Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw
Indeed. We're so advanced now that the right to internet access is a serious current issue. Why should we give a toss of what the past was like before we improved things with our human 'miracles'?
I get some people struggle with progress and we should be able to understand why some find it hard to move on from old norms (especially if they're written down) but that's as far as it goes.
The invention of the roomba removes the responsibility to sweep the floor. There isn't some serious moral consideration involved. I highlighted the point that the majority of abortion is just unwanted pregnancy/babies at the beginning for a reason. Other issues such as complications for the mother, rape, and birth defects are relevant but can be dealt with separately from the core and most common issue
When people talk about ending the heartbeat of something that looks like a baby and will become a baby, it becomes a moral issue which isn't similar to the use of other technology. Treating unborn babies as unwanted or inconvenient is far too close to a mob boss viewing witnesses as loose ends for my taste.
Things get tricky when you get very specific about the actual time or beginning of life or when you would be comfortable with abortion, which is why my legal perspective isn't the same as my personal one, but I'm talking about babies with a heartbeat that would be viable outside the womb. AFAIK the mainstream left position is perfectly comfortable in ending those babies life for the simple reason that they are unwanted.
I brought up history, technology, and social norms because I think people are warping the seriousness of sex because we have technology that can mitigate the perceived seriousness. It doesn't remove it though. Pregnancy becomes an "accident" because of the failure of birth control etc instead of a known consequence of your behavior. And if tech makes abortion easy and convenient, it doesn't change the moral questions.