.

(Continued …)

.

A foetus is a life form that is “partly different from” but “totally dependent on” the female of the human species that nurtures it.

The formation of a foetus is part of the natural process of the reproduction of the species. The end result is the production of a new individual or “person”.

According to the experts, its development is both structural and functional. An important element is the human brain, which is particularly complex. Recent research reveals that the brain does not reach full maturity until the new individual or “person” reaches, at least, his or her mid-20s.

The specific changes that follow young adulthood are not yet well studied, but it is known that they involve increased myelination (i.e., enclosure of nerve fibres in an insulating sheath which increases the speed at which impulses are conducted) and continued adding and pruning of neurons.

As a number of researchers put it, "the rental car companies have it right." The brain isn't fully mature at 16, when we are allowed to drive, or at 18, when we are allowed to vote, or at 21, when we are allowed to drink, but closer to 25, when we are allowed to rent a car.

Before forming a definitive opinion on the morality or immorality of abortion, I think we should acknowledge the fact that, as Yuyutsu reminded us :

« The consensus about the time when human life really begins is still not reached among scientists, philosophers, ethicists, sociologists and theologizes. The scientific data suggested that a single developmental moment marking the beginning of human life does not exist. Current biological perspectives on when human life begins range through fertilization, gastrulation, to birth and even after. The development of a newborn is a smoothly continuous process » :

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2582082/
.

We would also be well-advised to carefully consider and evaluate the particular conditions, circumstances, environment and responsibilities involved in bringing a new “person” into the world, together with his or her future perspectives in life.

All of these factors are constitutive of a sound and just morality.

.

.

Oops !

I wrote "perspectives in life" but, of course I meant "prospects in life".

Sorry about that.

.

To David F.

Just because I don't support abortion doesn't mean I don't support women. Let that sink in a bit before you respond. Think of it like this. If you had a life and death sutution where you were rescuing people from a sinking ship. And at the end of it you had two people left to rescue. But only could take one. A mother and her young baby. Neither are conscience and choosing one will likely be the last person you can take. Who would you choose? I'm sure regardless of the choice anyone would take they would see this as a tragedy, and might haunt their dreams. The person they could not save.

This is the kind of tone that abortion supporters seem to have, choose the fetus or choose the mother. Except that it's usually not a life or death situation. The baby dies by the choice of abortion and that's the end of it. No mater what the sitution is or the hardships that are there the tragedy is on the side of the baby, not on the woman.

That said, take it a step back from the extreem tones that pro abortion arguments take it. The hardships of the women are not lost on me. And though I don't see abortion as a valid solution, that doesn't mean that I don't want to support the women who choose life instead of death.

Let that sink in for a brief second before moving on to the next point. Because it's important to note the difference between being against abortion, and being against women.

(Continued)

(Continued)

The second point is regarding my point on keeping your pants up.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=19834&page=4

I was not talking about women as the blame of not keeping their pants up, but society as a whole for being loose. You might not see any issue with the casualness that people have sex in relationships (or even more casual without relationships attached), but on the other hand you also don't recognize a fetus as a living human being. Nothing worth consideration. So you miss the point entirely anyways.

When I say pregnancy is a consequence of not keeping your pants up, let's be clear, I'm talking about guys more then gals, because largely it seems it's the guys that want sex more often and expect it more often. Girls already have a culture to be little ladies of some kind or another, and to not be considered slutty or something. But guys on the other hand have no such reservations of shame. Thus in my opinion it's guys like you that need to keep their pants up. Pregnancy would still be the consequence non the less. At least it would be if life was considered more important.

To Toni Lavis. I read the article you gave about baby hatches. They don't seem to be that prevalent or supported. In many countries they exist in spit of the law saying they shouldn't and mothers can be prosecuted for abandoning their babies. The one example that seems to exist, that is both wide spread and government sanctioned is the US's version of "safe haven laws," with letting women give up their babies at hospitals and fire stations. No questions asked and the babies would be put into the system for adoption or foster care.

The crutch of the matter is that people don't see abortion as killing. If adoption was as affordable (it isn't) then the worry about what life the child would have would be lessened, and many of the arguments for abortion would lose weight. The only reasons why abortion has reasons is because we've distanced ourselves from recognizing the fetuses to be alive. To be unborn babies. Thus rationalizations stem up for why to abort because it's not like your killing a baby. (If people realized what they were doing they would realize they are killing babies though. Their choosing their deaths before they have the chance to be born). Just because abortion is chosen doesn't make it a moral and good choice.

Dear NNS,

We agree that abortion is killing the fetus. I think a woman has a right to kill the fetus if she does not want to go to term unless there was a prior agreement with the man involved. In that case his wishes should be considered. I think it was wrong when a woman did not have access to a abortion by a doctor. I say "all hail the fetus." because you seem to me to want to deny her the right to terminate her pregnancy and put the interests of the fetus above the interests of the pregnant woman. In order for adoption to be a solution a woman has to be willing to go through pregnancy, give birth and give the baby. For women who do not want to continue pregnant, do not want to go through labor and do not want give a baby away if there is a baby adoption is not a solution. I think if you did have a concern for a woman you would not seek to deny her the right to terminate a pregnancy.

You have stated that abortion is evil. I don't think abortion is evil.

In the United States about 16 years after Roe vs. Wade which granted women the right to abortion the crime rate started to go down. That to me meant that women knew the consequences of giving birth in their situation. They didn't abort Beethovens. They aborted those who were likely to become criminals.