Sunday, May 12, 2013

Difficult Ethical Questions

Why I'm Thinking About This

Today, a friend of mine sent me videos about abortion. Usually I've supported the idea of abortion because I believe that a woman should have the choice on whether they want to carry the heavy responsibility of a child, a woman shouldn't have to stop their career due to a mistake, and a child should not be brought into a family where it is unwanted. However, you cannot ignore the fact that abortion does actually involve killing something. It is causing death. The question of whether it is murder is debatable, but the fact that it causes death in something that could otherwise survive is certain.

I don't know if you guys are aware of this, but there are certain conditions where abortions don't work and the baby survives. This happens because many late-term abortions are done by inducing labor in the mother and giving birth to the baby prematurely, hoping it will be dead. Sometimes it's not. When the abortion fails but the mother still doesn't want the baby, they essentially abandon the baby and leave it to die.

This video talks about it. If you ignore the anti-Obama rhetoric, it delivers useful information.

Sometimes though, they reach an in between phase. The baby is alive but the mother hasn't fully given birth. When this happens, they cut the baby's neck with a scissors to kill it. This is called a partial birth abortion.


It is very easy to dismiss conservative arguments as ignorant and old-fashioned, but what does that prove? There is a decent point to be made that these techniques are discomforting and borderline inhumane, and that should not be ignored. I mean you can ignore it, but that just means you're being an ignorant bystander. It's fine if you want to be that way, but I'm not satisfied with accepting things as they are until I fully understand them.

As thus, I figured I had to analyze this issue piece by piece in order to form my own opinion.

Is Abortion Ethical?

Though I have not done in-depth research as of yet, I have seen both sides of the issue. It's a very difficult thing to judge. To try and make sense of it, I created a chart in which I asked numerous questions.


The picture may be tough to read, so I'll type what I wrote.
  • Is a fetus a person?
    • At conception?
    • After _____ weeks?
  • Traditions of abortion
    • Sparta: Unwanted/Undesirable children abandoned on hilltops
    • Spring Awakening: Girl sent to get abortion after coerced into sex. It kills her.
  • Women will try to get abortions even if it's illegal
    • Many of these women will die
  • If an aborted baby survives, are we morally obligated to save it?
    • What if it has a terrible disease? (Can this be detected early?)
    • What if abortion procedure dooms its death? (More common?)
  • If a baby is destined to be born with a major deformity, is abortion to spare it from suffering noble?
  • If a person is not ready to support a child, should we force them to grow up and do so anyhow?
    • What if it's clear that the child will live a troubled life?
  • Should people pay consequences for promiscuity?
    • Is promiscuity unethical or simply undesirable?
  • Does contraceptive make abortion less of an issue?
  • Does downward demographic trend mean that only good parents have children?
Without much information, it's hard for me to make a full judgment. However, I think these are a good set of questions to think about.

One of them, the one about promiscuity, actually spurred another debate inside my head; one that I had been thinking about for a while. I made another chart.

Is Promiscuity Unethical?


In the book Understanding Homosexuality, Roger E. Biery lays out three purposes for having intercourse: Reproduction, Emotional Bonding, and Enjoyment. Thus, I used these categories to analyze the ethics of promiscuity.

Reproduction

  • Promiscuity ignores this
  • Contraceptive and abortion nearly eliminates consequences
  • What about when it doesn't?
  • If reproduction is undesired, how will we continue the human race?

Emotional Bonding

  • Is emotional attachment always desired?
  • What if emotional contact is desired but person does not know how to get it?
  • What if it's not?
  • What if one person wants emotional bond but other does not?

Enjoyment

  • Is using others for sexual enjoyment manipulative?
  • What about danger of STD?
  • What about pregnancy?
  • Is it animalistic? Should we be more civilized?
  • Or is it unnecessary to restrain ourselves due to contraceptive?
  • If both agree its for enjoyment and contraceptive is used, is it ok?
I started at the board and tried to view the issue from the logical perspective. I ignored theological justifications such as "sex is a gift given to us by God that must not be abused" because I do not find them relevant in rational arguments.

Conclusion

This is what I decided.

In a perfect scenario, where both parties know that the sex is only being used for enjoyment purposes, promiscuity is ok. HOWEVER, this kind of scenario is mostly idealistic for two reasons. First of all, emotional complications are difficult to eliminate (as seen by the questions I listed for emotional bonding, those are serious issues that are difficult to solve or discuss). Secondly, accidents happen, people can get STDs and pregnancies.

In theory, promiscuity is not wrong, and if you are very careful, you can be responsibly promiscuous. However it takes a lot of effort to end up in the ideal scenario, often more than it's worth, and dedicated relationships make life a heck of a lot easier.

More Questions

Throughout my life, I have often had my opinions formed by other people. It's difficult for me to maintain a position on pretty much any subject and I'm easily persuaded into changing beliefs. This exercise is very helpful to me because it helps me find definite logic for my beliefs. Also, I quite enjoy analyzing these questions. It takes the abstract world and puts it into concrete terms that I can understand, which makes me feel more empowered, which makes me happier.

I think as I go on, I'm going to use this approach to analyze many of the world's major issues for myself. Perhaps I'll find some brilliant solutions. Who knows?

1 comment:

  1. I would love to approach these issues from an artistic angle. I think that would be great fun. I simply must decide what I want to do with. Perhaps try writing some more plays.

    It's interesting that you talk about how we animalistic traits as negative. In Jungian physchology, many people have the misconception that the shadow is evil, when in reality, it only represents our primitive animal tendencies, and it is the suppression of those tendencies causes you to commit evil acts.

    "It is the "dark side" of the ego, and the evil that we are capable of is often stored there. Actually, the shadow is amoral -- neither good nor bad, just like animals. An animal is capable of tender care for its young and vicious killing for food, but it doesn't choose to do either. It just does what it does. It is "innocent." But from our human perspective, the animal world looks rather brutal, inhuman, so the shadow becomes something of a garbage can for the parts of ourselves that we can't quite admit to."

    "The second principle is the principle of equivalence. The energy created from the opposition is "given" to both sides equally. So, when I held that baby bird in my hand, there was energy to go ahead and try to help it. But there is an equal amount of energy to go ahead and crush it. I tried to help the bird, so that energy went into the various behaviors involved in helping it. But what happens to the other energy?

    Well, that depends on your attitude towards the wish that you didn't fulfill. If you acknowledge it, face it, keep it available to the conscious mind, then the energy goes towards a general improvement of your psyche. You grow, in other words.

    But if you pretend that you never had that evil wish, if you deny and suppress it, the energy will go towards the development of a complex. A complex is a pattern of suppressed thoughts and feelings that cluster -- constellate -- around a theme provided by some archetype. If you deny ever having thought about crushing the little bird, you might put that idea into the form offered by the shadow (your "dark side"). Or if a man denies his emotional side, his emotionality might find its way into the anima archetype. And so on."

    http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/jung.html

    ReplyDelete