![]() |
Search this site |
|
|
These are definitions according to physical development. Another approach is to define humanity as self-consciousness - awareness of oneself as human, or as an entity independent of other human beings. This earliest point at which this occurs is birth and, depending on how rigorous we define awareness, we might even consider that this may not come until several months afterwards. Taking all these facts into account, we come to the conclusion that an embryo cannot be considered human and a foetus can only be considered human at the earliest moment when it can survive independently of its mother. 6.8c "Potential" humans?
To decide that one collection of cells (the embryo) is potentially human but another collection (egg or sperm) is not, is illogical and destroys the base of an already weak argument - an argument that is based on emotion rather than reason. Strong emotions make poor morals and laws. Some of us may find the idea strange or distasteful, but we have to accept that because the foetus or embryo in early development is not human, it is not subject to our moral imperative of doing no harm. It is time, therefore, to turn our attention to the people who are or may be affected by abortion - the pregnant woman and the potential father. 6.8d The pregnant woman Is abortion beneficial or harmful to the woman carrying the embryo / foetus? Obviously, if abortion were always beneficial, no babies would ever be born and if it were always harmful all pregnancies would lead to birth. Pregnancy is a life-changing experience and few women take the question of abortion lightly. While many pregnancies are planned and welcomed, others are an unexpected interruption to the potential mother's life and she may be unable to spend the next eighteen years meeting a child's physical and emotional needs. Carrying the foetus to birth and putting it up for adoption may also be unacceptable if denies the woman access to her own child. Many women decide to proceed with an unplanned pregnancy. Others, however, decide to abort. Whichever choice the woman makes is moral, as long it ensures the best outcome for her physical and emotional well-being. 6.8e The potential father It takes two individuals to conceive. Theoretically, therefore, it takes two individuals to decide whether to continue the pregnancy or to have an abortion. The potential father is often unaware of the pregnancy or unwilling to take responsibility for the foetus or embryo. But in a perfect moral universe, every man would assume responsibility for his every action. In that case, some would consider they were not ready to become a father and would opt for an abortion, while others would want spend a lifetime as the potential child's parent. Which means that, ideally, the potential father's welfare - his desire or not to be a parent - should be taken into account whenever a woman has to choose between birth and abortion. At the end of the day, however, pregnancy affects the woman's welfare more than the man's and, regrettable as it may sometimes be for the father, that fact confirms that ultimately it is the woman's decision whether or not to abort. 6.8f The law, "pro-choice" and "pro-life" In recent years, in the United States and elsewhere, the debate over abortion has focused on two opposing phrases - "pro-choice" and "pro-life". Both terms are misleading. The term "pro-choice", has echoes of an advertising campaign and trivialises the serious, often painful emotional issues that women have to consider before deciding whether or not to abort. A woman seldom "chooses" either an abortion or birth; circumstances point her towards a conclusion that one outcome is better for her than another. The term "pro-life" rests on two false assumptions. Firstly it suggests that abortion is the end of life, when it is not - it is the end of potential life. Secondly, the phrase implies that if abortion is banned, every foetus will to come to term. But the reality is that where abortion is illegal women continue to try to end their pregnancies, with often debilitating and even fatal consequences. Ironically, a "pro-life" stance makes it more likely that death will occur. It is more accurate to describe the opposing camps as "pro-legal" and "pro-criminal" abortion. The pro-legal stance recognises that abortion is inevitable and that to minimise harm to those who undergo the procedure, it should be made safe and legal in every jurisdiction. The pro-criminal stance may slightly reduce the number of abortions, but it leads to many more unsafe abortions and to more women dying. All abortion, legal or otherwise, is regrettable. It is often an indication that sex education, teaching couples the necessity of birth control, has failed. The only moral response is to accept that abortion occurs and to reduce the potential harmful impact wherever. And that means ensuring comprehensive sex education for all, and safe, legal abortions for all women who need them.
Custom Search
Email us, pasting the URL into your letter with the comment This account is protected by Spamarrest. You will receive a one-off request to verify your email before it is delivered. |
If God existed, he would... admire the beauty of a universe that he did not create recognize that eternity is meaningless deny both heaven and hell disown all men and women who speak in his name denounce the harm caused by religious "morality" help the human race to thrive without him If God existed, he would be an atheist. What is the difference between science and faith? science is certain of nothing and requires proof of everything faith is certain of everything and requires proof of nothing Which do you trust? "I know there is no God" or "I believe there is no God" ??? Check the answer |
|
Supporting advertisers helps to provide an income for The Atheist God. Clicking on advertiser links may allow these companies to gather and use information about your visit to this and other websites to provide you with advertisements about goods and services presumed to be of interest to you. |