Replies to post #6731 on Zeev's Turnips Talk Politics (ZTTP)

[brainlessone]

I think the question is even much harder than you state. I know you are not asking for my opinion, but I wanted to take exception to one phrase of yours:

But, it is the convenient destruction of a perfectly formed baby developing in a womb simply because one is unwed, or financially not prepared, or unwilling to have their lives complicated that evokes outrage in those opposed to abortion. This while there are would be parents who must wait for years for the opportunity to adopt a child.

If you use high dose sex hormone within 72 hours of possible conception there is a virtually 100% lack of implantation.
Does this qualify as abortion?

IF you take ru 486 at 3-4 weeks or so ( just when you could conceivably test postitive) when the fetus is not perfectly formed so does this count as abortion?

Logically to me it is all or none, because if you do not take that view, then physiologically you can always find some kind of logical trap. Yet if you do take the view that abortion is any destruction after conception, then this closes the door to stem cell research and makes drinking coffee a potentially murderous act.

Finally, speaking for the Hindus in America, do you have the right to impose your views in the form of a public law on all Americans?

[Zeev Hed]

mike, my position is really quite clear, though in diametric opposition to yours. Abortion is not an act of murder. Mind you, I don't like abortion and wish our society will find ways to eliminate this elective procedure. But that position is more based on my tendency to limit many "elective" procedures (possibly 50% of all hysterectomies, cosmetic procedures, "life style" procedures, such as severing ligaments in the hands to overcome "trigger finger syndrome" etc. and the list goes on).

To the extent that an abortion is required to save a living mother, I am not even questioning the necessity of such a procedure, to me it is a "given". People with religious conviction set in such a situation, should, in my opinion, form a counseling triumvirate of a physician, a psychologist and a clergyman of that person's faith, to provide the right advice as to how to proceed.

I cannot equate a "potential" life with an "actual" life, under no circumstance.

Strangely, I abhor abortions not so much for the "killing" of the unborn (since as I stated, a potential live is not a live as far as I am concerned), but because of the lifelong psychological damage to the young women undergoing that procedure. For one reason or another, a great majority of these women (and it may be a "social stigma", but could also be a Natural selection principle reaction) bear life long guilt feelings that interfere with their normal development post such a procedure.

Outlawing abortion, will make these women and the physicians that provide the service criminals, a position which, IMHO, is not justified, and just add to the already difficult burden of having had the procedure. Unless we impose the same type of penalties to other crimes of similar severity (which I have elaborated on in prior posts) imposing criminal status to abortion would be, IMHO, a travesty. Lets find ways to minimize these as much as possible, and use abortion only as a last resort, but don't criminalize it.


Zeev