Rath on 16 May 2009
| jv103 said: Question: How long do we have a moral obligation as a society to ensure the survivability of an individual? As long as they are cute? Until they are 18? Or is it simply just let them be born and fight for themselves? I don't get it. How many people are for implementing breathalizers in all motorized vehicles to prevent deaths? What if someone who is drunk hits someone else - obviously it wasn't the victims "choice" - rates can be reduced - but these aren't issues. I'm just wondering why? Is it cause babies are just so cute? Who's for requiring a law that makes every mother take 800mcg of folic acid a day during pregnancy? How about making it illegal to smoke or drink during pregnancy? I don't want to go on either side of the issue really. I'm just wondering why we don't have as many people pushing for laws to maintain a healthy, safe, secure and protected life for that child once its born. Or maybe I am missing something. |
There has to be a healthy balance between freedom of the people and protection of people, I don't think it would be ethical or practical to force people to stop smoking drinking and to force people to take folic acid during pregnancy. Mind you, I think somebody is a shit parent if they do smoke and drink during pregnancy.
Also implementing breathalysers in cars has massive problems, asthmatics and other people with breathing difficulties for example would be royally screwed.
