Comment 1: I completely agree with “Feminists for Life”. They “oppose all forms of violence, including abortion, because they are inconsistent with the core feminist principles of justice, non-violence and non-discrimination”. They “raise arguments that are specifically related to women's rights: 1. Abortion sidesteps oppression of women. It’s provides a way of side-stepping other real issues: rapes, abusive relationships, education, poverty… 2. Abortion does not free women but allows society not to cater to (provide) women's needs: maternity leave, workplace, flexible scheduling, childcare, school… 3. Abortion damages women. It can damage the long-term physical and emotional health of women 4. Abortion violates feminist principles. They believe in a woman's right to control her body, and she deserves this right no matter where she lives, even if she's still living inside her mother's womb. 5. Abortion is a male plot. It’s a way for men to have sex with women without having to take responsibility for any resulting children. Feminists for Life are active in trying to promote practical solutions to the causes that drive women to abortion.” If you want to read more about these interesting arguments: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/abortion/mother/against_1.shtml I invite you to read my next comment where I wrote about how I think this matter should be tackled.
Abortion is a very sensitive and controversial issue, so first of all I’d like to make clear that I feel very sorry for the women who have had to face this terrible decision and that I’m not blaming them at all. My comment is about the general concept and about what government and society should do in my view. In my opinion the root of this problem lies in the definition of “human being” and in when a human life is worth it. Regarding the first point “the scientific evidence is quite plain: at the moment of fusion of human sperm and egg, a new entity comes into existence which is distinctly human, alive, and an individual organism, that is, a fully human being (*)”. Therefore the unborn child is a human being entitled to rights. With regard to the second point I side with those who think that it’s very dangerous to lay down the requirements which a human being has to fulfill to be life-worthy (deserving of life). Throughout history of humankind there’ve been many examples of where this can lead us. The modern German society of the thirties and forties experimented with this matter resulting in dreadful consequences. And unfortunately the value of human life is in the subtext of abortion and euthanasia laws. By counting the number of your cells or by measuring the level of your intelligence and feelings these laws state whether “you” have the right to live or your mother have the right to put an end to your life. It seems to me like a very unfair and biased border. For instead: why the law protects your live when you reach a certain number of days inside your mother’s womb and not one day before (earlier)? I’ve written “you” because you did not come from a zygote, an embryo, a fetus or an adolescent but you once were a zygote, an embryo, a fetus and adolescent. Therefore, since it’s not fair to allow anybody to establish the criteria on which the life of another human can be taken, we should protect and nurture every human being. The right to be born should always outweigh the right of an individual to control their own body. Besides as there’re a lot of families filing for adoption, governments and societies should support women during the pregnancy in every way so they can choose after the delivery between giving the children up for adoption and raising them. In both cases every necessary resource should be endowed. On the other hand when abortions are accepted and easy to obtain, people use them as a form of birth control so it increases the number of human beings whose lives or deaths are in our hands. Governments should allocate enough money and resources to provide every woman with an infallible and safe (side effects free) birth control method. I can’t understand why we can walk on the Moon but we can’t solve the problem of unintended pregnancies (pregnancies that are mistimed, unplanned or unwanted at the time of conception) ones and for all. We should lay the stress on this matter. We‘ve been studying at class the creative thinking so let’s be creative: let’s stop focusing in the specific abortion question and let’s gaze at the whole picture together. We may start for the statement that both sides (anti-abortion activists as much as pro-choice campaigners) share in this video: No woman wants to resort to having an abortion. Therefore let’s force governments and the scientific community (which have mainly been ruled by men) to discover something that allows women to conceive a child only when they want to. Maybe if creative women had been ruling the word for millennia as men had been, abortion didn’t exist because we would’ve discovered a way to save us an unintended pregnancy. (*) Read scientific evidence of the existence of human life before birth in my next comment.
(*) “Here is a thumbnail sketch of the scientific evidence of the existence of human life before birth. These are irrefutable facts, about which there is no dispute in the scientific community. At the moment when a human sperm penetrates a human ovum, or egg, generally in the upper portion of the Fallopian Tube, a new entity comes into existence. Zygoteis the name of the first cell formed at conception, the earliest developmental stage of the human embryo, followed by the Morula and Blastocyst stages. Is it human? Is it alive? Is it just a cell or is it an actual organism, a "being?" The zygote is composed of human DNA and other human molecules, so its nature is undeniably human and not some other species. The new human zygote has a genetic composition that is absolutely unique from itself, different from any other human that has ever existed, including that of its mother (thus disproving the claim that what is involved in abortion is merely "a woman and her body"). This DNA includes a complete "design," guiding not only early development but even hereditary attributes that will appear in childhood and adulthood, from hair and eye color to personality traits. It is also quite clear that the earliest human embryo is biologically alive. It fulfills the four criteria needed to establish biological life: metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction. Finally, is the human zygote merely a new kind of cell or is it a human organism; that is, a human being? Scientists define an organism as a complex structure of interdependent elements constituted to carry on the activities of life by separately-functioning but mutually dependant organs. The human zygote meets this definition with ease. Once formed, it initiates a complex sequence of events to ready it for continued development and growth: The zygote acts immediately and decisively to initiate a program of development that will, if uninterrupted by accident, disease, or external intervention, proceed seamlessly through formation of the definitive body, birth, childhood, adolescence, maturity, and aging, ending with death. This coordinated behavior is the very hallmark of an organism. By contrast, while a mere collection of human cells may carry on the activities of cellular life, it will not exhibit coordinated interactions directed towards a higher level of organization. Thus, the scientific evidence is quite plain: at the moment of fusion of human sperm and egg, a new entity comes into existence which is distinctly human, alive, and an individual organism - a living and fully human being.”
Hi!. As far as I know this assertions came from Feminist for Life (FfL from now on) so I´ll take the liberty to reply them all, otherwise I wouldn´t reply a classmate comment. ;) I completely disagree with FfL in all the five statements you transcribed us through the blog: 1. Abortion provides a chance to choice for women when something so dreadful has sadly happened to her: rapes, abusive relationships… 2. Abortion sets free women and families from an unwanted fate. Is that society the same who has to provide community care for newborns with malformations?? Are FfL going to compare figures on this? (I am not looking for an answer) 3. Abortion is something sad, can put women health in danger as any other surgery, but in the long-term the physical and above all emotional side becomes positive in most cases. (Please watch the link at the end of the comment). 4. When a human being is living inside the mother he or she has the best protection like nothing else, just the mother. But the mother has to have the right to, eventually, take the decision when it is inevitable and justified. Thus, news like this (http://www.godvine.com/Mom-with-Cancer-Refuses-Treatment-to-Save-her-Baby-s-Life-2770.html) couldn´t show how strong is a mother’s love for her baby. We value the mother’s attitude because she could decide, no one forced her, and she finally gave her life to make possible the baby to live. 5. To force women to have a baby without the mother´s opinion is normally a religious plot. It’s a way to think, I disagree about it but I also respect it, except when pregnancy is unwanted and there are justified reasons.
Here you have a link to a very shocking new about a baby who was born without brain. Can anyone think that this kind of life is a dignified life? The child has spent six years tied to a bed, is it worth to live like her? http://boston.com/community/moms/blogs/parent_buzz/2013/07/child_born_without_a_brain_is_now_6_years_old.html
In my humble opinion this is not a moral or religious debate, specially now when both sides are irreconcilable. Moreover, it´s a quite controversial subject as the abortion itself is terrible.
But I thought we were discussing about the new abortion law proposed by the PP Party last December. Without taking into account that nobody knows why they propose this change at this moment (political or electoralist reason?) I´ve read it´s illegal because the Article nº 30 of the Spanish Civil Code establishes the date of birth as the moment in which everybody becomes a legal person. So, above the rights of the foetus still the mother´s rights remain.
I´ll never agree with any law that ban the individual's right to decide how to live your life… and it´s not just my opinion, please read next: "The dignity of the person, the inviolable rights which are inherent, the free development of the personality, respect for the law and the rights of others, are the foundation of the political order and social peace". Source: Spanish Constitution, Article 10.
Thank you for reading my comments and for conveying your ideas. Please, allow me to clarify that my arguments are neither religious nor moral but scientific and bioethical. Maybe my not making myself clear enough has caused this misunderstanding. Anyway there are legal arguments against abortion like the Article 15 of the Spanish Constitution: “Section 1: Fundamental Rights and Public Freedoms. Article 15: Everyone has the right to life and to physical and moral integrity, and under no circumstances may be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment. Death penalty is hereby abolished, except as provided for by military criminal law in times of war.” In anti-abortion activists’ view, “Everyone” is everyone whether they are inside or outside their mother’s womb, because the law says “under no circumstances”, and I think they’ve got a point there. On the other hand, I see (understand) pro-choice campaigners’ point of view when it comes to some extreme and shocking cases (like Carlos’ linked news item). I’m glad to pep up the debate but I always try to keep in mind that the objective of this blog is preparing the topics (human rights, health and science in this case) and learning how to get our ideas across in English. So I apologize if I’ve hurt some classmate’s feeling. I meant no disrespect.
Marilé, you are exquisitely respectful in your writing and in your speaking. It is clear that you meant no disrespect, I understand that none of the views expressed here meant any disrespect to anybody, although it is true that this is a very hot, controversial issue and most of us have strong feelings about it. Thanks again for all of your contributions, you are a very generous student.
I don´t think you have to apologize, so far you have stated your own opinion, as everyone can also do. Mª Jesús gives us the opportunity with this blog to discuss very interesting issues among English advanced students, and we have to take advantage of it, that´s all. By the way, I am learning a lot of vocabulary from your contributions, carry on this way!. Thanks.
Thank you Natalia. What you've written is very interesting, as you have refocused the attention on the real issue, which is key in any debate. I'm also very impressed which the research you have done. I'm glad that you have decided to take part in this hot, controversial issue and share your very knowledgeable opinion. Thanks!
Carlos, I couln't agree more with you! I'm so thankful that you started and sparked this debate! I am glad that you value how much you can learn from other students. I have to say the same about you all. All of us learn a lot from you and your contributions. You rise the level and you guys make me a very happy teacher. I love to see how seriously you all take this. It is most rewarding, and a first in my very long career as a teacher!
Wow! Thank you all for your contributions and for making this debate so rich and alive! Good job! Give me a few days to send you feedback on your comments! You guys make me a happy teacher!
Comment 1:
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with “Feminists for Life”. They “oppose all forms of violence, including abortion, because they are inconsistent with the core feminist principles of justice, non-violence and non-discrimination”. They “raise arguments that are specifically related to women's rights:
1. Abortion sidesteps oppression of women. It’s provides a way of side-stepping other real issues: rapes, abusive relationships, education, poverty…
2. Abortion does not free women but allows society not to cater to (provide) women's needs: maternity leave, workplace, flexible scheduling, childcare, school…
3. Abortion damages women. It can damage the long-term physical and emotional health of women
4. Abortion violates feminist principles. They believe in a woman's right to control her body, and she deserves this right no matter where she lives, even if she's still living inside her mother's womb.
5. Abortion is a male plot. It’s a way for men to have sex with women without having to take responsibility for any resulting children.
Feminists for Life are active in trying to promote practical solutions to the causes that drive women to abortion.” If you want to read more about these interesting arguments:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/abortion/mother/against_1.shtml
I invite you to read my next comment where I wrote about how I think this matter should be tackled.
Thanks for contributing to the debate in such beautiful English.
DeleteAbortion is a very sensitive and controversial issue, so first of all I’d like to make clear that I feel very sorry for the women who have had to face this terrible decision and that I’m not blaming them at all. My comment is about the general concept and about what government and society should do in my view.
DeleteIn my opinion the root of this problem lies in the definition of “human being” and in when a human life is worth it. Regarding the first point “the scientific evidence is quite plain: at the moment of fusion of human sperm and egg, a new entity comes into existence which is distinctly human, alive, and an individual organism, that is, a fully human being (*)”. Therefore the unborn child is a human being entitled to rights.
With regard to the second point I side with those who think that it’s very dangerous to lay down the requirements which a human being has to fulfill to be life-worthy (deserving of life). Throughout history of humankind there’ve been many examples of where this can lead us. The modern German society of the thirties and forties experimented with this matter resulting in dreadful consequences. And unfortunately the value of human life is in the subtext of abortion and euthanasia laws. By counting the number of your cells or by measuring the level of your intelligence and feelings these laws state whether “you” have the right to live or your mother have the right to put an end to your life. It seems to me like a very unfair and biased border. For instead: why the law protects your live when you reach a certain number of days inside your mother’s womb and not one day before (earlier)? I’ve written “you” because you did not come from a zygote, an embryo, a fetus or an adolescent but you once were a zygote, an embryo, a fetus and adolescent.
Therefore, since it’s not fair to allow anybody to establish the criteria on which the life of another human can be taken, we should protect and nurture every human being. The right to be born should always outweigh the right of an individual to control their own body.
Besides as there’re a lot of families filing for adoption, governments and societies should support women during the pregnancy in every way so they can choose after the delivery between giving the children up for adoption and raising them. In both cases every necessary resource should be endowed.
On the other hand when abortions are accepted and easy to obtain, people use them as a form of birth control so it increases the number of human beings whose lives or deaths are in our hands. Governments should allocate enough money and resources to provide every woman with an infallible and safe (side effects free) birth control method. I can’t understand why we can walk on the Moon but we can’t solve the problem of unintended pregnancies (pregnancies that are mistimed, unplanned or unwanted at the time of conception) ones and for all. We should lay the stress on this matter.
We‘ve been studying at class the creative thinking so let’s be creative: let’s stop focusing in the specific abortion question and let’s gaze at the whole picture together. We may start for the statement that both sides (anti-abortion activists as much as pro-choice campaigners) share in this video: No woman wants to resort to having an abortion. Therefore let’s force governments and the scientific community (which have mainly been ruled by men) to discover something that allows women to conceive a child only when they want to. Maybe if creative women had been ruling the word for millennia as men had been, abortion didn’t exist because we would’ve discovered a way to save us an unintended pregnancy.
(*) Read scientific evidence of the existence of human life before birth in my next comment.
(*) “Here is a thumbnail sketch of the scientific evidence of the existence of human life before birth. These are irrefutable facts, about which there is no dispute in the scientific community.
DeleteAt the moment when a human sperm penetrates a human ovum, or egg, generally in the upper portion of the Fallopian Tube, a new entity comes into existence. Zygoteis the name of the first cell formed at conception, the earliest developmental stage of the human embryo, followed by the Morula and Blastocyst stages.
Is it human? Is it alive? Is it just a cell or is it an actual organism, a "being?" The zygote is composed of human DNA and other human molecules, so its nature is undeniably human and not some other species. The new human zygote has a genetic composition that is absolutely unique from itself, different from any other human that has ever existed, including that of its mother (thus disproving the claim that what is involved in abortion is merely "a woman and her body"). This DNA includes a complete "design," guiding not only early development but even hereditary attributes that will appear in childhood and adulthood, from hair and eye color to personality traits.
It is also quite clear that the earliest human embryo is biologically alive. It fulfills the four criteria needed to establish biological life: metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction. Finally, is the human zygote merely a new kind of cell or is it a human organism; that is, a human being? Scientists define an organism as a complex structure of interdependent elements constituted to carry on the activities of life by separately-functioning but mutually dependant organs. The human zygote meets this definition with ease. Once formed, it initiates a complex sequence of events to ready it for continued development and growth: The zygote acts immediately and decisively to initiate a program of development that will, if uninterrupted by accident, disease, or external intervention, proceed seamlessly through formation of the definitive body, birth, childhood, adolescence, maturity, and aging, ending with death. This coordinated behavior is the very hallmark of an organism. By contrast, while a mere collection of human cells may carry on the activities of cellular life, it will not exhibit coordinated interactions directed towards a higher level of organization.
Thus, the scientific evidence is quite plain: at the moment of fusion of human sperm and egg, a new entity comes into existence which is distinctly human, alive, and an individual organism - a living and fully human being.”
Hi!. As far as I know this assertions came from Feminist for Life (FfL from now on) so I´ll take the liberty to reply them all, otherwise I wouldn´t reply a classmate comment. ;)
DeleteI completely disagree with FfL in all the five statements you transcribed us through the blog:
1. Abortion provides a chance to choice for women when something so dreadful has sadly happened to her: rapes, abusive relationships…
2. Abortion sets free women and families from an unwanted fate. Is that society the same who has to provide community care for newborns with malformations?? Are FfL going to compare figures on this? (I am not looking for an answer)
3. Abortion is something sad, can put women health in danger as any other surgery, but in the long-term the physical and above all emotional side becomes positive in most cases. (Please watch the link at the end of the comment).
4. When a human being is living inside the mother he or she has the best protection like nothing else, just the mother. But the mother has to have the right to, eventually, take the decision when it is inevitable and justified. Thus, news like this (http://www.godvine.com/Mom-with-Cancer-Refuses-Treatment-to-Save-her-Baby-s-Life-2770.html) couldn´t show how strong is a mother’s love for her baby. We value the mother’s attitude because she could decide, no one forced her, and she finally gave her life to make possible the baby to live.
5. To force women to have a baby without the mother´s opinion is normally a religious plot. It’s a way to think, I disagree about it but I also respect it, except when pregnancy is unwanted and there are justified reasons.
Here you have a link to a very shocking new about a baby who was born without brain. Can anyone think that this kind of life is a dignified life? The child has spent six years tied to a bed, is it worth to live like her?
Deletehttp://boston.com/community/moms/blogs/parent_buzz/2013/07/child_born_without_a_brain_is_now_6_years_old.html
In my humble opinion this is not a moral or religious debate, specially now when both sides are irreconcilable. Moreover, it´s a quite controversial subject as the abortion itself is terrible.
ReplyDeleteBut I thought we were discussing about the new abortion law proposed by the PP Party last December. Without taking into account that nobody knows why they propose this change at this moment (political or electoralist reason?) I´ve read it´s illegal because the Article nº 30 of the Spanish Civil Code establishes the date of birth as the moment in which everybody becomes a legal person. So, above the rights of the foetus still the mother´s rights remain.
I´ll never agree with any law that ban the individual's right to decide how to live your life… and it´s not just my opinion, please read next: "The dignity of the person, the inviolable rights which are inherent, the free development of the personality, respect for the law and the rights of others, are the foundation of the political order and social peace". Source: Spanish Constitution, Article 10.
Thank you for reading my comments and for conveying your ideas. Please, allow me to clarify that my arguments are neither religious nor moral but scientific and bioethical. Maybe my not making myself clear enough has caused this misunderstanding.
DeleteAnyway there are legal arguments against abortion like the Article 15 of the Spanish Constitution: “Section 1: Fundamental Rights and Public Freedoms. Article 15: Everyone has the right to life and to physical and moral integrity, and under no circumstances may be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment. Death penalty is hereby abolished, except as provided for by military criminal law in times of war.” In anti-abortion activists’ view, “Everyone” is everyone whether they are inside or outside their mother’s womb, because the law says “under no circumstances”, and I think they’ve got a point there.
On the other hand, I see (understand) pro-choice campaigners’ point of view when it comes to some extreme and shocking cases (like Carlos’ linked news item). I’m glad to pep up the debate but I always try to keep in mind that the objective of this blog is preparing the topics (human rights, health and science in this case) and learning how to get our ideas across in English. So I apologize if I’ve hurt some classmate’s feeling. I meant no disrespect.
Marilé, you are exquisitely respectful in your writing and in your speaking. It is clear that you meant no disrespect, I understand that none of the views expressed here meant any disrespect to anybody, although it is true that this is a very hot, controversial issue and most of us have strong feelings about it. Thanks again for all of your contributions, you are a very generous student.
DeleteI don´t think you have to apologize, so far you have stated your own opinion, as everyone can also do. Mª Jesús gives us the opportunity with this blog to discuss very interesting issues among English advanced students, and we have to take advantage of it, that´s all.
DeleteBy the way, I am learning a lot of vocabulary from your contributions, carry on this way!. Thanks.
Thank you Natalia. What you've written is very interesting, as you have refocused the attention on the real issue, which is key in any debate. I'm also very impressed which the research you have done. I'm glad that you have decided to take part in this hot, controversial issue and share your very knowledgeable opinion. Thanks!
DeleteCarlos, I couln't agree more with you! I'm so thankful that you started and sparked this debate! I am glad that you value how much you can learn from other students. I have to say the same about you all. All of us learn a lot from you and your contributions. You rise the level and you guys make me a very happy teacher. I love to see how seriously you all take this. It is most rewarding, and a first in my very long career as a teacher!
DeleteWow! Thank you all for your contributions and for making this debate so rich and alive! Good job! Give me a few days to send you feedback on your comments! You guys make me a happy teacher!
ReplyDelete