The_Walrus wrote:
Killing a zygote or embryo is about analogous to swallowing.
Killing a foetus up to about 30 weeks is less bad than killing a mouse (ignoring that it's also a parasite).
Killing an unwanted newborn is about as bad as killing a chicken.
All changes if the baby is wanted, of course, as does whether it is in or out of the womb. If it's in the womb then the mother should have total control. If it is out of the womb then if anyone wants to take responsibility for it, then they should be able to.
If it is in the womb and the mother wants it, killing it is like killing a pet. If it is out of the womb and anyone wants it, likewise.
Let's make it super clear: this is a personal opinion of The_Walrus,
not anything official for WP.
In particular, having experienced pregnancy, childbirth and motherhood (but not abortion nor miscarriage), I do not agree with this opinion.
Simply, it's not nearly that easy.
A forming human being is a forming human being, not a mouse nor a chicken. But this being is being formed at the expense of their mother's body, definitely not for free, it can be an enormous price.
I do accept both arguments.
"Is abortion as bad as killing a newborn"? If the newborn can be adopted, no - because there is an alternative. Current medicine can't transplant a fetus, so there is no third option. The mother might need to either sacrifice her health or her forming child, can't have both, no third way. This is a different dilemma than once the child is born and can be adopted.
I don't believe such decisions should be made by sweeping state policies.
_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.
<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>