Pro-choice thoughts and arguments

  THE GHOST IN THE MACHINE It is not for me to resolve the philosophical and scientific problem of consciousness and how consciousness emerges and works. Several books have been published for whoever is interested in this question. For my purpose, which is to shed some further light on what I believe to be the moral permissibility of abortion, it is enough to define consciousness as sentience and awareness of internal and external existence, and a sense of selfhood or identity, which I believe is the generally accepted definition. And although the phrase “ghost in the machine” was coined to critique the notion of a duality of mind versus matter, I will only be using it metaphorically. I will hereunder be arguing for the permissibility of at least most abortions (those that are performed prior to 24 weeks along the pregnancy) through the metaphor of “ghost in the machine” taken from both a secular and religious (mainly Catholic) perspective. There are two main theories about wha...

THE LOGIC OF RIGHTS 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝟭. 𝗢𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝗯𝗲𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗮𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗿𝗲𝘀. 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝟮. 𝗜𝘁 𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗲𝘀 𝘀𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗸 𝗼𝗳 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗿𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗲𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝘄𝗵𝗼𝗺 𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿. 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝟯. 𝗕𝗲𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗮𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀. 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝟰. 𝗧𝗼 𝗯𝗲 𝗮𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲  𝗮 𝗯𝗲𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱𝘀 𝗮 𝘀𝘂𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲. 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝟱. 𝗔 𝗵𝘂𝗺𝗮𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗲𝘁𝘂𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝟮𝟰 𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗸𝘀 𝗴𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻'𝘁 𝘆𝗲𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗮 𝘀𝘂𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗵𝗮𝘃...

EMBRYOS AND FOETUSES HAVE RIGHTS BECAUSE JOHN PACE SAYS SO Mr John Pace wrote a response to an article of mine  that was also published in an abridged version in The Times of Malta on January 16 (physical edition) but somehow did not make it to the online version. Apparently the editor chose “Life alone has no rights” as the heading, which, while factually true, is not the heading I submitted. This makes Mr Pace’s criticism of the title at best inconsequential, but I will address his concern (as well as the rest of his response) below. Mr Pace says that the “unbelievable title” is a “defiant disrespect of life inspired by another faith extolling the culture of death”. I suppose Mr Pace eats, and he eats plant or animal food that were once alive before they were killed to end up on his plate. So even though I did not choose the title myself, it is still factually true that life alone has no rights, otherwise Mr Pace would have to renounce eating any living beings or things. And...

  PRESIDENTIALLY UNFIT FOR PURPOSE You know someone is a fanatic when he can’t help always bringing up the same single issue on any occasion, even when he invites guests to commemorate a completely unrelated event. Such is our unelected President, who showed both rudeness and gross insensitivity today by first bringing up abortion during a Holocaust Remembrance Day ceremony at the Presidential Palace - when some of his invited guests might well have been Pro-Choice - and then by trivializing the terrible suffering of millions of Jews at the hands of the Nazis by comparing the Holocaust to abortions of non-sentient and non-conscious embryos and foetuses who would not even know they exist, and all this in the presence of a Jewish Rabbi. And the tragic thing is that he probably hasn’t got a clue on how offensive his speech is to people who are not fanatic extremists like he is.

  LEST WE FORGET – THE LIFE NETWORK FOUNDATION ARE COMPULSIVE LIARS It really shows that you have no argument when you must repeatedly resort to lies, even those already proven to be so, to defend your religious beliefs that you mask as “science”. Miriam Sciberras’ opinion piece in The Times of Malta of January 22 is a case in point. Let me list her four major lies and half-truths and expose them one by one. 1. “Abortion targets human beings in their most vulnerable state”. While it is true that a foetus is helpless in its state, it is equally true that at least until the 24 th week of gestation, a foetus cannot experience anything since it would not have yet obtained a sufficiently developed brain to make it aware of anything, feel anything or even know it exists at all. One can only describe as vulnerable, beings to whom it matters what happens to them. At least early to mid-term foetuses (on which most abortions are performed) can only be described as vulnerable if one ...

  OH LOOK, A “RELIGIO ET PATRIA” BIGOT WANTS TO HAVE OUR CITIZENSHIP REVOKED John Vassallo ( The Times of Malta, January 21 ), a “former ambassador to the EU” no less, tells us that “those who vote for abortion should not be called Maltese” and that Pro-Choice people are “the fifth column and are abhorrent to the majority of the Maltese”. Now where have we heard such bigoted talk before? Will he next propose that we wear a star on our lapel and be sent marching to concentration camps?  Would Vassallo have uttered such bigoted words in any of the EU institutions he used to frequent? I seriously doubt it. Bigots are generally cowards who only feign courage when they believe they are in a position of strength through forming a part of a real or perceived majority, and thus think they are able to oppress a minority. It is no coincidence that "they should not be called Maltese" is usually uttered by racist bigots when referring to people who demand that the authorities at the ve...

  SOMEONE REMIND JOE MIFSUD HE’S A MAGISTRATE, NOT AN INQUISITOR Magistrate Joe Mifsud, commenting on a murder case and conflating abortion with murder, said that “The Court regrets that for yet another time there was loss of life that the Court always believed should be protected from conception until death”. Magistrate Mifsud added that “this is what society wants, that the institutions listen to them and not to those who spread the culture of death and murder because certain lobbies that exist in our country make a noise”. Someone should remind Magistrate Mifsud that he’s a Magistrate, not an Inquisitor.   What society wants is for Magistrates not to publicly express their religious prejudice and bigotry that may influence (or appear to influence) their judgements in a Court of Law, judgements that should be religiously and politically impartial as stipulated in the Constitution and based exclusively on justice conditioned only by the law. And as someone has just broug...

  TRUTH? THE WHOLE TRUTH? ANYTHING BUT THE TRUTH. Since the very start of the Andrea Prudente case, Pro-Choice NGOs have always maintained that given that Ms Prudente’s foetus was non-viable, meaning that it would die anyway, it would be irresponsible to put her to any further risk to life and health by not allowing her to terminate her pregnancy. Ms Prudente was 15 weeks pregnant when she suffered a ruptured membrane that led her to be flown to Spain (reportedly paid by her insurance) the following week to have an abortion there after she was refused one in Malta. Following the testimony of Mater Dei Hospital’s consultant head of obstetrics and gynaecology, who said under oath that according to studies and developments over the past decades there is now a 79.2% survival rate of the “unborn baby” when the mother’s waters rupture before 20 weeks, the forced-birth activists and supporters, notoriously including Catholic priest Joe Borg, were quick to celebrate victory after only ...

  A WEB OF DECEIT INDEED, DEAR JOE BORG Testifying under oath in a court case involving a pregnant US woman denied a termination at Mater Dei hospital last year, consultant head of obstetrics and gynaecology at Mater Dei Hospital, Yves Muscat Baron last week stated that following developments over the past decades,  there is now a 79.2% survival rate of the "unborn baby" when the mother’s waters rupture before 20 weeks . Muscat Baron was testifying in constitutional proceedings related to Andrea Prudente, who suffered a ruptured membrane when she was 16 weeks pregnant. The news reports on the testimony, immediately  contested by Doctors for Choice and other pro-choice groups, elicited premature celebrations of victory from the anti-choice movement, particularly from Joe Borg, who, accusing the pro-choice NGOs of lying , said: “The Prudente case was the casus belli to justify (the government’s proposed bill that would permit the termination of pregnancy if the mothe...

REPETITION IS INDEED VERY POWERFUL Repetition is very powerful, Joe Borg tells us on January 15.  Indeed, it is, as evidenced by the institution he represents with its countless absurd teachings that could only be believed by the gullible through repetition. I assume that's also the point of reciting the Rosary, and not that God is hard of hearing. But let’s not go there and stay on topic lest this article takes me at least a whole year to finish. The man who constantly whines that he is “being silenced” , yet again got an opinion piece  published in Malta’s leading newspaper, this time telling us in its heading that abortion is a web of deceit. And yet, Borg devotes his whole article to criticising the real or perceived deceit of politicians and does not even devote one sentence to explaining how and in what way abortion is “deceitful”. What he does instead is express his own deceit which he knows that, if it is repeated often enough, will be believed by the gullible and by t...

HOW THE ANIMAL RIGHTS VIEW ALLOWS FOR THE MORAL PERMISSIBILITY OF ABORTION IN MOST CASES, AND HOW A NON-ARBITRARY CASE AGAINST ANIMAL RIGHTS WOULD HAVE TO ALLOW NOT ONLY FOR ALL ABORTIONS, BUT ALSO FOR INFANTICIDE. On 23 December of last year I wrote a short article showing that the interests view, logically extended to include non-human animals, necessarily leads to the recognition that all and only beings who have interests and have the capacity to experience may rationally be given moral consideration. Moreover, I claimed that people who give all sentient beings equal moral consideration (not to be confused with equal treatment), would argue that harming any sentient being may only be morally permissible if there are compelling reasons that might override the protection of those beings’ rights.   I therefore argued that the pro-life view, to be morally and rationally consistent, must explain why it would be immoral to terminate a life that has no interests (and doesn’t even k...

  THE DNA FALLACY AND POTENTIAL PERSONHOOD REVISITED Some get their morals from intuition, some from philosophy and others from religion.   Ms Carmen Zammit (who, she informs us, has a Master’s Degree in Theology), writing to The Times (January 13) clearly gets her morals from religion, which is fine as long as religious beliefs are not imposed on anyone who does not share her beliefs. Ms Zammit, in her opinion piece entitled “ My body, not my choice ”, tells us that “though (she is) a woman of faith, (she) is not writing from a faith perspective…(she) is writing on the basis of reason – a capacity unique to human beings and one which we should use more often in the way we dialogue with each other”.   Yet, Ms Zammit fails to even attempt to put forward any rational philosophical arguments in support of her biased and prejudiced opinions which she takes as unquestioned and unquestionable facts.   And while she brings up scientific facts, she fails to give any philos...

𝗣𝗢𝗧𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗜𝗔𝗟 𝗔𝗗𝗔𝗠 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗣𝗢𝗧𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗜𝗔𝗟 𝗘𝗩𝗘 Modern science shows us that embryos and foetuses develop gradually, incrementally, and in stages. Embryology also tells us that foetal sentience and consciousness require a sophisticated network of highly interconnected components (nerve cells). The thalamo-cortical complex that provides consciousness with its highly elaborate content, begins to be in place only between the 24th and the 28th week of gestation. This means that prior to the 24th week, the foetus is just growing living flesh that besides feeling nothing, is not even aware of its existence. It is basically a body with only the potential of becoming a person with a subjective awareness and interests. Moreover, the ability to think about oneself as an object of perception only develops gradually in the years after birth. Indeed, reflective self-awareness only emerges between 15 and 18 months after birth. Faced with these scientific facts, and being told that right...