• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

When is it ethically okay?

When is it ethically justified to abort?


  • Total voters
    72

DifferentDrummr

Bald eagle
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
7,437
Reaction score
1,950
Location
Confirmation Bias Land
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
According to your own ethics, morals, philosophy, and values, under what circumstances to you believe it's right to end a pregnancy?
 
According to your own ethics, morals, philosophy, and values, under what circumstances to you believe it's right to end a pregnancy?
First off I am going to say I like the wording of this question. It acknowledges that different people have different ethical standards, and even that they might not try to hold others to them by force of law. Bravo!

For me the only ethical use of abortion is when the mother's life is in danger. I am also willing to say it is ethical in terms of rape where the carrying of the child would be mentally and emotionally traumatic to the mother.

Also note that I do separate ethical from practical.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
 
According to your own ethics, morals, philosophy, and values, under what circumstances to you believe it's right to end a pregnancy?
Something eles I noticed. You said end a pregnancy, not terminate a ZEF. Are you holding an assertion that a woman's right is not the termination of the offspring per se, but the ending of the pregnancy, but termination of the ZEF is the only current method we have?

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
 
According to your own ethics, morals, philosophy, and values, under what circumstances to you believe it's right to end a pregnancy?

I selected "Only if the mom's life/health is in danger". However I would also make exceptions for victims of rape. As such I wish you would have made the poll a multi-choice poll.

Note: That per your own OP this is ONLY in regards to my own personal standards. Politically I am fully pro-choice and support abortion "Any time at all". I have no Right to tell another woman what to do with her own body. Nor do I have a Right to tell another person what to believe.
 
Something eles I noticed. You said end a pregnancy, not terminate a ZEF. Are you holding an assertion that a woman's right is not the termination of the offspring per se, but the ending of the pregnancy, but termination of the ZEF is the only current method we have?

According to my own ethics, a ZEF should be treated as a human being, and therefore terminating it is ethically justified only under a similar set of conditions (for example, a health threat, a rape, a severe deformity, etc.)
 
I chose "Other," because I think it's always ethically justified during the first trimester, and that option wasn't listed.

But, I also feel that it is often justified during the second trimester, up to viability, for a number of reasons, including a female not finding out earlier that she was pregnant (it happens), a young girl who was afraid for her family to discover the pregnancy (perhaps a relative's kid), a woman's situation changing and/or the health of the fetus changing. After viability, it gets kind of hairy, but, thankfully, there are very VERY few post-viability abortions, and when they do occur they are for reasons that no one anticipated, such as the health of the mother being in risk if she continues the pregnancy, or a badly damaged fetus.

I don't think it's ethically justified to abort a full term pregnancy the day before a due date -- but that never happens so it's not even worth considering.
 
I'd say up to the point where there is verifiable brain wave activity giving credence to a determination of active sentient thought.

After that, abort only if the mother's life is in danger, and no method of saving the baby while preserving the life of the mother is available.

So I chose "other."
 
Last edited:
Personally if my life was in danger. Ethically, I do not believe it is appropriate to apply my standards to another person’s health related decisions
 
Something eles I noticed. You said end a pregnancy, not terminate a ZEF. Are you holding an assertion that a woman's right is not the termination of the offspring per se, but the ending of the pregnancy, but termination of the ZEF is the only current method we have?

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

You can induce labor at around 5 months with a change of the fetus (not sure what the term is at that level of development) with a chance of its survival with lots of medical intervention (lots of money) that would terminate the pregnancy as well
 
Voted Other.

Personal ethics - viability

Legally - any time. Because elective abortion dont happen after viability and I dont believe in useless, feel-good legislation that implies a need to control a woman's bodily sovereignty.
 
Last edited:
You can induce labor at around 5 months with a change of the fetus (not sure what the term is at that level of development) with a chance of its survival with lots of medical intervention (lots of money) that would terminate the pregnancy as well

The single earliest survivor was 21.5 weeks.

Babies born that early (22-26 weeks) that survive almost always have severe health issues and mental disabilities. It's not hard to understand why. There's a reason they are born around 9 months.
 
I selected "Only if the mom's life/health is in danger". However I would also make exceptions for victims of rape. As such I wish you would have made the poll a multi-choice poll.

Note: That per your own OP this is ONLY in regards to my own personal standards. Politically I am fully pro-choice and support abortion "Any time at all". I have no Right to tell another woman what to do with her own body. Nor do I have a Right to tell another person what to believe.

That's why he wrote it that way. He's been thru this rodeo before.
 
According to my own ethics, a ZEF should be treated as a human being, and therefore terminating it is ethically justified only under a similar set of conditions (for example, a health threat, a rape, a severe deformity, etc.)

Can you kill a person that is a health threat to others? (no, we quarantine them or put them in jail). That have severe deformities? If it's a person, how can you kill it if it's the product of a rape?

Is it equal to people or not?
 
Last edited:
For me it's any time. It's a hard question, but I think the choice of the person already born outweighs whatever emotional response I might have to the situation in general.
 
According to my own ethics, a ZEF should be treated as a human being, and therefore terminating it is ethically justified only under a similar set of conditions (for example, a health threat, a rape, a severe deformity, etc.)
I was looking at ethics per se. I was.talking actual rights vs practical application. At the risk of going far off track, let's assume that there is a way to get the ZEF out of the woman and into an artificial womb at the same or less physical trauma as an abortion. Is the woman's right to abort the baby or only to end the pregnancy? That is about rights not personal ethics.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
 
Can you kill a person that is a health threat to others? (no, we quarantine them or put them in jail). That have severe deformities? If it's a person, how can you kill it if it's the product of a rape?

Is it equal to people or not?

According to my ethics, yes. And also according to my ethics, there are extraordinary circumstances in which killing a person is justified. Those circumstances are always tragic, but they can't be dismissed just by claiming that someone is a person.
 
According to my ethics, yes. And also according to my ethics, there are extraordinary circumstances in which killing a person is justified. Those circumstances are always tragic, but they can't be dismissed just by claiming that someone is a person.

Understood.

So then your ethical position is focused on meeting the needs of the unborn rather than women?

It sounds odd that way. Sorry. It's more about how people value each, since they cannot be valued equally in a practical, real-life sense. (If they could be treated equally, there would be no ethical dilemma)

I value the unborn, but I value women, all people, more.

Is it true to say then, that you value the unborn more than women?
 
I was looking at ethics per se. I was.talking actual rights vs practical application. At the risk of going far off track, let's assume that there is a way to get the ZEF out of the woman and into an artificial womb at the same or less physical trauma as an abortion. Is the woman's right to abort the baby or only to end the pregnancy? That is about rights not personal ethics.

Depending on what you're asking, it can be very much about personal ethics; in other words, whether the woman is "doing the right thing" or not.

If you're asking about her legal rights, I'm fairly sure that she can abort the baby, but that isn't really the topic of the thread.
 
Depending on what you're asking, it can be very much about personal ethics; in other words, whether the woman is "doing the right thing" or not.

If you're asking about her legal rights, I'm fairly sure that she can abort the baby, but that isn't really the topic of the thread.

So, since it's about personal ethics, isnt "pro-choice" the correct application towards abortion in the US?
 
It is ethically okay to abort a pregnancy at whatever point prior to birth that the parents, but predominantly the pregnant woman, determines to do so. For some women that point in time may be never, for others it may be quite late in the pregnancy. At any rate, until the fetus is born, its fate is the sire and woman's to control.

What is my burden in the matter? At most and when solicited, it's to articulate my position re: any specific situation, offer solution options, but otherwise refrain from acting to proscribe, interdict, inhibit or foster the parent's actions/decision on what to do in effecting a solution. I would not forbear someone telling me to have or not have a child; that decision is solely mine. If another were going to provide for the child in the manners to which I would have done, all the while the child yet remains mine, then sure, they can have some say in the matter.
 
Understood.

So then your ethical position is focused on meeting the needs of the unborn rather than women?
Depends on the need itself. If it's one life or the other, my ethical position is that the mom is justified in choosing her own over the unborn.

It sounds odd that way. Sorry. It's more about how people value each, since they cannot be valued equally in a practical, real-life sense. (If they could be treated equally, there would be no ethical dilemma)

I value the unborn, but I value women, all people, more.
That last bit sounds odd to me, because I consider the unborn to be "equally human" to born people.

Is it true to say then, that you value the unborn more than women?
I would say that both have equal value. Either one may have to give something up (ethically, again) for the sake of the other.

Hope that helps.
 
Depends on the need itself. If it's one life or the other, my ethical position is that the mom is justified in choosing her own over the unborn.

Lursa said:
It sounds odd that way. Sorry. It's more about how people value each, since they cannot be valued equally in a practical, real-life sense. (If they could be treated equally, there would be no ethical dilemma)

I value the unborn, but I value women, all people, more.
That last bit sounds odd to me, because I consider the unborn to be "equally human" to born people.

Well that's why I asked before how it's ethical to kill the unborn if the result of rape. Can you kill a toddler that's the result of rape? What is the difference you see in the unborn and that toddler?


I would say that both have equal value. Either one may have to give something up (ethically, again) for the sake of the other.

Hope that helps.

It sounds nice, but even in ethics, choices must be made and some are very clear.

If you believe the will of the mother should be overcome to give birth, you do not value both equally. You value the unborn over the mother.
 
So, since it's about personal ethics, isnt "pro-choice" the correct application towards abortion in the US?

Just for argument's sake, let's turn that around.

If a woman doesn't believe that she's ready for the possibility of carrying a child to full term, and yet chooses to have sex with a fertile man, isn't that an unethical choice on her part?
 
Just for argument's sake, let's turn that around.

If a woman doesn't believe that she's ready for the possibility of carrying a child to full term, and yet chooses to have sex with a fertile man, isn't that an unethical choice on her part?

Not if she doesnt believe that abortion is unethical. She can have one early term...most people find that acceptable. She can give it up for adoption. She can have it and live with his family or her family (support network). She has options.

OTOH I dont ever support people being irresponsible about birth control, but that's also my personal ethical stance.
 
Back
Top Bottom