Irrespective of lawful conduct, are all instances of terminating a viable post natal human mass, bad.What would your opinion be?
Abortion is murder by definition.
Therefore when done lawfully, abortion is not murder by definition.
As owners we have a broad right to do with our bodies what we want and maintain our bodily integrity as we see fit.
I am not talking about the "right to your body argument" right now.
My only question is do you think it is morally acceptable to kill a child in the womb, and why?
Ok, follow up question.Why?
Because at the point of conception, it’s a brainless body.
During the earliest stages of development, a fetus is on autopilot. It is not unconscious, it is pre-conscious. This means its consciousness does not exist.There is no sentience or autonomy.Defining 'murder' in the moral sense is both unclear and entirely subjective. But even if we were to define abortion as murder at this stage, then to be morally consistent, we'd have to consider every human being a murderer because they kill skin-cells every day.
Coma patients are unconscious.
- If the coma patient demonstrates a possibility for recovery, then terminating their life could be seen as murder. Because the patient was sentient before their unresponsive state and had intended to live for longer, and did not give pre-consent to having their life ended. It’s also likely they weren’t put into a coma voluntarily and after waking up, they will still want to live on.
- If the head trauma for a coma patient makes the damage irreparable and the life beyond saving, then euthanizing them makes no difference anyway.
The fetus during conception does not process thought, emotion, or demonstrate the capacity for intention. So the comparison to a coma patient is moot anyway.
