Comment: I Agree with OP and I look to the Bible

(See in situ)

I Agree with OP and I look to the Bible

Most of the Bible talks about life in terms of breath or breathing. Spirit is air. I'm not saying I believe that strictly metaphysically, but I would say that I think human life (not biological life etc.) begins with and is coincident with breathing and breath. Not as a strict legal standard, but as a general and abstract ethical standard.

So this means that a child's first breath is the abstract beginning of its life. However, viability would imply the ability to take a first breath, so things like partial birth abortion represent 'cheating' and depriving the child of what would have inherently been life.

I do think a viable baby 'owns' the womb, not the mother - though she owns her body (so if she starved herself and the baby died it wouldn't be ethically wrong, but intentional intrusion into the womb with suction tubes and pincers would be - against the baby).

The mother does have a right, in a sense, to have the baby removed - but with all reasonable care taken to protect the life of the child. This means carrying to term if necessary.

On the other hand, a pregnancy in its first month or two is certainly NOT viable. The mother would have every right to have the embryo removed.

Because viability is hard to define and indeed can occur earlier and earlier in pregnancy, and because abortion itself walks such a thin ethical line I propose this legal solution for the issue:


A woman may obtain an abortion if she makes the decision upon first discovering pregnancy. Reasonable time is given for both discovery and arranging for the procedure, appx. 3 months. This window also represents a reasonable amount of time in which the embryo has not become viable. Abortion may therefore be an immediate reaction to pregnancy, but must be restricted beyond that. At some point the fetus becomes viable and implicitly will gain life at first breath, therefore its presence in the womb must be protected.

Anyway, that's my opinion. A woman has the minimum reasonable time after pregnancy to obtain an abortion, otherwise she elects to bring the child to term. I find that to be leaps and bounds healthier than some arbitrary trimester, or even those who claim abortion is 100% A-OK

In an anarcho society of course, only a father would have claim here, and ultimately there's little he could do. Also, God would ultimately be responsible for eternal moral type consequences and our laws are rather insignificant in that light.