Date: 2011-09-28 01:36 pm (UTC)
I think maybe we agree. I wasn't fully awake either.

Thinking about it more [livejournal.com profile] kirisutogomen has implied [while not quite setting up] a false dichotomy. I think unborn fetuses have more moral standings than lintballs, and the closer they are to viability, the more moral standing they have. I think it is sad when a fetus is aborted, and the longer the fetus has been gestating, the sadder it is. I would even say it was usually morally wrong to abort a late-term fetus. But that doesn't imply I want to use force to do anything about it. So legally, I think my "victory condition" is the government stays out of making rules about abortion.

Morally, I'd prefer to live in a world where abortion wasn't treated like a trip to the hair salon, but who I am to judge that that's really what's happening in China with these advertisements? I find them surprising, but I don't think they should be illegal.

All that said, I could imagine supporting a law against very late-term abortions. The real reason I don't is that it's not necessary --- basically nobody is aborting their perfectly healthy 8 1/2 month fetus --- and it's a slippery slope. But on the other hand, I don't blanket agree with your "what a person does with their body" approach either. What's the wedge that lets you accept quarantining people with infectious diseases but not accept preventing very late-term abortions? They are both instances of someone other than X having a say with what X does to their body with the purported goal of protecting Y.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

kirisutogomen: (Default)
kirisutogomen

June 2015

S M T W T F S
 1 23456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 21st, 2025 09:55 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios