I'm answering your questions as straightforwardly as I can from my own point of view. But I would add the caveat that the difficulty comes in legislating the criminality of certain acts that might lead to the death of a child in utero.
My own defense of a pro-choice position in the past has had primarily to do with the problem of criminalizing miscarriage or inadvertent death of an unborn child. Should a woman be prosecuted, say, if she smokes during pregnancy, resulting in the death of an unborn child? Drinks to excess? Uses drugs?
Should a husband or lover be prosecuted if he throws a woman down a flight of stairs, causing the death of an unborn child? If he hits her or abuses her in any way, leading to the death of a child? If the woman is maltreated or malnourished?
If a man and woman get into a shouting match during her pregnancy, and she miscarries as a result, should someone be prosecuted?
It seems to me that the difficulties in legislating the criminality of abortion is in distinguishing between spontaneous and procured abortion, and intent.
If a pharmaceutical is taken post-conception to end the process of life that has already begun, yes, that is intentional killing. A pharmaceutical taken prior to conception to prevent conception might be considered morally objectionable by some in terms of preventing life, but it would not be considered infanticide or intentional ending of a life.
The reason this is all so difficult is that no one can agree exactly when human life begins, and in the absence of being able to definitively determine that, it seems to me that it is reasonable, appropriate and exercising good caution to place it all the way back at the time of conception, since scientifically it is proven that human life begins on its accelerated growth process at that moment.
I'm aware of no other use for the morning-after pill other than ending life, rather than preventing it.
It seems to me that if abortion is murder, the fact that it can be difficult to ascertain intentionality should have nothing to do with actually criminalizing it. After all, it can be equally difficult to ascertain intentionality in cases where a killing of a human being OUTSIDE the womb has taken place, hence, the sliding scale of intentionality is reflected in the various legal labels that can be applied.
So now that I more fully understand your position, I’m also interested in your answer to the question posed to dart by John Larsen earlier in this thread:
An 18 year old woman goes to a doctor who performs an abortion. In your perfect world, what would you have society do to this young woman and the doctor?
This is the main question I’d like answered, so if you’re pressed for time, I’d appreciate you addressing that one first, but I’m going to add some more thoughts as well.
You said:
The reason this is all so difficult is that no one can agree exactly when human life begins, and in the absence of being able to definitively determine that, it seems to me that it is reasonable, appropriate and exercising good caution to place it all the way back at the time of conception, since scientifically it is proven that human life begins on its accelerated growth process at that moment.
Are contraceptives that simply prevent implantation, versus preventing conception, a form of murder?
Why discount the sperm and ovum themselves? It seems to me that this would be the level where it all actually begins, naturally speaking (of course with scientific advances it could begin with other cells). Since no one knows when the “soul” enters the body, perhaps the souls are already in the sperm, as people did once believe. It certainly is not more ridiculous, or scientifically unlikely than to suppose that the “soul” enters a blastocyst. Is it morally wrong for a man to masturbate for this reason? Is he guilty of murder? And as others have pointed out, why is preventing a life different than stopping the growth of that life? Are people who engage in birth control engaging in a form of murder?
You had earlier given the impression that your thoughts in this matter were the result of scientific study alone, but since you have begun to refer to the soul entering the body, I’d like some expansion on this. What is your religious viewpoint? Are you a believer, and have your religious beliefs influenced your position on abortion?
Next, do you believe we should allow abortion to save the life of the mother?
And, finally, I’m going to ask a question about something I referred to earlier: if a “clinic” in your neighborhood was, with parental permission, gathering up five year olds and killing them, and for some reason society said this was legal, what action would you consider morally justifiable to stop it?