Abortion Debate

[jinx]

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker

Now, let’s get this thing cranked up. How do you define personhood?

-sm

Legally, I would define it as one who has been born. One who is no longer a parasite to another person. Morally, I'd define it a bit differently but I don't think that's relevant to the legality of abortion.
The bottom line for me is that I trust women to make the right decision regarding their body and their ability to become a parent (as opposed to just giving birth). My morals are my own and my ego is not so large as to think I should have a say in the reproduction of others.

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by jinx

One who is no longer a parasite to another person.

should i be able to get away with terminating the welfare recipient dependent on tax money for their survival?

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by lookout123

should i be able to get away with terminating the welfare recipient dependent on tax money for their survival?

Maybe only certain ones.

[jinx]

Originally Posted by lookout123

should i be able to get away with terminating the welfare recipient dependent on tax money for their survival?

You mean lifestyle, not survival, right?

[lookout123]

the argument is always that the benefits they receive are for survival, not to maintain a "lifestyle".

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by lookout123

the argument is always that the benefits they receive are for survival, not to maintain a "lifestyle".

A rather thin argument, depending on who you are talking to.

[jinx]

Originally Posted by lookout123

the argument is always that the benefits they receive are for survival, not to maintain a "lifestyle".

The argument? Not my argument...

[Cyber Wolf]

Originally Posted by lookout123

should i be able to get away with terminating the welfare recipient dependent on tax money for their survival?

There's a bit of a difference. The welfare recipient is already a born and likely fully grown person who is surviving outside of the womb. A fetus generally cannot.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by jinx

my ego is not so large as to think I should have a say in the reproduction of others.

And that is why you'll never rule the world.

[glatt]

A legal definition is very hard to do. You need a clear cut-off point like conception or birth. Even something like first trimester, second trimester is a little too vague in my opinion. Laws have to be black and white.

I would never dream of killing actual newborn children, but with my own, I didn't think that they were "people" until they were around four to six months old or so. That's when I noticed a spark in the eye. Some sort of reaction to the world around them that was more than just simple reflex. Before that, they were just blobs of flesh. Eating, pooping and crying. The mice I killed in traps in my crawlspace were more conscious and aware than they were.

[garnet]

Originally Posted by jinx

Legally, I would define it as one who has been born. One who is no longer a parasite to another person. Morally, I'd define it a bit differently but I don't think that's relevant to the legality of abortion.

The bottom line for me is that I trust women to make the right decision regarding their body and their ability to become a parent (as opposed to just giving birth).

I agree 100%. While I am rabidly pro-choice, I personally think around 5 months after conception there's a bit of a line that shouldn't be crossed. I don't think abortion should be illegal after that point, but there's something unsettling to me about performing an abortion at that point. I personally wouldn't do it, but that's just me. Every woman should be able to make the decision for herself.