Home | Bio | Pics | Chomsky | Links  

Maybe.

Is abortion immoral?

No. As already discussed, there is no such thing as an objective right or wrong; ergo nothing is ever right or wrong.

Is abortion murder?

Maybe. Since murder is primarily a legal word (The unlawful killing of one human by another), this, of course depends solely on whether abortion is legal or not, which can change. It does NOT, however, depend on whether or not one considers a fetus technically human (all fetuses inside a human body are by their nature and genetic structure, distinctly human fetuses).

If we remove the legality, which we have to here for the moment since the whole basis of discussion is to determine whether or not abortion should be legal in the first place, abortion is indeed murder.

If we use a more popular concept of murder, such as the (killing of an innocent person) and by innocent we mean someone who didn't deserve it, abortion, since a fetus is innocent, is murder.

Is abortion homicide?

Maybe. Since homicide is primarily a medical word (The killing of one person by another) and a person in the legal sense is (A human with legal rights and duties), similar to whether or not abortion is legal or not in any given time, a fetus may or may not be considered a person depending upon political climate. A non-legal definition of person is simply (a living human). One doesn't have to be born to be considered alive, just existing.

If we consider a fetus a person (and I consider my cat to be one), abortion is homicide.

Should we allow abortion?

Laws (those which are not merely designed to protect wealth of the rich) are generally designed to punish acts which cause or may cause mental or physical suffering. Rape, murder, theft, etc. all cause some form suffering and all are against the law. With this in mind, there are 3 things to consider with abortion:

1) what is the difference between aborting a fetus inside a womb and killing a newborn child?

2) should we allow abortions of unborn children that cannot yet perceive pain?

3) should we consider an unborn child’s potential desires and suffering it would have or cause in the future in determining whether or not to abort it?

1 – SPACE (Born vs. Unborn; Outside vs. Inside)

A fetus at X months can feel pain. A newborn child can feel pain. Neither the fetus nor newborn child can make decisions nor are they even totally sentient yet. And neither have any rights nor abilities toward self-determination. There is no interesting difference between a child that is 1 hour away from being born and a child that has been born for 1 second. Even after exiting the womb and cutting the umbilical cord a fetus is dependent upon to live, the born child continues to be dependent on its mother’s milk and protection (or at least the mother’s ability to pay others for this) to survive. With test tube babies being a reality, not even a mother, nor a womb are necessary distinctions.

Thus there is no difference between the nearly born and born other than the fact that born is, by definition, now outside of something. That is nor more interesting than something being on one side of a door rather than the other. Pain, sentience, decision-making abilities are all important concepts to a life form. The temporary space it occupies in one way or another at age 0 doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with these things. It does not follow that we base an important decision such as to kill or not kill something based on the unimportant fact that it is simply occupying this space rather than that space.

Actually, when a baby passes through the love canal and is now outside the womb, it’s still technically inside of another container of sorts anyway. That being the world or universe.

Answer: Being inside the womb or other container should not determine abortion laws.

2 – TIME/PAIN

A fetus develops a nervous system (nerves and a brain to sense stimuli) at X months. Since a fetus before X months cannot feel pain, nor is it self-aware, nor can it make decisions other than reactive instinctual ones, it does not follow that aborting this fetus is causing suffering of any kind whatsoever.

Answer: Fetal pain should be considered in abortion laws.

3 – POTENTIALITY

Now then…If we do abort a fetus, we do in fact take away its potential future self-awareness, decision-making abilities, desires and all the pain and pleasure it would ever experience. Would it have had a good life? Would it some day cure cancer or become the next Hitler or George Bush (and thus change abortion laws)? And should the possible future determine present course of action?

We can make educated guesses based on economic background, IQ, medical history, etc. of the parents, but there are far too many variables to make a true and completely accurate judgment on whether a child would grow to have a better or worse life. However, if we base abortion laws solely on a cut-off point (age X months) at which the fetus begins to first feel pain, we may be allowing a child to come into the world that will suffer or cause others to suffer tremendous horrific pain due to the environment it may be raised in and/or its nurturing.

Would you have a child be raised in a war zone, concentration camp or slavery? Would you rather a child be born with untreatable painful or even terminal illnesses?

Answer: Potential pain should be considered in abortion laws.

END DECISION:

Let the people decide and democracy reign supreme. Let everyone vote on abortion’s legality and at what stage of development if any it should be allowed, every 4 years or so.

TOP OF PAGE