A Recent Conversation About Abortion

I thought I would share a conversation that I had with a friend about abortion today. I will abbreviate the boy's name as 'C'. The conversation was in response to this story:

A worried woman went to her gynecologist and said, "Doctor, I have a serious problem and desperately need your help! My baby is not even 1 year old and I'm pregnant again. I don't want kids so close together"

The doctor said "Ok and what do you want me to do?"

She said "I want you to end my pregnancy, and I'm counting on your help with this"

The doctor thought for a little, and after some silence he said to the lady, "I think I have a better solution for your problem. It's less dangerous for you too".

She smiled, thinking that the doctor was going to accept her request. Then he continued, "You see, in order for you not to have to take care of 2 babies at the same time, let's kill the one in your arms. This way, you could rest some before the other one is born. If we're going to kill one of them, it doesn't matter which one it is. There would be no risk for your body if you chose the one in your arms"

The lady was horrified and said "No doctor! How terrible! It's a crime to kill a child!"

"I agree" the doctor replied. "But you seemed to be OK with it, so I thought maybe that was the best solution". The doctor smiled, realizing that he had made his point. He convinced the woman that there is no difference in killing a child that's already been born and one that's still in the womb. The crime is the same!

 

-----

 

C: I believe it's quality of life rather than the quantity of lives. I think it's easy just to say "we can save lives, so no matter what we must save them", but if you're risking the lives of those around the child, and the child's itself just because people want to try and stand on a high moral ground, fighting for something in which they don't really have a huge say in... i dunno, i just don't think it's fair to have loads of peoples lives jeopardised by people who want to wear a big S on the front of their shirt trying to be a hero. It's all fine saying you want to save lives, cool, but how about fighting for those out there who genuinely need it and can't do anything about it. There are better more important things to fight for than trying to say the Quantity of Lives is more important than the Quality. Which i believe, it is not.

Me: I understand what you're saying, but I think the problem is how do we judge a quality of life? People often think abortion is justified if the child would have a 'poor quality of life', well what does that mean? Babies can be aborted if they have club foot. Does that mean they wouldn't have a good quality of life? How can we possibly define that? In which case it seems like a weak reason to abort a baby

C:  Mhm, i doubt anyone can argue with that really, seeing as hindsight is a wonderful thing and it's impossile to know beforehand. Plus, i can see how some people would say a child born into a 1st world country with some family problems would live a much better life than those in developing countries (even though that's kinda path dependancy which is a totally different topic altogether). I just think there are so many negative ethical complications, to what would be essentially forcing a woman to have a child, that it isn't worth the amount of lives you'd put in harms way/problems you'd cause. Sure, it could be the best thing that happens these people around the child, but as a general thing, i don't think it's what most people would say today is 'for the best'

C: Putting it this way, what we're all saying here, is that because the child doesn't have a voice, we're going to give it one by fighting for it's life. But that's exactly NOT what you set out to do here in the first place! (because you make their decision for them!) I think i can speak for most people here when i say that if i had a rational, sympathic, fully thinking brain when i was in my mothers womb, and i had a say in the matter, if my mother didn't feel like she could cope with me and give me a happy life that (i believe) everyone deserves, and that she ultimately isn't ready/doesn't want me at this time in here life, i'd have to bite the bullet and be selfless, saying that it really is, at the end of the day, her call. (So i see what you mean with the whole.... 'where do we draw a line', i guess i'm just saying that we kinda already have a pen in our hands, all we need to draw now is draw it)

Me: I don't think you'd be forcing a woman to have a child, because apart from extremely rare cases where a woman has become pregnant through rape, women can control whether or not they get pregnant. If they didn't want to have a child, they should have taken preventive measures in the first instance. That's where the mother had her call. If she couldn't do that then she only has herself to blame for the situation she now finds herself in. She shouldn't take out her frustrations on the unborn child.

Me: I don't see how ending the life of a child before it's born would ever be a good thing. You just don't know what will happen, for example Steve Jobs is only here because his mother chose to give him up for adoption rather than abort him. Also the baby will feel pain from 6 weeks gestation. From the mother's perspective also, she has no idea what will happen. I know people who've had abortions that now find it difficult to conceive again, or have had several miscarriages, leaving their bodies permanently damaged from the abortion. Was the abortion therefore beneficial even for her? Emotional trauma is another factor, I know people who are tormented by what they did and by thoughts about what their baby would be like now. Thus, where is the benefit to anyone from an abortion?

'Nothing Made Everything' - how atheists think they have the answer to everything

Many people are under the impression that atheism = intelligence and Christianity/creationism = stupidity. I would like to share a video with you that I just can't get enough of. You can try to argue against this all you want if you're an atheist, in which case, leave me a comment answering the questions Todd poses in this video. You can't. I present, the stupidity of atheists...

Thought of the Day: The Implant

This post is one of my more off-topic posts, a post that isn't an answer to a question that I've been asked, nor is it a thought connected to philosophy or theology. It is however a thought linked to society and the theology of how men and women should be treated within a sexual relationship. It's kinda hard for me to write about in a way that isn't overly offensive and in a way that gets my views across but here it goes.

A few of my friends have had or have the implant and recently it's made me think a lot about my attitudes toward it. An impant (for those who aren't sure) is a small plastic tube that's inserted into a woman's upper arm. It releases a hormone to prevent pregnancy. (For the more technical and detailed explanation, click here). It can last up to 3 years.

I came to the conclusion that I think it's pretty disgusting. Not just the fact that it looks weird, you're taught it's bad to have foreign objects in your body and then you can have this thing that looks like a straw sewn into your arm. Not to mention how gross it looks to have it put in and taken out. But on top of all that, I think it affects the way guys treat girls.

I know it's a woman's own choice if she has an impant or not (and that has just made me think, I wonder how old you have to be? In the UK they'll do anything to stop teen pregnancies so I'm thinking a 13 year old could get one quite easily without family members needing to know). But it still makes me think of movies and things like 'A.I.', 'The Terminator' and 'I, Robot' where robots are editied, opened up, had bits added and removed to improve them or to stop them being a certain undesirable way. That's pretty much how I see girls with implants.

I realise at this point I may sound pretty offensive to some people, but it's how I honestly feel. Even if you're in a loving, serious, long-term relationship, or even in a marriage, it seems to me like you've been edited to be more desirable or more convenient for a man. You can be used for sexual purposes without the unsatisfactory result of becoming pregant. You've been tailor made for a man's selfish purposes. If you chose to have it because you don't want to get pregant, I still feel like it's the same thing. You may have initially chosen to do that for your reasons, but you've still set yourself up to be more convenient for a man.

I'm not particularly feminist either, I don't care if men want to claim they're stronger, or that they can handle bigger cars, but I do care if men think they can mistreat women purely because they're men. I also have a problem with women who encourage men to do this, either by being hookers, dressing like they're in a porn movie when they're going to class, etc. The implant I feel, inadvertantly encourages men to see women as sex objects, because it's more risk free for them.

The girl is the one who has to go to the doctor, have a minor surgery, have a foreign object in her body, have her hormones messed up for 9 months, have her cycle messed up for 3 years and then have another minor surgery to either change it or have it taken out. Meanwhile the guy can just carry on with life and worry about nothing when it comes to having sex. I don't really think that's fair.

So to conclude, I think the implant is not only disgusting and unnecessary, but I think it enables men to further objectify women. I for one will NEVER be putting one in my body, mark my words ;)