How does the MWI of Quantum Mechanics affect your views on abortion?

There is more to thought than making note of the various unrelated political stances demanded by your favorite of two political parties.

 

Its interesting when we talk of a humans potential as an individual entity. I believe prenates are humans with potential rather than potential humans. We value an infant because they are humans that have the potential to contribute to society. We value a woman because she is a human that has the potential to go to college or pursue a career and contribute to society. So it makes sense for us to value a prenate because it too is a human with potential.

I think it was Christopher Hitchens who said we should value prenates as candidate members of society.

As for sperm and ova. They are cells with potential. A part of the mans body and a part of the womans body that have the potential to create a new body. They are cells with potential to create new humans. But until they have fused, they are not humans with potential.

Just so you know there are pro life liberals and pro life democrats. Not all liberals think we are at liberty to take life simply because the creator of that life does not value it.

 

Are you suggesting anyone living in a certain society and under a certain jurisdiction can be used and disposed of at the whim of said society? And if the society finds something acceptable enough as for it not to cause disharmony in that particular society, then then that makes it just?

So you must think FGM is acceptable in societies that find FGM acceptable. Or child brides acceptable in societies that find child brides acceptable. Or the death penalty in societies that find the death penalty acceptable.

That's what your saying, right? If something does not cause our own society disharmony, then it is okay.


And I agree with your last statement. It is ridiculous to punish a preborn child, or anyone else for that matter, for something they may or may not do.

 

Yes. Denying a service is not the same as forcing a service. And denying a service is not always an immoral or unethical act.

For example if a person with a perfectly healthy colon wanted to have an elective colonectomy as they no longer wanted to use their anus to poop, or have waste inside their body, or any other elective reason, it would be unethical for a surgeon to perform the procedure.

If a person had something wrong with their colon, but it could be treated with drugs or therapy, it would be unethical for them to perform a colonectomy.

I wonder if people who campaign against elective colonectomies are referred to as "forced poopers"?

 

You just can't admit the obvious :If abortion is banned it is FORCING women to stay pregnant.

Why can't you have the courage to stand up for your beliefs??

 

Your examples ( I don't know what FGM is) all deal with people, born people,...a fetus is not born and not a person. A fetus NOT being born affects no one.

 

It really is absurd that you continue to repeat this false equivocation. The two are not the same. If you think abortion, should be legal, say that you think killing fetuses should be legal. It should not be necessary for your position to deny an understanding of what abortion is.

 

Your proposed standards for what laws can be made and can't be made are not legally binding. You have designed your standards specifically to exclude laws against abortion. In real life, we can make laws against whatever we want.

 

If you can elect a law-maker who sees eye-to-eye with you on the laws you want, you can do that. Enforcing them is another matter altogether though, and plenty of laws have been passed only to take up space in the law books unenforced. You may also have to deal with your laws being repealed if you violate the guidelines of the US Constitution.

 

You just couldn't address the post of mine you quoted.

I'll admit the obvious that Anti-Choicers won't admit...if abortion is illegal women will get abortions anyway.
HOWEVER, their idea is that IF abortion is illegal women will be FORCED to stay pregnant......why else would you ban abortions ???


Killing the fetus is legal, I have always said that and never denied it so I don't know why you'd be playing that game...

 

First of all Multiple Worlds was been replaced by MULTIVERSAL THEORY as the two are not the same.


Multiple Worlds is too limited to detail aspects of Quantum Mechanics and what you think to be FANTASY has now with the advent, creation and existence of a WORKING QUANTUM COMPUTER been discovered to be a REALITY!

You really have no idea about anything you are attempting to discuss here do you?

Abortion and Multiversal Theory?

OH...that's right....you only know about Multiworlds Theory.

There is nothing in common with Abortion and Multiversal Theory.....NOTHING.

Why you eve attempt to place the two together I have no idea?

AboveAlpha

 

I think that a more perfect set of guidelines would allow something so morally reprehensible on so many levels to be outlawed, allowing that perhaps there are current impenetrable legal barriers.

 

The OP referenced the Multiple Worlds Interpretation, a decades old attempt to conceptualize the consequences of quantum measurement results.

Although the first sentence of your post contradicts its main theme, the rest of it attempts to falsely equivocate MWI with the far more recently developed theoretical branch of high energy/ standard model physics, multiverse theory, which deals with high energy branes existing in extra mathematical dimensions, the interactions of which supposedly create a virtually endless number of universes with varying physical constants, supposedly for the sole purpose of exposing my fraudulent expertise of the subject matter, an expertise I do not claim to have and do not need to make this simple point about a CONCEPT that was merely impressed upon me while I amused myself reading a layman's book about quantum mechanics.

I am not an expert in anything. I'm just an ordinary guy pondering the universe around me and I think aborting a pregnancy is a terrible thing to do. We all make mistakes, so I would be slow to judge. Killing the fetus is a mistake, in my opinion.

Let me finish by assuring you and everyone else that the multiple worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is only incidentally related to multiverse theory and in no way contributed to the mathematical breakthroughs of the latter to aid quantum computer development.

 

not sure what your saying, are you saying every universe should be exactly alike.. and that abortion creates differences?

what if a rapist was sent to prison in our universe and one of his children in a future rape cured cancer in another .... lot of what if's, should we not imprison rapists on a what if?

what if a rape victim had an abortion in our world and later had a child that cured cancer, but because she was forced to have a baby in the other Universe she had no more children?

.

 

The reason to make it illegal is so that someone guilty of such a terrible thing has to face the consequences of doing something terrible in a just society.

That's fine IF you do not think abortion is terrible, or that the legal restrictions preventing laws against it are more valuable than the human fetus. Those are legitimate positions. But I think aborting a pregnancy should be a crime. And if enough people in a society think that way, it can happen. With or without the U.S. Constitution.

Maybe fetus killers have us by the balls, and we can't stop them due to a technicality, but what they are doing is WRONG.

Edited to add that a couple of pages back, I explicitly stated that I support the type of force that arises from not allowing someone to kill a human fetus. Too bad the discussion hasn't advance like I had hoped back then.

 

Let's remember that anyone guilty of any crime must have had "intent".