Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Childbirth is an enabling event that endows the child with the ability and right to apply human reasoning as a way to grant or withhold consent. The condition of childhood negates and postpones the authority of that consent in all or most matters. The child has no voice or right of consent on childbirth.
I'm unsure how consent comes into play with respect to being born. I'm also unsure how it can even be a consideration of the person either birthed naturally or otherwise extracted from a womb -- or artificial womb, for that matter. Perhaps you could elaborate on that for me, or at least explain why you believe it constitutes some sort of violation?
First I consider your take to be more nuanced and reasonable than No_Recess's, so I agree with you on the need for at least a second organizing principle. That's all I'm really looking for.
To answer the question above, I think it is obvious that no person can ever consent to being born, so on the face it seems like a theoretical lark.
However a decision is made to create a person, not by that person. You would obviously consider the decision by one person to end another person's life - murder - to be a violation of consent. So why is consent not considered for birth?
The consequences of the actions are equally momentous: the creation and termination of a human life. That creation can never be voluntary does not mean it is also spontaneous or otherwise not chosen by anyone, like deaths due to old age or illness. The creation of human life is always the result of a human choice, even if the consequences are unanticipated. This is what makes birth different from death, and why the question is worthwhile.
Furthermore, we have lots of information available to inform us whether giving birth is wise or not. It's not as if we are subject to cosmic happenstance and just have to roll with the punches. So I disagree that it's like any other part of life where we don't have absolute knowledge of the future. We can make informed decisions even with the uncertainty.
Childbirth is an enabling event that endows the child with the ability and right to apply human reasoning as a way to grant or withhold consent. The condition of childhood negates and postpones the authority of that consent in all or most matters. The child has no voice or right of consent on childbirth.
Not if the child is so severely brain damaged due to the decisions of the parent that they never develop the ability to reason.
Is it a violation of consent to rape an unconscious person? Surely this cannot be your argument.
If someone go into a hospital and have sex with an unconscious person, do we wait till she wakes up to check if she consented or not? No, we arrest the person immediately.
The main violation here is that you should not take advantage of people who are not able to give consent.
An individual can give charity to any other individual.
With consent. Which the child has not given.
ex: lifting the child up without its consent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
