no clue where all that came from. Or what you think, or thought by my statement. My only point was, the first order question is, is abortion murder? If yes, all the social implications have to be evaluated against that, if it is not murder, than in that light.

As an example, the social consequences of unwanted pregnancies in your first post. I would assume these are different considerations if abortion is or is not murder.

the first order question is, is abortion murder? — Rank Amateur

Rubbish. Murder is illegal killing. So it is only murder if it counts as illegal, and if it counts as killing. The circularity of your argument marks its absurdity.

Rubbish. Murder is illegal killing. So it is only murder if it counts as illegal, and if it counts as killing. The circularity of your argument marks its absurdity. — Banno

Do you believe the moral permissibility of abortion is a settled item, unworthy of challenge?

What pisses me off most about the choice debate is the insincerity of the antagonists.

The reason you want to ban abortion is nothing to do with fair ethical consideration. It's because the people who tell you what your invisible friend wants say abortion is naughty.

The same misogynist folk who fight against child care, public education, maternity leave, and most other things that will actually benefit people. The ones who think giving guns to children is a good idea, and are shit scared of anyone who is slightly different, sexually, ethnically, geographically, politically or spiritually.

The folk who will not mention, let alone consider, the role of the potential mother; utter bullshit.

Whence your moral principles?

in which state of the process of creation of life, would you consider as an acceptable form of life that should fit into the equation of what we decide that fits into the judgement of our moral part when we make the decision to perform an abortion or not? — EpicTyrant

The woman who has the Blastocyst is the one who should decide what to do with it. There is no question that she is alive and able to make the decision.

All else is self-serving crap.

if you wish to read a dispassionate argument against the moral permissibility of abortion, prob a 15 minute read

https://rintintin.colorado.edu/~vancecd/phil215/Marquis.pdf

And as an aside, my argument against abortion is completely secular, and completely based on reason.

dispassionate — Rank Amateur

:brow:

Passion has its place.

here is the first paragraph which seems appropriate

The view that abortion is, with rare exceptions, seriously immoral has received little support in the recent philosophical literature. No doubt most philosophers affiliated with secular institutions of higher education believe that the anti-abortion position is either a symptom of irrational religious dogma or a conclusion generated by seriously confused philosophical argument. The purpose of this essay is to undermine this general belief. This essay sets out an argument that purports to show, as well as any argument in ethics can show, that abortion is, except possibly in rare cases, seriously immoral, that it is in the same moral category as killing an innocent adult human being.

"Woman" is mentioned once in your cited article.

"mother" is not mentioned. Nor "Parent".

So, tell me if I am wrong, but the article you cite appears not to mention the cost to the woman involved - as there always must be in such cases.

Is that right? Why?

Is abortion to be regretted? Of course, as any medical procedure would be best unneeded.

Carrier — EpicTyrant

A neat word that denies the humanity of the woman involved.

Disgusting.

we are on the same team. — Rank Amateur

You might want to reconsider your bedfellow. Or are you comfortable with misogyny?

As an example, the social consequences of unwanted pregnancies in your first post. I would assume these are different considerations if abortion is or is not murder. — Rank Amateur

It comes from the fact that "abortion" is not one issue, but a multiplicity of issues. As for murder, the state defines murder and at the current time abortion is not "murder". It is not a simple or single issue. Are there social consequences, yes, are there medical considerations, yes, are there ethical considerations, yes but trying to paint all these different complex situations with one answer (although simple), is incorrect and I might add unphilosophical.

because the mother has no more basis in this argument, than the mother of a 1 year old would have.

However, this pro abortion argument is I think the best argument that account for roll of the mother, more specifically here right to determine the use of her body

https://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm

Again, here, the woman receives no mention.

Why?

what? Dr thomsons argument is completely about the right of the mother to control the use of her body, and it is completely a pro choice argument. What are you talking about

because the mother has no more basis in this argument, than the mother of a 1 year old would have. — Rank Amateur

Seriously?

I think your discounting of the woman is grossly immoral. What kind of blindness could bring you to think like that?

I was referring to your argument, in the post I was replying to.

Let me try and make the argument for a valuable future- there is a link above to the whole argument

1. It is immoral, without justification, to kill people like us. ( can we avoid a rabbit hole about justified here please, it is not important to the argument)

2. What one loses, when one is killed is all the experience, joys, relationships, etc that is in ones future. Let's call this a human future of value. FOV

3. Killing someone is immoral because it denies them their FOV

4. After the process of conception is completed, a new and unique organism exists

5. This organism is 100% human, and 100% alive

6. This unique, human organism is in complete possession of a fully human and unique FOV

7. It is immoral to deny a FOV

8. It is immoral to deny these organisms their unique FOV therefore abortion is immoral — Rank Amateur

No mention of the involvement of the woman.

I propose, then, that we grant that the fetus is a person from the moment of conception.

(Judith Thomson)

A Blastocyst is not a person.

you read 1 sentence of probability the best pro choice, pro woman argument and make a complete judgment of it. amazing.

If an assumption of the argument is wrong, it's not worth following the argument.

as you wish. Enjoy the rest of your evening.

Did you read the final paragraph?

At this place, however, it should be remembered that we have only been pretending throughout that the fetus is a human being from the moment of conception. A very early abortion is surely not the killing of a person, and so is not dealt with by anything I have said here.

Just to be clear, those who oppose free choice on the part of a woman wishing to put an early end to an unwanted pregnancy are acting immorally.

Why? If one accepts the premiss that the baby has any rights, arent we then having a discussion about competing rights? Whether they are acting immorally depends on what basis they are working from as far as defining what kinda personage we give the “baby”.
Why is it necessarily immoral?

This is why we need to be more precise what we are talking about?
Is an 8cell blastocyst a person? Does it have legal rights?
Not under the law.

If one accepts the premiss that the baby(sic.) has any rights... — DingoJones

A blastocyst does not have rights.

Obviously some people do not define blastocyst to include the “baby”.
Why is it necessarily immoral? Isnt there at least a process or scenario where a discussion might take place about how far along the “baby” is and how developed it needs to be to have rights? If there is a discussion, a debate of any kind, then how is it necessarily immoral? Is this purely ground you must stand because it so soundly dispells the anti abortion position? Im honestly asking, I have no dog in the fight on abortion.

Obviously some people do not define blastocyst to include the “baby”. — DingoJones

And some do not define fetus to include the "baby".