Roe v Wade

[canarydan23 4,060]

On 29/06/2022 at 11:12, horsefly said:

Then I refer you back to the Judith Jarvis Thomson article. The point of her thought experiment was to demonstrate that no one has a right to oblige another individual to let them make use of their organs to ensure their own survival.

There is a critical difference here though.

In the Thomson article, the person connected to the violinist had no prior knowledge of the possibility that the situation may arise.

Everybody knows that sex can result in pregnancy and we all still choose to do it. Some take precautions, others don't, but it remains a possibility.

For the Thomson analogy to truly work, there would need to be a big sign outside the hospital, "Come and have a play in our Ward, it's REALLY good fun but there is a chance that you might end up with your kidney wired up to someone else for 9 months in order for them to survive".

Maybe stay away from the ward or deal with the consequences of all the fun?

[benchwarmer 624]

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

Glad to see that you don't have a problem with vaccines per se, but that makes me wonder why you object to vaccines that require updating (such as the flu jab). It's the disease that dictates such requirements.

Quite happy for you to make your individual choice re flu jabs etc, but the evidence is clear that the jab saves many lives. As for tetanus, it is very much on the increase in this country at the moment and causing serious concern (my partner works in the NHS). 

Of course proper trials are vital. I took part in one for the Covid vaccine myself. I see no evidence to contradict the claim that the Covid vaccine roll-out has saved huge numbers of lives across the world.

Re. flu jabs, I only have a problem with it for myself.  It's up to each individual to decide what to do.  If I die from flu, I can think of many worse alternatives.  I accept that death is inevitable and have no wish to try and live longer than my natural span. (I note btw that almost all the 8.4% increase in the UK population in the past decade is accounted for by the over-50s, of whom I am one.)  I hope to die in my own bed and not trouble the NHS, since death itself is not a disease.

Re. tetanus, I'd be interested to hear who is getting it.  It isn't easy to catch.  It lives in the soil and enters the body through an open wound. Seasonal agricultural workers are particularly at risk, and they ought to be offered tetanus jabs before they commence employment.  This should become law if it isn't already.  DEFRA please note.

As you say, it is 'claimed' that vaccination has saved huge numbers of lives. This is impossible to contradict because we will never know what would have happened otherwise.  Whilst areas of the world with low vaccination rates suffered no worse, there are other variables which could account for this. We simply don't know.

Edited June 30, 2022 by benchwarmer

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

35 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

There is a critical difference here though.

In the Thomson article, the person connected to the violinist had no prior knowledge of the possibility that the situation may arise.

Everybody knows that sex can result in pregnancy and we all still choose to do it. Some take precautions, others don't, but it remains a possibility.

For the Thomson analogy to truly work, there would need to be a big sign outside the hospital, "Come and have a play in our Ward, it's REALLY good fun but there is a chance that you might end up with your kidney wired up to someone else for 9 months in order for them to survive".

Maybe stay away from the ward or deal with the consequences of all the fun?

Which is why the focus should be on men. Usually far more than half of all men don't wear condoms all the time. Not to mention that many forms of birth control for women have some pretty bad side effects (and these appeared to a greater extent amongst men in initial trials of birth control for men, which is why it's on the back burner for now).

The problem with any anti-abortion guff is that women get the consequences, men generally don't. They consent to sex, not pregnancy.

Men can prevent nearly all abortions if they wore condoms all the time. Maybe we should start there?

Edited June 30, 2022 by TheGunnShow

[horsefly 4,287]

1 minute ago, canarydan23 said:

There is a critical difference here though.

In the Thomson article, the person connected to the violinist had no prior knowledge of the possibility that the situation may arise.

Everybody knows that sex can result in pregnancy and we all still choose to do it. Some take precautions, others don't, but it remains a possibility.

For the Thomson analogy to truly work, there would need to be a big sign outside the hospital, "Come and have a play in our Ward, it's REALLY good fun but there is a chance that you might end up with your kidney wired up to someone else for 9 months in order for them to survive".

Maybe stay away from the ward or deal with the consequences of all the fun?

Well, firstly it's not always the case that the woman voluntarily engages in sex. But leaving aside those type of cases, the key idea underlying your response is that anyone engaging in some potentially risky practice must take full responsibility for the consequences that might result. To follow that principle through would have dramatic consequences for many areas of our lives. When you voluntarily drive your car you know full well that there is a potential you could be involved in a serious car crash, should you not expect to be treated for your injuries if that were to happen? Should cigarette smokers be left untreated for their cancer? type 2 diabetes sufferers left in a coma? mountaineers left at the bottom of a cliff with a broken skull? If you leave your front door unlocked shouldn't you expect to be burgled? etc, etc, etc. We get into an extraordinary moral mess if we make such a principle of foreseeable consequences fundamental to our moral outlook. Thus we arrive back at the question whether there are significant grounds for believing that society has a right to force a woman to continue a pregnancy against her wishes. 

[horsefly 4,287]

10 minutes ago, benchwarmer said:

Re. flu jabs, I only have a problem with it for myself.  It's up to each individual to decide what to do.  If I die from flu, I can think of many worse alternatives.  I accept that death is inevitable and have no wish to try and live longer than my natural span. (I note btw that almost all the 8.4% increase in the UK population in the past decade is accounted for by the over-50s, of whom I am one.)  I hope to die in my own bed and not trouble the NHS, since death itself is not a disease.

Re. tetanus, I'd be interested to hear who is getting it.  It isn't easy to catch.  It lives in the soil and enters the body through an open wound. Seasonal agricultural workers are particularly at risk, and they ought to be offered tetanus jabs before they commence employment.  This should become law if it isn't already.  DEFRA please note.

As you say, it is 'claimed' that vaccination has saved huge numbers of lives. This is impossible to contradict because we will never know what would have happened otherwise.  Whilst areas of the world with low vaccination rates suffered no worse, there are other variables which could account for this. We simply don't know.

I fully respect you comments about your own attitude to the flu jab. Of course it is right for you to make your own mind up about that.

Re tetanus, the vaccine has been remarkably effective so it has for years been the cause of only a handful of deaths. Anyone who comes into contact with the soil is potentially at risk, and that includes anyone who potters around in their garden (animal bites, rusty nails etc are also potential routes for infection). Why there should be an increase in infection recently I don't know (my guess would be complacency).

As for your last point, we already have evidence that it was the unvaccinated that filled Covid wards after the vaccine roll out (to a massively disproportionate extent - 80-90% from memory, but I'm sure those stats are available on-line). We also have irrefutable evidence of the astonishing efficacy of vaccines in the case of diseases like smallpox, german measles, polio, tetanus etc. 

[benchwarmer 624]

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

Why there should be an increase in infection recently I don't know (my guess would be complacency).

 

Re. tetanus.  To put it in perspective, these are the most recent stats for UK cases (not deaths):

2019     4 cases

2020    7 cases

2021    11 cases

So yes, cases have risen but from a very low base.

[Barbe bleu 816]

19 hours ago, horsefly said:

Thanks! I actually agree that the issues are extremely emotional, and it is instructive to note that no one has ever "solved" this issue despite centuries of debate.

Maybe it had never been solved because it cannot  be solved. 

Maybe (in your terms i think) there is no dang an sich and the only answer worth arriving at (unless you are a fan if turkes or nihilistic anarchy) is the one you feel is right based on whatever framework you want to put around it.? 

[benchwarmer 624]

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

 we already have evidence that it was the unvaccinated that filled Covid wards after the vaccine roll out (to a massively disproportionate extent - 80-90% from memory, but I'm sure those stats are available on-line).

This does not include the large number of very elderly people who were never admitted to hospital but died in care homes. 

[benchwarmer 624]

On 29/06/2022 at 11:58, keelansgrandad said:

. Of course  institutions such as the Catholic church used to believe that even a man's sperm was life and forbid contraception.

And it was correct.  Put a sample under a microscope and you can watch them swimming about like tadpoles.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

2 minutes ago, benchwarmer said:

And it was correct.  Put a sample under a microscope and you can watch them swimming about like tadpoles.

Its life Jim but not as you know it.

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

If sperm is life then doesn't that make b-u-k-k-a-k-e a "baby shower"?

[benchwarmer 624]

23 hours ago, horsefly said:

As for tetanus, it is very much on the increase in this country at the moment and causing serious concern (my partner works in the NHS). 

 

I've delved a bit further and found that the average no. of tetanus cases per year in the UK since 2001 is 8 or 9, so 4 in 2019 was unusually low.  Also that intravenous drug use is a factor so if people share needles there can be clusters, which may account for variations.

Edited July 1, 2022 by benchwarmer

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

And this is why the "when does life begin" question is a complete and utter red herring.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

2 hours ago, TheGunnShow said:

And this is why the "when does life begin" question is a complete and utter red herring.

But I believe your organs can now be taken when you are dead unless you opt out.

[horsefly 4,287]

Here in one very horrific example is what makes the overruling of Roe V Wade so devastating for women, and in this case a 10-year-old girl:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/republican-governor-kristi-noem-pressed-on-whether-child-rape-victims-should-be-forced-to-endure-pregnancy/ar-AAZ9s1K?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=61552ca8d49244c295e3c25cd21f86fb

Republican governor Kristi Noem pressed on whether child rape victims should be forced to endure pregnancy

The Republican governor of South Dakota was pressed by CNN’s Dana Bash on Sunday on whether she thought child rape victims should be forced to endure pregnancies, just days after the existence of such a case was reported in Ohio.

 

Kristi Noem was grilled on the issue in response to gut-wrenching media reports concerning a 10-year-old victim who was forced, along with her family, to cross state lines and find an abortion clinic in Indiana due to Ohio’s restrictive abortion law.

After several attempts to dodge the question and accuse the media of “not talking” about the rape that had occurred and the need to prosecute such criminals, Ms Noem admitted that she would not push for child rape victims to be allowed to terminate their pregnancy under South Dakota state law, which banned all abortions statewide without exception after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade. The law is by definition one of the most restrictive in the country.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,514]

I was having a barbecue with friends yesterday and one person was talking rather contemptuously of a family member who was warned her child was going to be badly disabled; she chose to keep it for the benefits, including a brand new £40,000 people carrier at the time, then a few years later decided she'd had enough and started seeking to farm it out for adoption. He was arguing that abortion should be compulsory in cases of known serious disability. Not sure I'd go that far, but it does sound like we're incentivising some pretty immoral decision-making there. 

Edited October 3, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie