I found the following replies here. The article is a dress-down of a doctor who wrote a spoof on late-term abortion in the 43rd week that is seen by pro-choice people as moronic. The author tells us that abortion is an ethics question that has several places where the line can be drawn.
Every exception to a rule helps prove the rule. If there are nothing but exceptions, then there is no rule. A rule must hold true in the vast majority of cases. I think it is fair to say that, in the vast majority of cases, a baby carried to term and delivered will produce a favorable outcome for both mother and child. Delivering is certainly less dangerous to the health of the mother in the vast majority of cases. This is only speaking of the danger of the physical complication of abortion and doesn’t take into account any emotional harm. And, it can certainly be said the delivery is safer to the health of the baby than abortion in the vast majority of cases.
In a very, very small number of cases, the child may have little chance of surviving delivery. But, even in that case, there really is no ethical quandary. To abort the child, in almost all of those special cases, is still to play God. Of course, if you believe that there is no God, you may not wish to use such a term. But, in essence, you are elevating yourself to the supreme authority in that case, which is a good as saying you are all-knowing and infallible in this case. And yet, many times, babies that were supposed to be damaged beyond hope and never survive have done quite well. I have a good friend whose son wasn’t supposed to survive childbirth and for sure would never be able to walk of function. Today, he is in his twenties and walks with the aid of a cane. He is happy, well-adjusted.
There are, of course, the down syndrome babies that people want to terminate. But there is ample evidence that these special people are far from miserable. It is only the selfishness of the parents that creates the illusion of an ethical conundrum.
What I find interesting about Bob’s argument is that he assumes that, since two choices result the same as the one choice of abstinence, then both outcomes result in a moral equivalent. Except that, in one choice, nothing dies, and , in the other, it does. It also doesn’t take into consideration at all the predicament of the woman, who must not only wrestle with the decision to abort but must also undergo the procedure.
Ethics and moral issues aside, the use of abortion as birth control is an extremely expensive option.
Will · 92 weeks ago
Bob Oboc · 91 weeks ago
Will · 91 weeks ago
By not examining these questions, by simply following the crowd, we loose something of our own human nature, and the society as a whole become degraded. I am not one for blindly following evolutionists or one’s genitals wherever they may lead. But this kind of thinking is only for those who have enough sense to understand that life or Nature is not simply a bag of marbles that just happened to form a world. The marbelists will think that everything is just fine – so just eat, drink and have sex and never let any foolish, unscientific idea that there is more to life than that ever enter your mind.
- What Pro-choice People Don’t Want to Know and Don’t Want You to Know
- Inhuman: What late term abortion is like from the mouths of Planned Parenthood clinicians
- Why is there a mainstream media blackout on the Gosnell live-birth abortion trial? (4simpsons.wordpress.com)
- It’s a baby – kill it anyway (liveactionnews.org)
- Baby Screamed During ‘Live-Birth Abortion’: Clinic Worker Testifies In Gosnell Murder Trial (patdollard.com)
- “Is it a baby?” clinic workers respond (liveactionnews.org)
- Stripped for Parts (thebioethicsprogram.wordpress.com)
- Baby screamed during ‘live-birth abortion’ (wnd.com)
- If abortion is good health care, then why not infanticide? (Slate)