glowbug said:
Imo, the "a fetus is a human being with rights" argument is a specious one because it implies (by conscious omission) that a fetus has the SAME rights as another viable, already born human being.
I fail to understand why so many people focus on "viability."
Without the help of caring adults, 99-plus percent of one-year olds would quickly die, too.
To me, the question of whether or not we allow abortion comes down to this:
"How selfish do we want to be?"
You brought up animals, and I mentioned them earlier as well.
And to me, fetuses, animals, very young children, and the old and infirm are all "beings" whose ability to continue living depends largely on society's willingness to protect them.
I don't think that morality is black and white and that each ethical question has a clear right answer.
Rather, in most instances, as in this one, I feel the question often becomes:
"Are we willing, as a society, to sacrifice some measure of comfort, convenience, money, enjoyment, and/or some other form of happiness in order to protect animals/fetuses/young children/Grandpa Shlomo?"
And just as I see both sides of the "should we eat meat" argument, I see both sides of this one.
When someone is faced with the decision as to whether or not to abort his/her unwanted so-to-be-child, if that someone chooses to abort, I don't consider that person to be evil.
Rather, I consider that person to have acted selfishly with respect to that one particular decision.
Which is something I have done on many an occasion.
Even though I consider myself to be a rather kind, generous, caring (and viable) human being.
And of all the times I have ever acted selfishly, one thing has rung true each and every time:
I justified to myself that my wants and needs were more important than someone else's.
of "micromanagerially."
