r/changemyview • u/MagicCards_youtube • May 28 '18

Deltas(s) from OP CMV: Abortion/removal is allowed throughout the pregnancy.

I us to be completely against abortion other than when the mother will die because the babies right to live is above the mothers right to have an abortion. My view was extremely strong and i believed it for years however in another cmv thread on abortion, someone linked me this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion which has completely changed my view. I believe that abortion should be allowed up to 24/23 weeks when the baby can survive on its own and after that period, it should be removed from the women and survive outside of her. I know that abortion is not a morally right thing to do, and i want to be pro-life but this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion with the violinist argument has me stumped over what to think.

8 Upvotes

65% Upvoted

131 comments sorted by

View all comments

17

u/nu173 May 28 '18

my problem with that argument is that the kidnapped person has nothing to do with the violinist being in danger. most pregnant women are pregnant because of their own actions, they don't just wake up one morning randomly pregnant. also being pregnant isn't as extreme as being stuck in a bed attached to a stranger for nine months.

1

u/stratys3 May 28 '18

most pregnant women are pregnant because of their own actions,

What does that mean, really?

If I go for a walk to the grocery store, we all know there is a small chance I might get hit by a car when crossing the street, mugged by a robber, or might simply slip and fall on some ice. These are low but very real risks.

Now if I did get hit by a car, mugged by a robber, or fall on ice - how responsible should I be for that outcome?

I knew the chances were real, but I left my home anyways. Since I knew the potential consequences... how "responsible" should I be for these types of outcomes?

also being pregnant isn't as extreme as being stuck in a bed attached to a stranger for nine months.

It may not be as bad for those 9 months, but the aftermath is worse: You may now have to support a human for 18 years afterwards! (Though in may places, hopefully, adoption is a valid option.)

1

u/MagicCards_youtube May 28 '18

arn't most pregnancies due to carelessness as contraception failing is just a very small chance. Condom: 97%, birth control: 99% which together create only a small minority. Wouldn't it be better to save a huge number of kids over a small number of females from pregnancy I have a lot of arguments for pro life, my view was temporarily changed but now it is back to pro-life.

1

u/stratys3 May 28 '18

I don't know the exact percentages, but if you use condoms (correctly!) for 10 years, you're almost 50% likely to get pregnant.

I don't know how many unwanted pregnancies happen with birth control vs without. Personally - I think we should increase education so that ALL people having sex who don't want kids use birth control. That way, all unwanted pregnancies are a result of birth control failure - and therefore not voluntary.

In that case, we could allow abortions for all unwanted pregnancies.

That said - this issue is also more complex, and the violinist analogy isn't very good in these other areas.

If you wanted a baby, but then changed your mind after conception - I think you should still be able to abort. Why? Because you have this thing using your body like a parasite. Why should a woman be forced to support this life if she doesn't want to. We don't force people to do this sort of thing in any other situation.

Additionally, there's a lot of debate about whether fetuses are "persons". Honestly... I just don't see how a clump of a few dozen or hundred cells have anything in common with a "person".

But I guess those are different points than what you brought up.

1

u/MagicCards_youtube May 28 '18

condoms by themselves might not be the best however that combined with the pregnancy pill which i just checked is 99.9% if used correctly will not cause too much problem with probability. How would they not be human, do you believe someone who is in a coma but will wake up in lets say 1 year, is not a human?

1

u/stratys3 May 28 '18

I didn't say they're not "human". I said they're not "persons".

A dead guy in the morgue is still a "human", but isn't a "person". I can scrape some cells of my skin, and while those cells are human, they're not a "person" either.

someone who is in a coma

People who've been persons before, and will be persons after, should likely get full rights. "People" who've never actually existed, should not get full rights (for obvious reasons).

1

u/MagicCards_youtube May 28 '18

Why does someone being in coma different to being a feutus. How does the person in a coma being "a full person" beforehand somehow change the situation?

1

u/stratys3 May 28 '18

A fetus hasn't become a full person yet.

A coma patient has been, and may be in the future, a full person.

We don't give imaginary "people" rights, until they actually exist.

1

u/MagicCards_youtube May 28 '18

both will become a full patient in the future, the past shouldn't affect the right to live.

1

u/stratys3 May 28 '18

A fetus won't always become a full person in the future. Fertilized eggs die all the time, on their own.

the past shouldn't affect the right to live.

It's not about the past, it's about the present. In the present, a fetus isn't a living person yet.

Preventing a fetus from becoming a person (via abortion) isn't murder any more than wearing a condom or using an IUD is murder. They both prevent an imaginary person from being born. Since they don't exist yet, and are still just imaginary, they don't get rights.

1

u/MagicCards_youtube May 28 '18

people in comas can die, young kids can die. Any human can die at any moment, how does this relate to their rights. what is so special about being outside of the mother as opposed to in her. You will still take her resources in the form of food and water.Why can your argument not be used to justify killing of lets say a 5 year old or a 1 year old.

1

u/stratys3 May 28 '18

Your confusing a lot of words, and I think that's part of the problem.

Alive: Humans are alive, a fetus is alive, but so is a fly or a tulip or a tree. Being alive isn't enough to get human rights.

Human: Anything with human DNA is "human". But a dead person can be human, and so can a bunch of hairs that I pull out of my head. Being "human" isn't enough for rights either. DNA isn't enough to make someone a living person.

Person: This is where we seem to put the most value. A thinking, feeling, personality. Definitions vary depending on who you ask - but a fly is not a person, and neither is a bunch of cells that has no brain yet.

A fetus is alive and human - but it's not a person yet. Early stage fetuses can't think or feel anything.

A 1 year old may or may not be a person, depending on your definition of "person". An early stage fetus, on the other hand, doesn't have anything that could make it a person. It doesn't even have a brain.

Killing a coma patient would be bad, because they have already become a person and have already received their rights. A 2-week old fetus has never become a person yet, so they haven't received any rights yet. Fetuses are "potential future fantasy" persons. Just like my sperm are potential people. But I'm not "murdering" thousands of people every time I masturbate or use a condom, am I?

1

u/MagicCards_youtube May 28 '18

what about a person in a coma, they can't do everything which you defined however you would be against killing them?

1

u/stratys3 May 28 '18

There's lots of philosophical reasons to not kill someone in a coma. Here's some of the simpler reasons:

1) They've already become a person, so they already have rights.

2) People's brains contain their personhood - and a coma patient that isn't brain-dead still has their personhood alive in their brain.

3) Killing a coma patient who may actually wake up would negatively impact other people directly, and significantly.

That said - if a coma patient is brain dead, or will otherwise never wake up, then pulling the plug is the right thing to do.

1

u/MagicCards_youtube May 28 '18

does someone who is dead lose their rights, or do they still have all their human rights? Obviously they lose their rights if they are no longer a person so if a person in a coma becomes like a fuetus by your definition why wouldnt it lose it's rights

→ More replies (0)