« The Incarceration Blame Game | Main | Are Beatbullying statistics bogus? »

25 February 2008


Brian Barder

All good stuff -- but entirely irrelevant to the question of the stage of development of the foetus beyond which abortion should be banned, viability or survivability being a red herring diligently cultivated (if a herring can be cultivated? why not?) by the Roman Catholics and other committed members of the anti-women's rights brigade. The argument is spelled out here, and I am glad to be reminded that it was endorsed at the time by the very highest authority here: 'Of course the viability argument must be binned. It won't be long before an artificial womb is built. Then a foetus, with only a couple of cells, could be transferred there to grow until "birth". It will then be argued that viability starts at conception. Bang goes the woman's right.'

Those who believe in a woman's right to control her own body regardless of the clamour of the priests and other doctrinaire busy-bodies do take rather a risk by getting drawn into the debate about the precise moment of foetus viability, since as we both argued last October, viability is liable to regress with scientific progress right back to conception -- at which point all abortions become unacceptable according to the viability argument.

[I hope these hyperlinks work here! If not, perhaps you would convert them as necessary, Tony?]

Brian B.


And I don't retreat one nanometre from my comment. But it's the mauling of statistics by Professor Wyatt, the CMF and their fellow travellers in the Mail that I was challenging.
p.s. your links worked perfectly!

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • The Out Campaign: Scarlet Letter of Atheism
  • this is Tony's profile
  • Get Thunderbird!
  • Get Firefox!
Blog powered by Typepad