Three data points:
1. The 1973 Roe v. Wade case was decided 7-2 by an all-male court.
2. A 2018 Gallup poll showed statistically small-to-trivial differences between men and women’s beliefs about whether abortion should be legal in all cases, illegal in all cases, or legal/illegal in some cases.
3. A 2018 Pew survey also showed that “Men and women express similar views on abortion; 60% of women say it should be legal in all or most cases, as do 57% of men.”
Instead, it is a three-aspect philosophical debate about (a) human identity, (b) sexual ethics, and (c) political rights.
Questions about abortion are secondary. First, and, foremost is the question, “When does life begin.” IMHO, life begins at conception. Life is complex, freewill is complicated.
Richard Silliker: I think life begins before conception i.e. sperm and ovum are alive. So for that matter are HIV and malaria viruses. But you probably mean the life of a potential human individual, at present a two-celled organism. Believe it or not some people actually advocate sacrificing the life of an actual adult human female to those two cells. Many of these people call themselves Christians. After fifteen hundred years of political rule dominated by them in Europe, the Americas and elsewhere there can be no doubt as to the benevolence of their motives.
Leaving aside the somewhat historically superficial stab at random Christians and their supposed intentions of which you seem to be very certain, this is about personhood. When someone becomes a person and as a result get legal rights. It would be interesting however to see you produce some evidence of Christians ready to sacrifice a mother-s life.
Typical nonsense. Why life starts at conception? Why not before? Conception can NOT happen if both halves, furnished by female and MALE, are not alive. If abortion is illegal for a pregnant woman, then ejaculation should be illegal. Think of the 300 million possibile lives or more that are wasted every time… As usual, we the male are the mass muderers.
1 what brings most benefits to society for each particular case
– do we need numbers? how many pregnancies do we afford to cut . considering special cases all are under 1%
2 after deciding the above, intersect with any conventions / laws on human life
There are far too many variables when the issue of abortion arises.
Was the female underage?
Was it consensual?
Are there known indications of severe birth defects or fetal abnormalities?
Is abortion being used as an afterthought convenience measure?
Is there genetic reasonings?
Does the mother have a history of difficult or dangerous past deliveries? Is the issue even of public concern legally or morally outside of the female/doctor/family relationship?
If strict anti abortion laws are enacted, how many women will suffer harms or even death by turning once again to the well known unsafe, unskilled and unsanitary alley way and back room abortion rings of the past?
If the issue is deemed only by a segment of the population to be of public concern, what else could be construed of as ‘de-privatized’ activities of individuals or between two people who are in agreement with one another in private and yet mandated by new laws for forced public exposure?
Who will be the observational and regulatory public/private oversight bodies of new anti abortion laws and modalities? Third party corporate contractors? Religious non profits? A computer surveillance algorithm?