Saturday, August 13, 2016

The abortion dilemma

Some people think that no abortions are morally acceptable, and some think that most all abortions are morally acceptable. But many people think that some are, and some are not, acceptable, and this likely represents the majority of people.

If we conclude that some abortions are moral and others are not, then it may not be feasible to determine judicially which are which in time to decide whether to abort.

Take, for example the case of rape, the most popular abortion justification. The justice system sometimes takes years to determine whether a woman was raped or not, and he said she said scenarios abound. But pregnancy takes nine months. So we are stuck with putting trimester restrictions on abortions, outlawing them, or pretty much allowing all of them.

All of which suggests that we all too often get our morality from a law book, and that this is a mistake.

16 comments:

John Moore said...

If you crash your car, it can be a tricky question whether it's better to fix your car or throw that one away and buy a new one. That tricky question arises due to the previous wrong when you crashed your car. If you could avoid crashing in the first place, that would be the best of all.

In the same way, all this discussion about the morality of abortion seems to overlook the previous wrong of the unwanted pregnancy. If we could drastically cut back on unwanted pregnancies, then the abortion question would be far less controversial in our society.

Crude said...

If we could drastically cut back on unwanted pregnancies, then the abortion question would be far less controversial in our society.

Yeah sure.

Will the guy who's willing to tell people, especially women, what their sexual habits should be - on pain of their behaving immorally - please step forward. And also let us know if that's more or less controversial than the abortion question itself.

I'll do it, but I'm curious who else is willing.

John Moore said...

When you talk about changing sexual habits, that sounds really simple like don't sleep around so much. But that is only one of many possible ways to avoid unwanted pregnancy. Also, there's no need to tell anyone they're being immoral. You just have to tell them how to avoid unwanted pregnancy. It's a basic practical matter.

Joe Hinman said...

I think one of the major aspects of the whole problem is the political nature of the case. The issue has been turned into an organizing tool for politics (really by both sides). That creates the black hole effect Like communism and anti-communism; no light can get out.

Crude said...

When you talk about changing sexual habits, that sounds really simple like don't sleep around so much. But that is only one of many possible ways to avoid unwanted pregnancy.

Tell them what pills they should take or what stuff they should put on or in their body. They'll love that.

Also, there's no need to tell anyone they're being immoral. You just have to tell them how to avoid unwanted pregnancy.

Tell them how to avoid getting fat too, that's working effing wonders.

Crude said...

The point I'm driving at should be clear. Discouraging abortion via discouraging 'unplanned pregnancy' necessitates oversight of people's sex lives, at least in terms of culture. 'Education' doesn't solve anything when judgment and even condemnation is off-limits. Even with those things it can be an uphill battle.

Are you prepared to tell a woman that her sexual habits are wrong, immoral, or even stupid? (I say 'woman' because no one has any problem with lecturing men, unless they're gay.) Try to hide behind a rock like 'Well if we shove birth control at them...', and I'll note that getting them to accept and use it (putting aside the moral questions) is yet more control, yet more shaming, yet more conditioning. Tell me you're prepared to call a woman stupid if she's not on the pill and having sex easily. And even if you are - rare as that is nowadays - then on what grounds are you going to criticize someone who tells women and men that screwing outside of marriage is slut behavior?

The lesson is that these are not questions which come down to nice, easy, non-judgmental, non-intrusive methods. If abortion is regarded as immoral, or even undesirable, then law and culture comes into play in ways that would make a standard leftist choke. There are no 'well we won't encourage anything, we'll just give education and access to this contraception and it will handle itself' solutions on the horizon. That is quite likely one reason why abortion access in totality is sacrosanct to the left. At least on a primitive level they can sniff out that if it's immoral at all, a whole lot of other sacrifices will need to be made.

SteveK said...

Crude is correct. The culture doesn't want any limits placed on sexuality.

John Moore said...

I can't believe you think education doesn't solve anything. Condemnation is unnecessary. You just need to show people what typically happens, and then they can decide for themselves which path they'd rather take.

Birth control is another thing that people need educating about. There are many types of birth control, some of which don't work unless done properly. And using this technology properly is something people can learn in a non-threatening, non-shaming environment.

Yet another thing to educate people about is social welfare options for single mothers. There are various programs available to help, but mothers need to know about them, and how to sign up. It's not easy, but education can make a huge difference.

If you think education doesn't help, maybe you've been focusing too much on the shaming and the judging. Try focusing on the educating.

Ilíon said...

OMG!
Next thing you know, crudé-minded individuals will asking whether there isn't a term to denote women who "have too much sex" (as people say) and thus live in fear of the totally natural result of engaging in the sex act.

And then 'women' (meaning feminists and other leftists) of both sexes will have a freak-out and declare that one may never, ever, ever use that term ... except as approval.

And then eunuchs who still pretend to be men will agree with the above mentioned feminist/leftist keepers-of-language-and-thought and viciously attack those who refuse to be neutered.

Ilíon said...

VR: "Some people think that no abortions are morally acceptable, and some think that most all abortions are morally acceptable. But many people think that some are, and some are not, acceptable, and this likely represents the majority of people.

If we conclude that some abortions are moral and others are not ...
"

"Conclude" how? On the basis of consulting actual morality, or on the basis of consulting the ever-changing sentiments of "most people"?

There three -- and only three -- reasons for which any abortion procedure is ever performed:
1) the baby has died in utero and its remains must be removed for valid medical reasons;
2) the pregnancy itself endangers the life of the mother such that there are valid medical reasons that one might choose to kill the innocent child to save the innocent woman, rather than risking the deaths of both innocent persons;
3) the pregnancy is inconvenient in some way, and so people choose to murder the innocent child to spare themselves the inconvenience.

Now, of course, both scenarios 2) and 3) result in a dead baby. But, in 3) the dead baby is itself the sought-after result; whereas in 2) the dead baby is the not-at-all-desired consequence of the desired result, which is the saving of the life of the mother.

Fortunately, scenario 3) is so rare as to be inconsequential to the pretend-debate about the legality of abortion. And, of course, the moral question is separate-and-distinct in each of the three possible scenarios.

So, all we are supposedly debating is scenario 2) -- the intentional murder of a weak and totally innocent human being so as to serve the interests of stronger and not-at-all-innocent persons.

Ilíon said...

So, tell me, what, exactly, is the dilemma?

Crude said...

John,

I can't believe you think education doesn't solve anything.

It's not a matter of what I think at this point, dude. Fat people. They're abundant. We know what makes you fat. We know how to cure it. They don't care, because information alone often doesn't cut it.

I mean look at you. 'Just show people what will typically happen and they will decide for themselves...' Yeah, they do with eating: they get fat. Real fat. More of them every year. And now that they've been turned on to SJW logic, you have to increasingly walk on eggshells around them. Of which there are many because they keep making pancakes.

If you think education doesn't help, maybe you've been focusing too much on the shaming and the judging.

Maybe I've been too focused on the fact that the era where everyone was shamed and judged about this (as opposed to SJW bullshit-standards) was the era with next to no out of wedlock births, refreshingly little abortion, and also everyone was thinner. You're apparently hellbent on ignoring easily available evidence, and completely ignoring the possibility that maybe, just maybe, you have to tell people they're doing something bad in order to achieve a positive result.

And that's the problem. You immediately rule out from the start even the possibility that discouraging people from bad behavior, even on a cultural level, will help or even is necessary. It would not surprise me at all to find out you're mighty selective with this, and don't propose that the best way to cure other social ills is 'Well don't judge them or condemn them or shame them, just provide them with some helpful information'.

SteveK said...

Don't judge the Christian or condemn the Christian or shame the Christian, just provide them with some helpful information - er, wait a minute, hold on?!?!

Ilíon said...

^ Don't expect intellectual consistency of 'atheists', Darwinists, Freudians, leftists, or Christ-haters.

Ilíon said...

SteveK: "Your comment reminded me of the video below. It "argues" that there was no first human, but in a twist of irony they show you the first human in the video -- it's photo #4632 at the very least, but possibly before that. Start at 2:10 to see what I mean.

There Was No First Human
"

Never expect DarLogic to map to actual logic; it's worse than Zen koans, which at least have a point and an internal logic.

Sabrina Klose said...

I was not happy until i met Dr.Agbazara through these details +2348104102662 OR agbazara@gmail.com because my husband has left me and never had the intention of coming back home. But just within 48 hours that i contacted Dr. Agbazara my marriage changed to the positive side, At first my husband came back home and since then my marriage has been more peaceful and romantic than ever before