How one should handle an ethical dilemma

Welcome to Coffeetalk. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2

How one should handle an ethical dilemma
Topic Started: Apr 16 2006, 08:40 PM (423 Views)
Drew	Apr 16 2006, 08:40 PM Post #1
Apparently not Cybersquirt's favorite person Posts: 373 Group: Members Member #2 Joined: February 11, 2006	I have been told to be more respectful of other's opinions on abortion. It strikes me as funny that anyone would expect that and leads me to believe that those who are pro-choice don't understand what is going on "under the hood" with those who are pro-life (or at least with me). It all boils down to one question.....when faced with an ethical dilemma (a situation in which the wants/needs of one party may conflict with the wants/needs of another party) one has several ways available to adjudicate that dilemma. One is to require proof that there is anything [i]wrong[/i] with the action in question in order to condemn it. Another is to require proof that the action in question OK before allowing it. Thus: the abortion debate. There really isn't concrete evidence upon which to base a cogent debate on the matter. Just a question. Do we concrete proof in order to condone abortion or do we require concrete evidence in order to condemn it. Either way we decide, someone could be hurt. For the mother looking at abortion there is financial strain, societal condemnation, phsycological issues.......a whole laundry list of things she may have to deal with if she were to be denied the right to abortion. For the unborn child, there is death. Without concrete evidence proving that abortion is not a violation of an unborn child's right to exist I argue that abortion should not be condoned because the stakes of the unborn child are much higher than the stakes of the potential mother. I readilly admit that I could be wrong, but that's my point, here. When given a situation in which you could be wrong, I feel you should [i]always[/i] choose the option which will cause the least ammount of harm if you were wrong. Opinions do not matter. My opinion doesn't even matter. If concrete evidence can be provided showing incontroveribly that abortion does not carry an ethical dilemma, than I would be pro-choice. As it stands today, abortion is an ethical dilemma. I am not disrespecting anyone elses opinions. It is simply a known fact that [i]IF[/i] (I made the "if" really obvious so you would notice that I said "if") abortion is depriving life from someone who [i]wants[\i] to live, then the one who is losing his/her life is losing more than the one who is being forced to birth and raise (or go to the trouble of adopting out) the child. So, please, stop making "pro-lifers should agree to fund the birth an rearing of unwanted children" statements. To one such as me, it appears that you are measuring human life against money. I know that you don't mean to, but that is how someone from my side of the issue sees it. To one who is pro-life, such statements appear petty because a pro-lifer sees the issue (and it's consequences) differently.
	Poor baby. Couldn't find a fight anywhere else so you had to come here, huh. -Cyber.


Blood_Raven	Apr 16 2006, 09:02 PM Post #2
Come burn with me. Posts: 830 Group: Members Member #10 Joined: February 21, 2006	The paragraph is your friend.
	TheFrozen North forums. Where it's at. Mood for today: Perfection


discharger12	Apr 16 2006, 09:05 PM Post #3
Green Posts: 33 Group: Members Member #32 Joined: April 11, 2006	Obviously, Miss GOTOSCHOOLTOLEARNGRAMMAR can't answer say anything back seriously, just once, ever. I agree, Drew.



Joe	Apr 16 2006, 09:15 PM Post #4
Coffea Canephora Posts: 725 Group: Members Member #30 Joined: April 10, 2006	[QUOTE=Drew,Apr 16 2006, 01:40 PM] To one such as me, it appears that you are measuring human life against money. I know that you don't mean to, but that is how someone from my side of the issue sees it. To one who is pro-life, such statements appear petty because a pro-lifer sees the issue (and it's consequences) differently. [/QUOTE] I think this is the most important issue, here. The other side seems to not understand that to you and I, abortion is no different than any other forced death (intentional or not). I'm not sure they understand that we see the unborn as human beings with the same rights as anyone else. Look, ladies, I understand that some of you do not see an unborn child as a human being, but perhaps as a clump of cells or whatever, But to someone like me, and possibly Drew, your comments can come off as very selfish and callous. This is why I brought up the idea of a man not paying to support a child he doesn't want. The pro-choicers here did not seem to like that idea very much; I don't either. But the concept is the same: it comes down to convenience and money on both sides. Cases involving rape and incest make up such a small amount of abortions that we cannot consider them to be a legitimate point of discussion. I think abortion is still wrong for those situations, anyway. To end my rant, I think what Drew is trying to say is that each side needs to understand the other more thoroughly on this issue.
	In the shadow of the light from a black sun Frigid statue standing icy blue and numb Where are the frost giants I've begged for protection? I'm freezing


Corvis	Apr 16 2006, 09:16 PM Post #5
Grand Maestro Posts: 54 Group: Members Member #23 Joined: March 29, 2006	I fucked a girl and she got pregnant and then she had the baby and I threw!!! It!!! In!!! The!!! River!!! Do you guys believe THAT??? Do you want to argue with me about THAT??? Let's ARGUE!!! YEAH!!!
	MASTER OF DISCHORD


Blood_Raven	Apr 16 2006, 09:22 PM Post #6
Come burn with me. Posts: 830 Group: Members Member #10 Joined: February 21, 2006	WOW Like fucking wow!!!!!!!!!!!
	TheFrozen North forums. Where it's at. Mood for today: Perfection


discharger12	Apr 16 2006, 09:22 PM Post #7
Green Posts: 33 Group: Members Member #32 Joined: April 11, 2006	[QUOTE=Joe,Apr 16 2006, 09:15 PM] Cases involving rape and icelus make up such a small amount of abortions that we cannot consider them to be a legitimate point of discussion. [/QUOTE] :(



THE_MACK	Apr 16 2006, 09:27 PM Post #8
The Lyrical Gangsta� Posts: 77 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: February 22, 2006	[QUOTE=Joe,Apr 16 2006, 09:15 PM] I think this is the most important issue, here. The other side seems to not understand that to you and I, abortion is no different than any other forced death (intentional or not). I'm not sure they understand that we see the unborn as human beings with the same rights as anyone else. [/QUOTE] Is it immoral to destroy something which has no feeling and no experience of even notion of life? (Yes, I'm aware that there are various theories on the exact time an unborn child develops consciousness.) You wouldn't give a second thought to cutting down a tree, which is destroying life in very much the same way. Presumably your argument is the sanctity of its potential to develop into something greater. From a religious perspective, I can acknowledge this, but from a purely scientific viewpoint, is it any more human than a lone gamete or an undifferentiated stem cell? The answer is, of course, "I have absolutely no idea". I'm usually extremely quick to pass judgement and condemn opposing views, but this is very much a situation in which I'd like to hope somebody will come up with a better answer than I can. [QUOTE]Cases involving rape and incest make up such a small amount of abortions that we cannot consider them to be a legitimate point of discussion.[/QUOTE] This is fundamentally evasive. No matter what the proprotion, they are still cases you have to account for. Put yourself in the situation, and consider what you would want. I'm led to believe, perhaps incorrectly, that abortion typically does look a whole lot more attractive when you're actually put on the spot.



Alarielle	Apr 16 2006, 09:44 PM Post #9
White Posts: 53 Group: Members Member #7 Joined: February 21, 2006	I don't think it's fair to say that "pro-choice" people value money over life. I certainly don't. The reason I'm pro-choice, as you put it, is that I don't think it's right to bring unwanted children into the world. I can't think of anything worse than knowing that your parents never wanted you and, in some cases, your existence has ruined their life. If I got pregnant just now, it would ruin my life entirely. I could never complete medical school, therefore never join my preferred profession and would resent that child forever. I don't think that's fair when the child can't help it. Moreover, I don't think it's fair to condemn abortion when the person was using contraception and it failed. This is not particularly uncommon, and it most certainly is not any person's fault when it happens. The fact of the matter is it does happen, and people should be allowed to make whatever decision is right for them.



Drew	Apr 16 2006, 10:16 PM Post #10
Apparently not Cybersquirt's favorite person Posts: 373 Group: Members Member #2 Joined: February 11, 2006	[QUOTE=Alarielle,Apr 16 2006, 09:44 PM] I don't think it's fair to say that "pro-choice" people value money over life. I certainly don't. [/QUOTE] I don't either, because I understand that people who are pro-choice see the issue differently. It would be foolish to meaningfully assert that one who is pro-choice does. My main commentary, here, is that if those who are pro-choice fail to comprehend what is [i]really[/i] going on in the minds of those who are pro-life and vice versa, we will never be able to reach any kind of reconcilliation on the subject. Us pro-life types should make the concession of not plastering pictures of aborted fetuses everywhere and you pro-choicers need to avoid making direct comparisons like the "if you are pro-life you should footh the bill" argument since we, viewing the issue as one not of choice or freedom or reproductive rights but one of murder, are going to interpret this as a direct equation between life and money. Coming from my perspective, such a statement is crass, at best. I do my best to avoid personally insulting those who hold the pro-choice stance and to work to understand that POV and I ask for the same courtesy in return, which I haven't been getting.
	Poor baby. Couldn't find a fight anywhere else so you had to come here, huh. -Cyber.


Joe	Apr 17 2006, 12:09 AM Post #11
Coffea Canephora Posts: 725 Group: Members Member #30 Joined: April 10, 2006	[QUOTE]Is it immoral to destroy something which has no feeling and no experience of even notion of life? (Yes, I'm aware that there are various theories on the exact time an unborn child develops consciousness.) You wouldn't give a second thought to cutting down a tree, which is destroying life in very much the same way. Presumably your argument is the sanctity of its potential to develop into something greater. From a religious perspective, I can acknowledge this, but from a purely scientific viewpoint, is it any more human than a lone gamete or an undifferentiated stem cell?[/QUOTE] I made the "human being" distinction. A tree is not a human being and, like you suggested, will never have sentience or sapience. The difference between undifferentiated stem cells and lone gametes is that they won't become human beings. [QUOTE]This is fundamentally evasive. No matter what the proprotion, they are still cases you have to account for. Put yourself in the situation, and consider what you would want. I'm led to believe, perhaps incorrectly, that abortion typically does look a whole lot more attractive when you're actually put on the spot.[/QUOTE] I don't think the choice bears any different considerations. The child's life is not made less valuable whether the conception was through rape, incest, or whether or not the mother's life is in danger.
	In the shadow of the light from a black sun Frigid statue standing icy blue and numb Where are the frost giants I've begged for protection? I'm freezing


Joe	Apr 17 2006, 12:12 AM Post #12
Coffea Canephora Posts: 725 Group: Members Member #30 Joined: April 10, 2006	[QUOTE=Alarielle,Apr 16 2006, 02:44 PM] I don't think it's fair to say that "pro-choice" people value money over life. I certainly don't. The reason I'm pro-choice, as you put it, is that I don't think it's right to bring unwanted children into the world. I can't think of anything worse than knowing that your parents never wanted you and, in some cases, your existence has ruined their life. If I got pregnant just now, it would ruin my life entirely. I could never complete medical school, therefore never join my preferred profession and would resent that child forever. I don't think that's fair when the child can't help it. Moreover, I don't think it's fair to condemn abortion when the person was using contraception and it failed. This is not particularly uncommon, and it most certainly is not any person's fault when it happens. The fact of the matter is it does happen, and people should be allowed to make whatever decision is right for them. [/QUOTE] You could always give it up for adoption.
	In the shadow of the light from a black sun Frigid statue standing icy blue and numb Where are the frost giants I've begged for protection? I'm freezing


jester	Apr 17 2006, 03:07 PM Post #13
Green Posts: 32 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: February 21, 2006	Why does Pro-Life sound so holy while Pro-Choice sounds like a cheapskate shopping trip to the next mall to get a new pair of shoes? You can either argue from the median of a situation or the extremes. I prefer the extremes as any theory has to be proven against the extremes not some muddy middle ground. Death penalty is wrong,because the judicial process is very often flawed. So if you get it wrong once, you are done with this idea. The decision in the case of abortion lies with the parents and the parents alone. Abortion is a nightmare to be put through. It is not a decision to have your nails done or have an abortion as the zealots like to shout in the streets. If my wife would be pregnant and I had to make a choice to rather loose my wife or my unborn child. I keep my fingers crossed to be spared from such a decision, but I think the real-life choice is obvious. I am also baffled that people who claim that gods wants this or that still hook people to a machine and watch them rot instead of giving everybody a chance to channel their grief and get on with their life. link to a guy who made me think about this: [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer[/URL]
	You maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God... damn you all to hell!


Alarielle	Apr 17 2006, 03:18 PM Post #14
White Posts: 53 Group: Members Member #7 Joined: February 21, 2006	An excellent example, Jester :)



Drew	Apr 17 2006, 03:22 PM Post #15
Apparently not Cybersquirt's favorite person Posts: 373 Group: Members Member #2 Joined: February 11, 2006	In know Peter Singer's work well. He's vegan, after all... In situations where the mother's life is threatened I have no problems with abortion. At that point you are measuring life against life. In other cases the measurement is one of life against the effects said life vs. finances, convenience, career, societal ramifications, etc. Ethically speaking, they don't equal out.
	Poor baby. Couldn't find a fight anywhere else so you had to come here, huh. -Cyber.


jester	Apr 17 2006, 04:09 PM Post #16
Green Posts: 32 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: February 21, 2006	The funny thing is that I am probably in theory way more conservative than you are on that matter. I think a child has to have a family. If you are going to have a child with the idea to throw it out into the wild, then I think you should either live in celibacy or get better sex education on how to use a condom. What I expect from my parents is nothing less than a fair fighting chance even a flying start, if possible. Should abusive parents have (more) children? Does that mean I discourage Riff-Raff to reproduce?In most circumstances I would think they are better off and their unborn are as well, if they get a vasectomy and cable.
	You maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God... damn you all to hell!


Drew	Apr 17 2006, 04:25 PM Post #17
Apparently not Cybersquirt's favorite person Posts: 373 Group: Members Member #2 Joined: February 11, 2006	Frankly, the only person I want deciding whether I live or die is [i]me[/i].
	Poor baby. Couldn't find a fight anywhere else so you had to come here, huh. -Cyber.


jester	Apr 17 2006, 05:07 PM Post #18
Green Posts: 32 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: February 21, 2006	What constitutes the 'I' you want to decide about? When does it come into existence and is awareness of this self a prerequisite for that choice?
	You maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God... damn you all to hell!


Drew	Apr 17 2006, 07:09 PM Post #19
Apparently not Cybersquirt's favorite person Posts: 373 Group: Members Member #2 Joined: February 11, 2006	I believe that everyone should be given the same courtesy that one wishes for himself. I don't want other people making decisions about whether I live or die, so I feel that no one has the right to take a life unless another life is in jeopardy.
	Poor baby. Couldn't find a fight anywhere else so you had to come here, huh. -Cyber.


Joe	Apr 17 2006, 07:33 PM Post #20
Coffea Canephora Posts: 725 Group: Members Member #30 Joined: April 10, 2006	[QUOTE=Drew,Apr 17 2006, 12:09 PM] so I feel that no one has the right to take a life unless another life is in jeopardy. [/QUOTE] Yep!
	In the shadow of the light from a black sun Frigid statue standing icy blue and numb Where are the frost giants I've begged for protection? I'm freezing


jester	Apr 17 2006, 08:45 PM Post #21
Green Posts: 32 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: February 21, 2006	Yep! I totally agree. Now we just have to define your ideas of causality and being in jeopardy. If you want to say that noone has the right to take a life then I am all for it. That is why it is unchristian to retaliate in kind. Now what about situations where you cannot decide?
	You maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God... damn you all to hell!


Joe	Apr 17 2006, 09:12 PM Post #22
Coffea Canephora Posts: 725 Group: Members Member #30 Joined: April 10, 2006	How do you mean?
	In the shadow of the light from a black sun Frigid statue standing icy blue and numb Where are the frost giants I've begged for protection? I'm freezing


Blackwing	Apr 17 2006, 09:12 PM Post #23
Hot Chocolate Posts: 116 Group: Members Member #16 Joined: February 25, 2006	I guess the basic question here is: when does a cluster of cells turn into a human being? At which point does a cluster of cells get a soul? Current science doesn't have an answer to that and there has been lots of different ideas about over the course of history. Just to take two extremes: every time a woman menstruates she commits a murder (IIRC from India) and after an infant is named which is 5 days after birth (from ancient Rome). Which one is right? Is neither right? Why? Why is your opinion more right? It all comes down to faith because we just don't know. That's why I don't care to judge someone else based on my arbitary morals which come from this culture and are based on patriarchal and misogynistic past.
	Angel: "What? I'm not allowed to hit people?" Wesley: "Not people capable of genocide." Angel: "Those are exactly the kinds of people I should be able to hit!"


Bex	Apr 17 2006, 09:15 PM Post #24
puppet dictator Posts: 3,211 Group: Admin Member #6 Joined: February 14, 2006	[QUOTE=Joe,Apr 17 2006, 02:12 PM] How do you mean? [/QUOTE] I believe Jester would be raising the question of euthanasia, where the person whose life is at stake is no longer capable of making a decision or (at least) communicating it.
	I belong to one of those families that does not speak to or see its members as often as we should, but if someone needed anyone to fall on a sword for her, there would be a queue waiting to commit the deed. -Min Jin Lee


Joe	Apr 17 2006, 09:29 PM Post #25
Coffea Canephora Posts: 725 Group: Members Member #30 Joined: April 10, 2006	[QUOTE=Bex,Apr 17 2006, 02:15 PM] [QUOTE=Joe,Apr 17 2006, 02:12 PM] How do you mean? [/QUOTE] I believe Jester would be raising the question of euthanasia, where the person whose life is at stake is no longer capable of making a decision or (at least) communicating it. [/QUOTE] Well it's really a case-by-case thing. Like with Terry Schiavo, she wasn't really euthanized. She was being kept alive when she'd have died naturally.
	In the shadow of the light from a black sun Frigid statue standing icy blue and numb Where are the frost giants I've begged for protection? I'm freezing


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Archive #01 · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2