Along side with that would be the other side of abortion choices. That people are scared of the commitment and responsibility of a new child, or afraid of the shame of being found out that you're pregnant. To step away from that would need a cultural perspective to be able to step up to your responsibilities and to not shy away from the consequences of your actions. It would also need a society that instead of throwing shame on young mothers, or pregnant teens, they should be supportive of the women who went to full term and gave their child up for adoption, or they kept the child to raise on their own. Those women are shining examples of good people, regardless how they became pregnant.

Both of these changes in cultural attitude would be encouraged and supported by the acknowledgement that abortion is killing an innocent life long before the aborted person would ever have a say in the matter.

Third would be on government assistance. As of now there pro abortion programs that assist with abortion by reducing their costs or paying for it in full. If that same money was used to assist in adoption costs instead of abortion costs then adoption could be a viable option considered with the assurance that the baby will go to a good home once born.

These changes would only be a start, but if they reduced abortion rates, I'd count that as a mighty fine result.

To Banjo Paterson.

How can it not be considered a biological fact that killing an unborn baby is killing an innocent human being? In your reply to Runner you said:

"The biological question you raise as to the precise point at which a foetus becomes a baby is not known. As it is a complex process, perhaps there is no such defining point."

It is with this in mind that the question of when a fetus is considered a baby only muddies the waters and gives way to arbitrarily assigning when it is legal to abort and when it isn't. If there is no defining point to say it is a baby then arguable it should be assumed that it is always considered a baby.

Having only the first trimester legal for an abortion is a step in the right direction, however even that deadline is too late in my opinion. If you want to counter it though, please do a image search for the beginning stages of pregnancy. Medical pictures instead of illustrations would be what you're looking for, and determine when the fetus resembles a baby enough to not allow abortion any more. Between week six and eight are where I think the fetus shows characteristics of a living baby instead of cells reproducing and tissue forming. That said even that date might be too late, with new studies finding out how old a heart beat is found.

If we can't find a distinction to call a fetus something outside of being a baby, then it is my opinion that it should always be counted as a baby.

Dear NNS,

When I worked in the Netherlands there was a man named van Klinken I worked with. Van Klinken was part of a group that tried to persuade pregnant women not to have an abortion. If they succeeded his group provided for the women and baby until the baby reached maturity. Since most women went through with the abortion they could provide for those who didn't. As far as I know those Australian groups who harass women going to abortion clinics take no responsibility if the woman decides to continue pregnancy.

You wrote: "Regarding abortion the first step is to acknowledge that it's wrong."

In other words, you just want people to agree with you. I do not think it is wrong, but I do not expect you to change your views to agree with me.

Dear David F,

We have different views about abortion. As what you said last time, We don't know if we are killing another Hitler or another Einstein. Yes, I do not wish you to change your views but killing an innocent child is not right. Abortion can't solve the problem. The problem just keeps on adding. If you can't discern what is wrong from this issue then maybe you needed a lot of help. If humans continue to legalize abortion in other countries then we can't differentiate ourselves from animals anymore.

.

Dear Yuyutsu

.

You wrote :

« Assuming there is no soul, then the concept of morality is stupid … »

The OED definition of soul is :

« The spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal »

Perhaps you would be kind enough to explain why you believe the animal kingdom (including us human beings) must have one of these in order to be capable of moral behaviour.

Might I just point out that morality is, of course, not only a concept but also a regular practice. – should I say a way of life.
.

You also wrote :

« A concept of "soul" could be relatively recent, but you don't need a concept of pain in order to feel pain: would you deny, for example, that babies feel pain despite having no such concept? »

By the same token that I do not know what you believe a soul is, I do not know exactly what you refer to as a baby (in the context of this discussion on abortion).

In the interest of clarity, allow me to recall that I indicated in my post on page 13 of this thread that I should like to see all the states of Australia adopt the same limit for abortion as Queensland is currently preparing for itself, i.e., 22 weeks of pregnancy.

There are essentially two reason for this :

1. The foetus cannot survive independently of the woman prior to that limit. It has no life of its own.

2. The stage of development of its biological structure does not allow it to feel pain prior to that limit

Here is what I consider to be a reasonably trustworthy (unbiased) article on the delicate question of the ability of a foetus to feel pain :

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/05/does-a-fetus-feel-pain-at-20-weeks/

.

Dear MandyMania,

You wrote, "If humans continue to legalize abortion in other countries then we can't differentiate ourselves from animals anymore."

I don't differentiate myself from the other animals. I am a mammal of the genus and species, Homo Sapiens. I have never differentiated myself from the other animals. If you don't realize you are an animal, you have a problem. I suspect that is a problem that many of those who would ban abortion have. They think they are not animals.

It used to be that most humans differentiated themselves from the other animals. Linnaeus, the biologist who introduced the binomial nomenclature to designate forms of life was probably the first to designate humans as mammals. No species can increase indefinitely, but people who do not realise we are animals are against population control measures. MandyMania, whether or not you realise you an animal you are an animal and eat, are born, die, breed and are subject to the constraints that other animals live under.