OLAADEGBU:

And so is the life of the baby.

The baby was born without a brain and would have died shortly after birth if carried to term while the mother didn't look like she would have made it to term.

thehomer:

The baby was born without a brain and would have died shortly after birth if carried to term while the mother didn't look like she would have made it to term.

Then leave the medical doctors to make the ethical decision in preventing both deaths instead of using lawyers to promote your pro-choice campaign.

OLAADEGBU:

Then leave the medical doctors to make the ethical decision in preventing both deaths instead of using lawyers to promote your pro-choice campaign.

Some doctors are also in support of abortions. So take your advice and leave them to make the ethical decision.

thehomer:

Some doctors are also in support of abortions. So take your advice and leave them to make the ethical decision.

Referring to the medical institution in your scenario, the doctors concluded that the case was under control only for the lawyers and politicians to say otherwise. The medical profession has a duty of care and respect for human sanctity.

OLAADEGBU:

Referring to the medical institution in your scenario, the doctors concluded that the case was under control only for the lawyers and politicians to say otherwise. The medical profession has a duty of care and respect for human sanctity.

So doctors can perform an abortion once they conclude the case is under control.

thehomer:

So doctors can perform an abortion once they conclude the case is under control.

What did you think they were saying?

^^
Under what duty is a woman obliged to carry a pregnancy?

Kay 17: ^^

Under what duty is a woman obliged to carry a pregnancy?

As soon as she realises that she is carrying another human being. The option of surrogacy, test tube and adoption is also available.

OLAADEGBU:

As soon as she realises that she is carrying another human being. The option of surrogacy, test tube and adoption is also available.

Under the general rules of property, an individual is entitled to protect, preserve and use his property in the manner he pleases. For a pregnancy, the woman is fully entitled to disallow a pregnancy

Kay 17:

Under the general rules of property, an individual is entitled to protect, preserve and use his property in the manner he pleases. For a pregnancy, the woman is fully entitled to disallow a pregnancy

A baby is not a property, he or she is a human being created in the image of God who also has the right to live either inside or outside the mother.

Since you are not even sure when human life begins why would you proceed to abort the pregnancy regardless?

^^
Yet you can't deny the existence of the rights of a woman over her body. And these rights are exercisable against other persons including foetus!

Kay 17: ^^

Yet you can't deny the existence of the rights of a woman over her body. And these rights are exercisable against other persons including foetus!

Either you call it foetus, pregnancy or cells the fact remains that the baby is a human life separate from the life of the mother and has equal right to live.

OLAADEGBU:

What did you think they were saying?

Oh I know what they were saying. I'm wondering whether or not you agree that a doctor can perform abortions at will because that is what your acceptance would amount to.

OLAADEGBU:

As soon as she realises that she is carrying another human being. The option of surrogacy, test tube and adoption is also available.

This is ridiculous. A pregnant woman has the option of surrogacy for the child she's already carrying? The can chuck that baby into a test tube? You're one strange guy I must say.

OLAADEGBU:

Either you call it foetus, pregnancy or cells the fact remains that the baby is a human life separate from the life of the mother and has equal right to live.

What I'm saying is: the right to life of the foetus is at the behest of the woman. Otherwise its right to life is impracticable. And the law does not demand the impossible.

thehomer:

Oh I know what they were saying. I'm wondering whether or not you agree that a doctor can perform abortions at will because that is what your acceptance would amount to.

Those who kill babies at will should face the music as the doctor in the OP will.

thehomer:

This is ridiculous. A pregnant woman has the option of surrogacy for the child she's already carrying? The can chuck that baby into a test tube? You're one strange guy I must say.

I only responded to Kay 17 who asked why the woman is not obliged to carry the pregnancy.

Kay 17:

What I'm saying is: the right to life of the foetus is at the behest of the woman. Otherwise its right to life is impracticable. And the law does not demand the impossible.

You may call it foetus but I insist that it is a baby. The fact that the woman has a duty of care for the baby doesn't mean that she may terminate the life. Do you have the right to kill a child that is under your custody?

OLAADEGBU:

Those who kill babies at will should face the music as the doctor in the OP will.

How about the doctors in the article I posted?

OLAADEGBU:

I only responded to Kay 17 who asked why the woman is not obliged to carry the pregnancy.

Yes you did. But as I pointed out, the options you gave other than adoption aren't possible at least for now.

thehomer:

Yes you did. But as I pointed out, the options you gave other than adoption aren't possible at least for now.

Adoption is a viable option then.

OLAADEGBU:

Adoption is a viable option then.

Of course. But then it requires a certain type of social support and of course as I've said, before the age of viability, the mother is free to do whatever she wants.