What's More Evil - Abortion Or Infanticide? Posted: 02-17-07 15:28pm
I've read countless topics pertaining to
women giving birth and then killing the
infants, or abandoning them and leaving
said babies to die. One article I read
recently detailed the story of a teenage
girl who gave birth in her bathroom and
then left the infant in the bathtub after
cutting the umbilical cord, and the infant
eventually died of asphyxiation.
I've read sotries of women drowing,
baking, microwaving, and freezing their
babies...Just to name a few of the many
horrific stories i've read of the deaths
of innocent infants. Could someone please
tell me how abortion would not have been
humane in cases like these? But I guess
abortion is far more evil because it robs
fetuses of their future existences,
whereas slaughtering a newborn allows it
to take a few breaths before it dies (and
thus fulfilling the desires of the
pro-lifers).
Thoughts?
|
Sunflower_pie81
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2006 Posts: 5041 Location: to hell with this crap
Posted: 02-17-07 16:45pm
I believe that in cases like these
abortion would have been the better
choice. I feel for a child that has been
birth and then doesn't receive the
treatment they need to survive. With the
way the law is where you can bring a baby
and drop them off with no questions asked
there is no reason to have a baby and then
procede to kill it.
In these cases abortion would be the
better choice. I don't agree with it but
to have a baby and then kill it by
abonding them is homicide.
|
Jules
Moderator
Joined: 19 Aug 2006 Posts: 3840 Location: Merrie Englande, UK
Thanks: 91
Thanked:77
Posted: 02-17-07 17:11pm
If indeed the only choices available are
abortion or murder then the lesser of the
two evils would have to be abortion
because the baby is at least killed in
controlled conditions and it is
(hopefully) a quick death.
However, both 'rob the baby of its
future existence' so that point is moot.
|
Meandering Away
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 06 Jul 2005 Posts: 535
Re: What's More Evil - Abortion Or Infanticide? Posted: 02-18-07 08:08am
cambion
wrote:
i've read countless topics
pertaining to women giving birth and then
killing the infants, or abandoning them
and leaving said babies to die. One
article I read recently detailed the story
of a teenage girl who gave birth in her
bathroom and then left the infant in the
bathtub after cutting the umbilical cord,
and the infant eventually died of
asphyxiation.
I've read sotries of women drowing,
baking, microwaving, and freezing their
babies...Just to name a few of the many
horrific stories i've read of the deaths
of innocent infants. Could someone
please tell me how abortion would not have
been humane in cases like these? But I
guess abortion is far more evil because it
robs fetuses of their future existences,
whereas slaughtering a newborn allows it
to take a few breaths before it dies (and
thus fulfilling the desires of the
pro-lifers).
Thoughts?
maybe because one is villified already and
one is not.
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 4159 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 159
Thanked:16
Re: What's More Evil - Abortion Or Infanticide? Posted: 02-18-07 11:04am
cowboys
wrote:
cambion
wrote:
i've read countless topics
pertaining to women giving birth and then
killing the infants, or abandoning them
and leaving said babies to die. One
article I read recently detailed the story
of a teenage girl who gave birth in her
bathroom and then left the infant in the
bathtub after cutting the umbilical cord,
and the infant eventually died of
asphyxiation.
I've read sotries of women drowing,
baking, microwaving, and freezing their
babies...Just to name a few of the many
horrific stories i've read of the deaths
of innocent infants. Could someone
please tell me how abortion would not have
been humane in cases like these? But I
guess abortion is far more evil because it
robs fetuses of their future existences,
whereas slaughtering a newborn allows it
to take a few breaths before it dies (and
thus fulfilling the desires of the
pro-lifers).
Thoughts?
maybe because one is villified already and
one is not.
both are vilified.
I think abortion in this situation would
have been the best choice. I bet the
hardline prolifers would feel this way,
too, if only they had the balls to answer.
|
Cambion
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 08 Nov 2005 Posts: 747
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-18-07 13:33pm
I posted this topic mainly because of the
pro-life attitude of screaming to keep a
fetus alive to term and then not giving a
damn the second it's born.
I agree that both abortion and infanticide
are villified, but think about it in this
manner: if we got rid of abortion,
infanticide would most likely become more
common - would anyone disagree with this?
As far as women who kill their babies,
perhaps they live in places where abortion
is illegal and had no means of
transportation to a place where it is
legal. I don't know what places have
adopted the policy of mothers being able
to leave their babies at fire stations if
they don't want the babies. I'm sure some
of these women have psychological
disorders (antisocial tendancies, etc.).
I wonder if pro-lifers realize how many
more unwanted children will die at the
hands of their mothers if abortion is ever
outlawed for good worldwide.
Quote:
however, both
'rob the baby of its future existence' so
that point is
moot.
when I said future existence, I meant it
in terms of life after birth. Aborted
fetuses never reach life after birth (but
i'm not denying they are alive, so please
don't go into a diatribe about that),
whereas babies do. The point I was making
is that babies get to 'live' in the more
understood sense, whereas aborted fetuses
do not (they don't get to breathe, see,
etc.). I'm not trying to argue or
disagree over this - i'm just trying to
explain the purpose behind that statement.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-18-07 16:11pm
cambion
wrote:
i posted this topic mainly
because of the pro-life attitude of
screaming to keep a fetus alive to term
and then not giving a damn the second it's
born.
I agree that both abortion and infanticide
are villified, but think about it in this
manner: if we got rid of abortion,
infanticide would most likely become more
common - would anyone disagree with this?
of course it would... China is a great
xample. Though abortion isn't illegal
there - it is in fact used quite a bit to
keep their population under control -
unwanted babies are still born. These
babies are then left to die because they
are unwanted. The reason they are
unwanted doesn't matter in this particular
debate (it happens to be the fact that
they re female) and everyone knows why
anyway.
To give my opinion on the original
question, infantacide is millions of times
worse; this is based off of what many of
you know as the "viability" theory: once
born, that baby has as much of a right to
life as you or i. Killing it now, is
murder.
Quote:
as far as women
who kill their babies, perhaps they live
in places where abortion is illegal and
had no means of transportation to a place
where it is legal. I don't know what
places have adopted the policy of mothers
being able to leave their babies at fire
stations if they don't want the babies.
I'm sure some of these women have
psychological disorders (antisocial
tendancies, etc.). I wonder if
pro-lifers realize how many more unwanted
children will die at the hands of their
mothers if abortion is ever outlawed for
good worldwide.
Quote:
however, both
'rob the baby of its future existence' so
that point is
moot.
when I said future existence, I meant it
in terms of life after birth. Aborted
fetuses never reach life after birth (but
i'm not denying they are alive, so please
don't go into a diatribe about that),
whereas babies do. The point I was
making is that babies get to 'live' in the
more understood sense, whereas aborted
fetuses do not (they don't get to breathe,
see, etc.). I'm not trying to argue or
disagree over this - i'm just trying to
explain the purpose behind that
statement.
right; a fetus dosn't have many, if any,
memories to pine over if it is aborted.
There is no "loss", in that sense. The
fetus hasn't really contribute anything to
society either - except an ongoing debate,
lol - and make some vomit from his mommy's
stomach during morning sickness. I
suppose if you want to get really silly, a
fetus contribues to the booming busines of
maternity clothing, though at the point
when most fetuses are aborted, the mother
doesn't really have muchneed for maternity
clothing.
