Bartikus wrote:
An alternative to an unwanted pregnancy would be adoption, preserving life, and making the lives of all involved better.
Naive and untrue. Adoption is a fine word to hide behind when the reality is sadly too often abandonment. As you should know, there are countless children without homes, and that is with abortion being legal.
"making the lives of all those involved better" begins with a different political direction other than making abortion illegal.
Bartikus wrote:
In any circumstance the former holds true unless the mother is in mortal danger.
Incorrect. Plenty of medical operations are not done electively without the risk of mortality. Plastic Surgery, Dental work, lasik are just a few examples. The practice of medicine is not only for the prevention of death and the risk of death should not be the only quilifier to exercise medicine either.
Bartikus wrote:
Consider timing? examples like age?
Consider health? yes.
Consider consequence? like more bodies than all the American wars combined? Is'nt that healthy?
Timing - Age is a excellent example.
Consequence - You have named no consequence in your statement about wars. The absence of the mass bodies (which would be mostly embryos and zygotes) which you reference can not be established as consequence. Given a reversal of all those decisions, the consequence burdened on the women involved is NOT lighter. While it is certainly a sad thing to think about that so many women have had to go make such a difficult desicion, it is not consequence without a frame of reference. You can offer no such reference.
Bartikus wrote:
The hypocrisy in the abortionist (doctor) who performs abortions goes against his oath does he not?
I'll pose a scenario for you. A woman in her late 80s fall and breaks her hip. Additionally she ruptures her spleen. She is taken to the hospitol and during the operation she has a stroke. She for the following two weeks lays comatose. Upon awakening, she can't speak, and her body is not healing from the surgery very well. Her mind is shorted out and she is frustrated she cant speak to her family who is right in front of her. She will lay in this bed until she dies 6 months later. She is unable to speak, and occasionally slips back into a coma. Her body is in constant pain. Pain which is not known to you or myself. That pain last for all 6 months, for which there is little rest because sleeping is difficult. Pain medication has robbed her of all ability to communicate and she now can hardly keep her jaw shut. She is skin and bones. She is stuffering. She dies alone during the night, not having had a moment without pain in 6 months.
The doctors acting in a way to do no harm have kept her in this state up until that moment.
I'd explore your notion of what "harm" is. I'd think about her family looking into her glossed over eyes. I'd think about how this pain spreads. I'd think about what her two daughters must experiance as their only two options are to either witness their mother piss and **** herself in a coma or writhe in pain moaning but yet never a word.
Not one "I love you." She can't.
And when that night comes and the oldest daughter recieves the phone call from the hospitol and she learns her mother has passed, the emotions she feels.
Certainly sorrow. Deep sorrow. But also relief.
I hate to say it, but as is the notion of "do no harm" is only a costume for ambivilance.
The same applies at birth, and a docter is doing no harm if he accepts a woman's choice to abort in lieu of the many alternatives.
T
K
O
P.s. - That senario isn't contrived. It's the story of my grandmother's last 6 months before passing away in July. The notion of "harm" is dangerous when used in sucha simplistic manner which you have done.
