I would like to try and avoid a buch of rabid Catholics and Christians falling back only on the religious reasons and what have you. However, I do not see how that can be dodged.
My view? I'm for it. If a woman wants to get one, it is her choice. Some people seem to act like if one woman gets an abortion, it means that all the rest have to. If the child in question is not yours, butt out.
Also, on a lighter note, I say that abortions should be allowed when kids are up to 18 years old. That would solve a lot of headaches, eh?
There is always that possibility that humans have souls.
So if they have no brain activity at all, but have a soul, they're considered alive? What constitutes being 'soulful'? At what point toes the soul leave so we can tell if they're really dead?
There has been absolutely no evidence for the existence of souls up to now, so there's no reason to assume they exist (if you believe so, ok, but that's your belief. Period.). Isn't it then a bit futile to argue about souls in an abortion thread? As far as the evidence goes, until neural cells have differenciated and neural activity started, the foetus is only a mass of living cells, that do not have a conscience yet since conscience requires a certain neural activity/complexity. Is it wrong then to abort because it is a bunch of living cells? Why, then wouldn't it also be wrong to fight bacterial inflammations, since you're killing living beings?
I suppose you could live for a while whithout brain activity. But it would be hard to eat, feel, smell, see, touch, hear, ect
Not without being hooked up to machines that force your body to preform every function that your brain usually does (that's a lot of functions), and even then you probably won't survive for ever in that state.
Actually correction....even if you're a vegetable, there would be brain activity. No brain activity, i.e a flat line just means you're dead.
