JDG wrote:
> Thus, you are very accepting of the "right to life" (as you
> put it: *the* human right) being removed on a case-by-case basis, yet
> somehow removing the "right to life" in the case of the death penalty on a
> case-by-case basis causes automatic disqualification from sitting on the
> UNHCHR.
OK, let me explain my full position on this, and, no doubt, i'll be branded
as some weird psychotic by you.
Human life is *sentient*. A human is not sentient until the age of 3 or 4.
Self-awareness doesn't appear until then.
However, it is obviously wrong killing a presentient human once they're out
of the womb. No-one will argue against that, unless they're already happy
with the idea of killing adults. Destroying a consciousness is wrong, plain
and simple, hence the death penalty is wrong.
So, seeing as we can't kill living breathing babies, and there is no
difference between a 9 month -1day baby and a 9 month +1day baby except for
how they breathe, we can't destroy a foetus at that stage without some
serious hypocrisy.
So, given that we agree that destroying a potential sentient at this point
is wrong, we have to say that destroying a potential sentient is wrong.
However, we have a serious social crisis, in the if we abolish abortion
entirely, we're risking losing adults to folding tables in back-alley
'clinics', and there's a serious crisis looming. If we remove that option,
we are back to forcing teenage girls into sticking knitting needles up
themselves. It has happened, it will happen again.
We have an unpleasant, and very difficult, dichotomy here, and we have to
reconcile this somehow.
So, we have three options:
1) Enforced reversible sterilisation for all.
There's huge problems with this, not least, who says who, how and when can
someone be allowed to bear offspring by having the op reversed.
2) Enforced pregancy and birth for any woman who gets pregnant, taking the
baby for adoption if necessary.
I can't see how this would in any way be anything other that a step into a
scary brutal totalitarian future. Anyway, we're back to knitting needles and
back-street abortions again, with an even higher cost (monetary, emotional,
leaga and physical) to women and even high potential rewards to the
"fixers".
3) A legal but very strict clinic system, with as early a cut-off date as is
practicable.
I don't like it, I'm aware of the contradictions, but it's the least worst
option.
Charlie
