As a sequel to my previous question....If it is illegal to cause harm to a dead body eventhough life is no longer present, why is it legal to intentionaly take a life by aborting a living feotus...? It doesn't make sense to me.
2006-10-28 12:08:40 · 8 answers · asked by luvaduck 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Ian...i take your point but many aborted babies are able to sustain life outside of the womb even if only for a short time...does a deliberate act to shorten that life not amount to murder..?
2006-10-28 12:23:35 · update #1
There is no right or wrong answer you see, and the view of the issue varies in people, so you can never get a right or wrong answer, or any real answer in fact. People are going to think this is a wrong answer, and ofc everyone has their own opinion and I'm not going into depth about the issue, and there is a very fine line between life and death and its a very easy issue to raise questions about, as is euthanasia, you cant get to the bottom of it and no one ever will :) as i said people are going to dis agree with me which is exactly my point, its just one big huge debate that you cant end and no one can win... lol
2006-10-28 12:17:40 · answer #1 · answered by stuuu 1 · 3⤊ 2⤋
The only reason it is legal is because so many people terrminate their unborn child ....
To many people a feotus is not alive until a certain number of weeks .... just a group of cells is still a living thing ... people in the UK feel it is better to kill a baby rather than at least try to give the child a good life. In countries where abortion is illegal there are LESS teen parents ... therefore should we not adopt a similar policy ... then that would not be an option for people ... oh if i get pregnant I can always have a termination .... UK law needs improving ... throughout all areas.
2006-10-28 20:31:05 · answer #2 · answered by Jan10 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Many believe that before 24 weeks the foetus is not yet a human being and therefore abortion is not actually taking a human life.
Here's a quote from my source:
~A fetus is human, in the sense that it contains human DNA; however, a fetus, like an embryo, is not a human being, as it has no means of independent physiological existence (as does a baby, child, or adult). As such, it is a potential human being, just like an acorn is a potential oak tree. It contains all of the DNA of an oak tree, but it is not an oak tree.~
That's what others think, although I don't necessarily agree. The law obviously seems to go along with this though.
Some people now claim that the foetus is more advanced at 24 weeks than previously thought and so are campaigning to have the time limit made earlier.
I read this week that some mothers were disgusted to find that a hospital had thrown their aborted foetuses into a large rubbish incinerator rather than cremate them properly- this confused me, why would you care more about your "baby" when it's dead than when it was alive?
2006-10-28 19:26:51 · answer #3 · answered by Vic 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
At the moment, until birth the child is not classified as a person (rightly or wrongly depending on your own opinion). So as a result, it is classed as a part of the parent's body, and if the parent no longer wants it there, or it poses a clear danger to her health, then it can be surgically removed.
As far as causing harm to a dead body, technically that cannot be illegal as such, otherwise pathologists would be breaking the law every time they performed a post mortem (autopsy), as would embalmers at funeral homes, so there must be more to this.
I would suspect that it is illegal for a non-medical person to harm a dead body, and in this example it is of course equally illegal for a non-medical person to perform an abortion.
2006-10-28 19:30:54 · answer #4 · answered by Lynn S 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Its that old chestnut about conscious self awareness isnt it.
At what point is a feotus alive, you cant say its alive from the moment of fertilisation as at that point it is only a cell and you see a dead person has living tissue and cells in them for some time after death too. More living cells than a feotus.
If you know the point at which life starts and stops 100% please let us all know.
2006-10-28 19:16:43 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Good question. We have the same moral dilemma here in the United States. I am sure no one will truly be able to answer this question.
2006-10-28 19:13:06 · answer #6 · answered by damdawg 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
This is life. Haven't you worked out yet that there are many areas where it just doesn't make sense?
2006-10-28 19:13:44 · answer #7 · answered by migdalski 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The law is an a*s.
2006-10-28 19:13:09 · answer #8 · answered by Polo 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋