Summary

As a result of the previous considerations I’ve pretty much come to the following tentative conclusions:

• I see no reason for laws that restrict contraception.
• Whenever possible, the state should stay out of the decision process on whether an embryonic mother should have an abortion. We should be very careful before empowering the state to intervene in abortion decisions and if we do make laws governing abortion they should be restricted to specific isolated and clear circumstances.
• In cases of rape, incest or involving underage embryonic mothers I’m inclined to favor no abortion restrictions whatsoever but may be persuaded to change my mind if I hear a reasonable argument devoid of rancor and imputations on my character.
• The only possible case where I see the law getting involved in abortion restrictions is for “late term” abortions when the embryonic baby has a viability when detached from the mother but I haven’t been able to formulate what I would consider a reasonable restrictive law.
• Finally I refer you to an article at salon.com for a powerful article relating a personal abortion experience which actually violates some of these conclusions but which also makes an effective argument for the state staying out of the process and illustrates the personal complexity of these issues to me.

Finally what is clear is that any abortion decision depends critically on one’s specific circumstances and I don’t believe that a “one size fits all” law is appropriate.

Pages:
«« previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Tags: Abortion, contraception, politics, Science

This entry was posted on Wednesday, November 25th, 2009 at 5:03 pm and is filed under Abortion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

this article with others.