Daniel – “you said Women have the right to determine how their bodies will be used;….,
she can use it to kill me or you. obvously you dont mean that women have the right to determine how their bodies are to be used in order to kill someone…
But then i see a problem- abortion is doing this.”

You are correct Daniel. This is the dilemma we all are faced with and what is really at the heart of the abortion debate.

I view it as a matter of priority,
the woman has the right to decide the deployment of her body with regard first to her own needs, the embryo / fetus taking second place to that woman’s needs and expectations.
If we were to insist on the woman continuing with the pregnancy against her own will or judgement, we are relegating her to the level of “a life support system for a uterus”. That is an obscene denigration of a thinking and competent individual.

In “social terms” the woman has the priority of choice to the deployment of her own body over everyone else opinion, because, it is her body, not their body at risk or the topic of the pregnancy.

In this we see the distinction between abortion and murder – abortion applies to a process a women wills upon the functions of her own body, murder involves a separate individual. The embryo / fetus is not separate. Separation and the recognition of a separate entity / person occurs at birth, not before.

I hope that helps

Col,
For the sake of this discussion, I request that you put forward two examples; the first example of where a woman's personal expectations do not justify an abortion, and the second example of where the woman's personal expectations do justify an abortion.
Daniel,
you asked the question, "where does life begein?"
I may be presumptiuous but I think we all agree that life begins with conception- but where there are disagreements is in the question, 'When does life merit protection?' or something along those lines.
I'm sure that by reading the above posts you will be able to learn of the different opinions posted in this thread.

Jose “Col,For the sake of this discussion, I request that you put forward two examples;”

I will decline.

I will decline for two reasons

First

Why on earth should I provide you with the bullets for you to shoot down any argument I might present?

That is what you are asking for.
If you want to make up hypotheticals then do so and I will be happy to use reason and logic to shoot your claims down (in flames).

The second, more important, reason is this

Just like a pregnant women, who might be seeking an abortion, I have my own free will. I do not have to fall in with your wishes, instructions or demands.

We are all free make our own choices. We do not live in servitude to the will or whims of any Church or religious zealot.

Whilst I could comply with your request, I will decline as an object lesson for you to learn from – my “free will” and I am exercising it.
I have on this earth need to answer to no one else. Beyond this earth I answer to God but I will never include any mere mortal or self proclaimed religious potentate within that authority.

As I am here answering I will respond to the second part of your post to Daniel

When does a “life” become individual and separate – the moment of birth. Until that moment the embryo / fetus is adjoined and inseparable from the mother.
In this society we respect the mother as having priority of access to the resources of her body and choice over how that body will be deployed.
You would demand the mother, by forcing her to endure a pregnancy against her own will, to take second place to the embryo / fetus and your own demands for the resources of her body and thereby relegate her to the status of a life-support system for a uterus.

Such denigration of her (the pregnant woman’s) human worth, individuality and sovereignty is contemptible, malignant and should be resisted by all reasonable and balanced persons.

Jose, although i'm not christian (i dont have a religion) some of my friends are catholics and i have alot of admiration for them.
i think both you and Col Rouge are arguing about different ways of prioritising. Maybe that's what the whole abortion debate is centered on. So how can society decide on its way of prioritising? Maybe it should be made official, like a Geneva Convention about the method of prioritisng.

OK Daniel

So it should be decided who/what has more rights - a foetus or a living breathing independent human being who just happens to be a woman?

Answer should be obvious - totally strange that it is even an issue.

Clearly a foetus has dominion over a woman's autonomy. Foetus's rock. Foetus' rool.

Right?

Col,

“Why on earth should I provide you with the bullets for you to shoot down any argument I might present?”

If you really thought you had the truth on your side, why would you worry about someone in error shooting down your arguments? If I were in error and attempted to shoot down your allegedly truthful arguments, you would be able to defend them with simple truth and expose the errors in my attempts to disprove you.
It is childish to fear what you think is false.
The only reason you would have to fear my shooting down your arguments is if truth was not your weapon but you were the one in error. It is even more childish to fear the truth.

“If you want to make up hypotheticals then do so and I will be happy to use reason and logic to shoot your claims down (in flames).”

I will point out that Reason is the <Formal object (quo)> of Philosophy
I will also point out that Logic is a branch of Philosophy

Division of Philosophy:
-Metaphysics
-Philosophy of Nature
-Philosophy of living beings
-Ethics
-Logic
-History of Philosophy

Philosophically is exactly how you, I and everyone else are going to debate this issue.
Hold on- I thought you said before that Philosophy is a subjective study which arrives at outcomes not supported by absolute proven facts and is influenced by subjective opinion?
And now you want to use Reason and Logic to shoot down my arguments?
...

Will you present the two examples, or do you still need me to do it?