catholic church affects our government

[LuciferSam]

Ahh, but here is the rub. Men by default can be excluded from the decision making process as to whether or not their mate can legally abort their product of conception, 50% of which is 'dad's' genetic ooze.
I don't like the hunting analogy because human evolution has progressed favorably concurrent with taking game. Evolution also naturally unfolds favorably toward the fittest in a species surviving, and abortion is certainly unnatural selection (with the exception of the termination of the genetically flawed).

Kind of creepy stuff.

Actually at that point, the father has no way of proving that it's his child, so I believe morally, legally, and ethically it should be solely the woman's decision. Also, termination of genetically flawed is no more natural selection than abortion (IMO). Natural selection just means the species is subject to nature's fitness tests.

 

[LuciferSam]

You want control over your genetic material, there are many inexpensive and readily available ways to keep it under your sole control w/o turning women into incubators! ;-)

Spousal approval is not required for a hunting license either.

And I would posit that many abortions happen because of failure of contraceptive methods or concerns about the potential quality of life for that child, so I don't think it's a backwards step for evolution.

I agree. and not only that, IMHO a lot of people who are ill-equipped to have children are ill-equipped period. Abortion prevents propagation of their genetic material.

 

[30A Skunkape]

Actually at that point, the father has no way of proving that it's his child, so I believe morally, legally, and ethically it should be solely the woman's decision. Also, termination of genetically flawed is no more natural selection than abortion (IMO). Natural selection just means the species is subject to nature's fitness tests.

Chorionic villous sampling or amniocentesis could prove paternity. Of course no woman would be obligated to undergo the procedure, so I guess you are correct. Abortion is not natural selection as you point out, my point was that some offspring that would not be viable outside the womb more than a few hours have no long term survival impact by being terminated before birth. The same can't be said of a viable fetus. Nature intends for the hardiest of the species to survive and reproduce;terminating viable offspring goes against this principle.

 

[30ashopper]

Chorionic villous sampling or amniocentesis could prove paternity. Of course no woman would be obligated to undergo the procedure, so I guess you are correct. Abortion is not natural selection as you point out, my point was that some offspring that would not be viable outside the womb more than a few hours have no long term survival impact by being terminated before birth. The same can't be said of a viable fetus. Nature intends for the hardiest of the species to survive and reproduce;terminating viable offspring goes against this principle.

Give it a decade or so, genetic engineering will soon put mother nature out of business. Evolution? We don't need no stinkin' evolution! "I'll take an egg for a girl, six foot one, blue eyes, light brown hair, i.q. of 170, moral stature, and she should lean republican." "That'll be a hundred dollars please." ching! "Please read the instructions carefully. Next please."

 

[LuciferSam]

Chorionic villous sampling or amniocentesis could prove paternity. Of course no woman would be obligated to undergo the procedure, so I guess you are correct. Abortion is not natural selection as you point out, my point was that some offspring that would not be viable outside the womb more than a few hours have no long term survival impact by being terminated before birth. The same can't be said of a viable fetus. Nature intends for the hardiest of the species to survive and reproduce;terminating viable offspring goes against this principle.

I wouldn't say nature has any intention at all. Nature doesn't know or care what happens IMO, unless you're talking about the nature of human consciousness. It just so happens that the fittest, by whatever measure of fitness is used, tend to do better in the natural world. This is not always the case, as natural selection has bouts of negative and neutral effects as well.

Do we really have some sort of obligation to follow along the path that we think nature would have taken? I think our increased life expectancy is due to the fact that we've managed to fight nature tooth and nail. There are plenty of arguments against abortion, I just don't think the laws of nature and natural selection are one of them. You certainly could use the "do no harm" argument, but I feel that's a rule for which nature has a high failure rate, and feels no guilt, shame or remorse in the aftermath.

 

[Lynnie]

I think the Pope and Cardinal should read this thread.

 

[30A Skunkape]

I wouldn't say nature has any intention at all. Nature doesn't know or care what happens IMO, unless you're talking about the nature of human consciousness. It just so happens that the fittest, by whatever measure of fitness is used, tend to do better in the natural world. This is not always the case, as natural selection has bouts of negative and neutral effects as well.

Do we really have some sort of obligation to follow along the path that we think nature would have taken? I think our increased life expectancy is due to the fact that we've managed to fight nature tooth and nail. There are plenty of arguments against abortion, I just don't think the laws of nature and natural selection are one of them. You certainly could use the "do no harm" argument, but I feel that's a rule for which nature has a high failure rate, and feels no guilt, shame or remorse in the aftermath.

Sam, I don't pretend to support or lament abortion legality or ethics based on nature...somehow or the other I was trying to make a point about Geo's analogy between hunting deer and abortion. I guess I failed.

Anyway, I am thankful that for whatever reason humans have been granted the ability to fight nature tooth and nail. We live in unprecedentedly good times thanks to science. As someone who has watched small babies succumb to infectious diseases, complications of prematurity and birth defects, I realize full well that 'nature' doesn't give a damn about humanity!

 

[Alicia Leonard]

Give it a decade or so, genetic engineering will soon put mother nature out of business. Evolution? We don't need no stinkin' evolution! "I'll take an egg for a girl, six foot one, blue eyes, light brown hair, i.q. of 170, moral stature, and she should lean republican." "That'll be a hundred dollars please." ching! "Please read the instructions carefully. Next please."

That is complete fiction.

 

[LuciferSam]

Sam, I don't pretend to support or lament abortion legality or ethics based on nature...somehow or the other I was trying to make a point about Geo's analogy between hunting deer and abortion. I guess I failed.

Anyway, I am thankful that for whatever reason humans have been granted the ability to fight nature tooth and nail. We live in unprecedentedly good times thanks to science. As someone who has watched small babies succumb to infectious diseases, complications of prematurity and birth defects, I realize full well that 'nature' doesn't give a damn about humanity!

It's possible I missed something in your message. I think you were saying that the net effect of hunting has been positive for humans, so if we're going to intervene, let's do things that emulate the positive side of natural selection.