The Case for Conception

[level_head]

This document makes the case for treating human life as beginning at the moment of fertilization.It's reasonably well-written, and I find points of agreement with it -- including that the Roe v. Wade case was incompetently argued

Comments

[ihuitl]

I argued for a pro life stance on my LJ too, but it quickly turned into something between anarchy and a charge across no-man's-land with the artillery falling short.

http://akhetnu.livejournal.com/62575.html?nc=135

So beware of the emotions that may flare up ;)

(1) - If life begins at conception, then yes, which is why birth control should be taken before sexual activity.
(2) - Either way someone is dying, so I would say that it is morally neutral, much like the morality of throwing yourself on a grenade to save others. I cannot hold a mother blameworthy whether she has an abortion to save her life, or if she does decide to give birth and die.
(3) - See (1)

[level_head]

And, apparently, over and over by the same person.

"You DON'T UNDERSTAND!"

"Just demonstrate that I'm wrong."

"I did, below, where I said 'YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND!'"

That seems to be the distilled essence.

One could MAKE reasoned arguments on some of those points -- but that didn't happen there.

===|==============/ Level Head

[level_head]

I followed up on some of those conversations. You have unusual visitors. ];-)

You and I don't completely agree on this topic, but at least we can be pleasant about it. And let me know if you ever catch me in an ad-hominem.

===|==============/ Level Head

Re: I'll just touch on (2)

[juliet_winters]

I've been almost there, and you'd be amazed at how much your love for a not-quite-born-possibly-handicapped-child will have you demanding that they save the infant rather than yourself.

I think it is very rare these days, in this country to have to choose one life over another. The problem is, pro-choice people extend "life" to quality of life--the unfettered pursuit of happiness sans bebe. Sex is usually fun. Life is always fettered. People who abort for recreational purposes need to learn to deal with life. Boyfriends who pressure their girlfriends into aborting so that they won't have to pay child support should be made to pay a penalty.

Re: I'll just touch on (2)

[juliet_winters]

I felt the same way before I had kids. I understand where you're coming from, I do. Before I had kids, I marched in the big pro-choice rally

[silverlightstar]

To err on the side of caution is a good thing, especially when dealing with abortion. In this case, I err on the side of life.

[level_head]

To err on the side of caution is a good thing, especially when dealing with abortion. In this case, I err on the side of life.

"Caution" and "life" are not necessarily the same thing here, it seems to me.

For example, in case (1) above, convicting the woman of premeditated murder (when we don't even know that a fertilized egg was harmed or even existed) is erring on the side of (potential) life -- but very much NOT cautious.

Note that I say "potential life" here not to denigrate the position of folks who hold that life begins at conception -- just to note that in this case we aren't sure of the existence of a fertilized egg, merely the possibility of one

[silverlightstar]

I view them similarly, but not the same thing.

If done in ignorance (meaning, she doesn't know for certain that she's pregnant), then I'd give her the benefit of a doubt.

If it was intentional (Knowing for certain that she had willfully aborted.), then I'd be less forgiving.

[level_head]

If done in ignorance (meaning, she doesn't know for certain that she's pregnant), then I'd give her the benefit of a doubt.

She was aware of the possibility, which would make her guilty of criminal negligence under states such as the one I hypothesized.

In fact, there was NO event that was perceptible to the woman regarding any potential "pregnancy" (beyond the rape itself, of course). No abortion, miscarriage, or whatever. If there WAS a fertilized egg, it failed to implant -- but no one can tell.

This is the case with morning after pills as well. Most of the time, they have no effect at all; certainly the user does not KNOW she is pregnant, for by then it's far too late for such pills. And when they HAVE an effect, no one can actually tell.

===|==============/ Level Head

Inspired by the Article: Living with Uncertainty

[acertaindoebear]

Knowledge is imprecise. We like to be certain, because being uncertain is uncomfortable. So societies, philosophies, religions are made to help with that certainty

Re: Inspired by the Article: Living with Uncertainty

[level_head]

Hello, and good to see you!

I am, alas, not a watcher of television; I've never seen a "Dr. Who" episode, though I am aware of their tremendous popularity. It seems well-earned.

While science -- empirical science, anyway -- doesn't produce certainty, it DOES produce good pragmatic practical information about how the universe works. That information -- once it goes though enough cycles of cleanup -- is quite useful, and science is the best source of it.

It's a pity that philosophical issues are completely outside its realm, but Divine Inspiration is in a different, and untestable, arena it seems to me. They don't have to conflict, but often do.

Also to be considered in these musings is the legal system in the US, which seems to be created around the idea of societal revenge.

I had several thoughts of what you might have meant by this, and it seemed that the best course would be to simply ask. So I am. ];-)

===|==============/ Level Head

Re: Inspired by the Article: Living with Uncertainty

[acertaindoebear]

The news of my dearth have been muchly inebriated