after all - but that would probably start to become irrelevant to the abortion issue.
-
If she were nursing a month-old baby and decided to stop and let it starve nobody would say she has a "right" to starve it!
I don't know about other countries, but here in the US there is no law that requires a mother to nurse her child with her own breast milk, so I'm not sure this is an adequate example for the topic.
There is an issue that a parent cannot harm their child through neglect, but whatever the issue involved in obligating parental care it doesn't involve bodily autonomy so isn't quite the issue here.

If this was a witch hunt, it found a lot of witches. -- David Cole, writing about the Mueller investigation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-27-2019 8:16 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Faith, posted 05-27-2019 11:56 AM Chiroptera has replied
 Message 66 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-28-2019 6:19 PM Chiroptera has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 40 of 286 (853418)
05-27-2019 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by Chiroptera
05-27-2019 9:40 AM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
The idea of bodily sovereignty or autonomy, or having no obligation to be a host to "another," meaning a developing baby, is really really weird. The baby forms by Nature, is not put there by itself or by anyone. You really want women to regard themselves as put upon by Nature? As having the right to kill the developing child within her for this bizarre reason? I can barely make sense of this point of view.
Maybe if you wanted to hold the man responsible who got her pregnant we could talk? Maybe he could pay all her costs -- or half of them or something. I'm certainly not advocating that she has a right to kill it in any case, but if its father has abandoned her I'm for holding him responsible.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Chiroptera, posted 05-27-2019 9:40 AM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Chiroptera, posted 05-27-2019 12:07 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 43 by DrJones*, posted 05-27-2019 2:19 PM Faith has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 41 of 286 (853419)
05-27-2019 12:00 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Sarah Bellum
05-26-2019 6:28 PM


Re: Is the fetus a human being? Is it a living creature that we allow you to kill?
Sarah Bellum writes:
The question of forcing someone to keep Sandy alive is a much different question. I might, for example, think it a good thing that someone donate a kidney to someone else that they might live, but that is not the same as thinking we ought to force that person to undergo surgery to extract their kidney against their will.
I can't figure out what you're saying here. Your second sentence seems to agree with me - i.e. we shouldn't force anybody to keep Sandy alive. But your first sentence says there's a difference when it comes to abortion. Why? Why should we force a woman to keep a fetus alive? You seem to be giving the fetus more rights than Sandy.

Izquierdo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-26-2019 6:28 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-28-2019 6:25 PM ringo has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 42 of 286 (853422)
05-27-2019 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Faith
05-27-2019 11:56 AM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
Hi, Faith.
You really want women to regard themselves as put upon by Nature?
I want each individual perspn to have the right to decide for themself how they're going to regard their own pregnancy.

If this was a witch hunt, it found a lot of witches. -- David Cole, writing about the Mueller investigation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Faith, posted 05-27-2019 11:56 AM Faith has not replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


(2)
Message 43 of 286 (853446)
05-27-2019 2:19 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Faith
05-27-2019 11:56 AM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
The idea of bodily sovereignty or autonomy, or having no obligation to be a host to "another," meaning a developing baby, is really really weird.
if you don't have control over your body what prevents the government from mandating you have an abortion? or forcing you to donate an organ?

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Faith, posted 05-27-2019 11:56 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Faith, posted 05-27-2019 7:10 PM DrJones* has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 44 of 286 (853463)
05-27-2019 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by DrJones*
05-27-2019 2:19 PM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
I guess if I don't lke my lver I could ask to have it cut out of me. The Izquierdo might think that a very good idea.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by DrJones*, posted 05-27-2019 2:19 PM DrJones* has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by DrJones*, posted 05-27-2019 7:45 PM Faith has replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 348 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 45 of 286 (853466)
05-27-2019 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Sarah Bellum
05-27-2019 8:16 AM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
but they still have qualms because . . . it's just a nasty thing to do.
My wife and I aborted our first child even though it was the last thing that we wanted to do. The fact that we were able to make that choice is the greatest thing that my country has ever done for me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-27-2019 8:16 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Faith, posted 05-27-2019 7:38 PM Dogmafood has replied
 Message 68 by Sarah Bellum, posted 05-28-2019 6:28 PM Dogmafood has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024