David,
Well, I have to at least compliment you that you make your point clearly. I think I understand your reasoning and perspective, although I don't agree. I'd like to address some of the points you've made.
"this is not constructive debate so I'll stop it at that." okay... I'll just part with the whole cannibalism argument! ... I probably went too far off on a tangent there!
"If a child has been born and it is unwanted, putting it up for adoption is the best choice." I think adoption is an excellent choice. Nor would I criticize a woman who raises the child herself.
"When the world is dangerously crowded it may be necessary to terminate illegaly born infants..." You're correct in that this could happen; China's one-child policy has at times been documented to include infanticide. Necessary? Never. Consider the absurdity of killing an infant because the world is "too full". It would be more sensible to start executing people for minor crimes. You achieve the same end, without doing it at the expense of an innocent life. It would keep adolescents from stealing (and clear out the riff-raff who do) and it makes room for more "decent" people. If that's too cruel, then it's also too cruel to kill an infant who hasn't committed any crime at all.
"if you discover that your future baby would be born without an arm, I think you should terminate the pregnancy. The disabled child will cause a lifetime of unhappiness over that in the parents and children." I suppose to notice the lack of an arm you would propose using the same technology which caused a couple to choose aborting their child who they thought had spina bifida, but in fact, did not. David, tell me by what authority you pronounce a child born without an arm as better off dead? There are many people born with far greater handicaps than a missing arm who live full, happy, and productive lives, given the chance. Yet, you say they bring such unhappiness to those around them that they should be put to death? Dr. Willke points out that "there has not been a single organization of parents of mentally retarded children that has ever endorsed abortion." Alcorn quotes former surgeon general C. Everett Koop:
"I am frequently told by people who have never had the experience of working with children who are being rehabilitated into our society after the correction of a congenital defect that infants with such defects should be allowed to die, or even 'encouraged' to die, because their lives could obviously be nothing but unhappy and miserable. Yet it has been my constant experience that disability and unhappiness do not necessarily go together. Some of the most unhappy children whom I have known have all of the physical and mental faculties and on the other hand some of the happiest youngsters have borne burdens which I myself would find very difficult to bear."
How can you presume to pre-judge the potential happiness of a life and therein make a life or death decision on behalf of that unborn child? A missing arm? Come on! I think you're way out there on your own with that statement. Have you ever had a broken arm, or seen someone with one? Did you observe them and say to yourself "I'd rather be dead than live like that every day?" I don't mean to ridicule your opinion; but I do wonder if you're not at least overstating it?
By the way, let me return for a minute to address the fact that many couples will abort their baby upon hearing a diagnosis of spina bifida. With aggressive treatment:
75% have normal intelligence
80% walk by school age
90% have control of bowel and bladder by school age
99% of parents are very satisfied with the treatments
(study by Dr. D. McLone and Colleagues of 1000 non-selected spina bifida patients, recorded by Dr. J.C. Willke)
"I would not want more children if I found myself a single mother. Adoption would be an option, but the mother would probably be better off with a job instead of an unwanted baby, so she could feed her other two children. What would you say to this mother?" I would say "PLEASE let your child live - even if you cannot raise him yourself, there are many couples who will welcome your child as their own." David, I myself probably came from such a pregnancy. I can think of no more selfless (not selfish, selfLESS) decision than for a mother to give up her child for adoption. Yes, most women who carry a pregnancy to term find it extremely difficult to part with the child. You call this "falling prey to motherly love." The
word "prey" suggests that the woman's better judgement has fallen victim to the sentimental predator called "motherly love." Is that really how you perceive it?
"...another mouth to feed?" The difficulty of feeding a child is in no way justification for killing it. You criticize me for "continuously compare[ing] the terminat[ion] of a pregnancy to the murder of people who have been in the world for a while." Well, I, in turn, criticize your position for trivializing human lives; making life or death decisions for what is undisputably a human being (even if not a so-called "person") based on such trivial matters as career or money. (not trivial? well, they sure are pathetically trivial compared to the decision to end a human life.)
"Before you are born, you have no connections to other people. Your parents are the only people who have a connection with you, and even that isn't the same as love for a child." My own experience and observation suggests that the bond between expectant parents and their unborn child, while it may be mostly one-sided, is very much the same as love for a child. It is not a love born out of a social relationship, but it is love nonetheless. I'm sure that many fathers and mothers, myself included, would, if required, give up their own life in defense of their unborn child(ren). One time in particular that parents' love for their unborn children is particularly apparent is during the tragedy of miscarriage. My wife and I have known several couples who have suffered miscarriages in the course of having children. Two couples we know have lost children half-way through pregnancies. These parents have held their dead children. With one couple, the event was years ago, and somewhere in their home they have a tiny set of footprints on a piece of paper. When they told us about that, it was with a very heavy heart. While the mother wanted to show us the footprints, the father said, "no, they're fine where they are." These are our friends. The conversation left an impression on me. The other couple, friends of ours from church, happily announced they were pregnant with twins at about the same time that my own wife announced she was pregnant with our third child. Around Christmas last year, complications developed, and they delivered two tiny dead babies. David, I understand you did not say "parents don't love their unborn children" but rather just that it's not the same as the love for a born child. Not the same? In some ways, maybe not. But less significant? I don't believe so.
Shama Khan, earlier in this discussion, spoke about her own experience. "...having suffered from two miscarriages, I know what it's like to have an abortion and I carry the pain of losing them but Thank God there's no guilt on my part. Having finally given birth to a healthy girl, I still feel that I have 3 kids, 2 of them just didn't make it. However, I will never forget the silence and iciness I felt overcome my whole being upon realizing that I was alone (in my body). It's the loneliest feeling in the world and many women must suffer from this PLUS the guilt."
As for connections, well, the mother may be the only person with a physical connection to the unborn baby, but there are many other people who share at least some degree of interest in that life beyond just the two parents. There are grandparents, aunts and uncles, cousins, and in addition to that, the world community as a whole. I don't know anything about your family, but if you were married and your wife were pregnant, I CARE about your unborn child. If your wife, God forbid, had an abortion, and I knew of it, I would be saddened at the loss of that child. In the occasional moments when I really connect with the heart of this passion of mine, I cry for the loss of so many. If a life begins, but is killed before birth, and before anyone ever got to connect with the baby, is the loss of the child less meaningful? I think not.
"If parents are able to get over that connection, than the fetus has nothing to live for." What about adoption? For all I know (not to say I think it was so), my mother may have hated my guts every day she carried me. Nonetheless, she "got over" whatever affection she had for me enough to give me up for adoption to parents who desperately wanted me. I grew up loved, and today I have a wife and three kids of my own. For an unborn child, who by your estimation, may at one time have had "nothing to live for", I sure think I have a lot to live for now!
Even if a child is kept by parents that don't want him and don't love him, the love (or lack of love) from the parents is no way to measure the value of a life, or even to measure how much the unborn child has to live for. Is the life of a child who's parents abuse him less valuable or less worth living than the life of a child who is adored by his parents? I'm guessing you'll say that yes, it is. I am adamant that the value and worthiness of a human life is independent of what any other person thinks about it.
"Connections are formed after birth." In the words of my own wife, who has carried three children from conception to birth: "baloney." Many women feel very much in touch with the child they are carrying. (witness also Shama's testimony.)
"If I choose any random embryo, can you tell me who cares for it and who it cares for?" I, for one, care for it. Why else would I invest myself in this? While the embryo itself is not yet capable of caring for me, it is no less capable than I was at the same age. I'm sure glad no one justified terminating me when I was just an embryo, totally dependent on my mother for my very life.
"If it is alone and doesn't even have its own musings or books or whatever to keep it company, it is not living in the sense that we live." ...but it is nonetheless alive, just as you and I were at that same age. People can reasonably say "when I was conceived" because despite what is said to justify abortion, people understand that we all passed through those very early stages of developement when we were not cute or sentient, and our parents probably did not even know we were there yet. But you were there indeed, and if your life were ended at that time, you would not be here today.
Respectfully, (even if I don't always sound respectful!
)
Peter Lyons