Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
2003
A paper from 2003: In a recent letter (August 2001, p. 5), a " Veg-News " reader asked why she does not see the vegetarian and animal rights communities taking a stand against abortion. She said it seems to be a "great contradiction" to respect animal life, but to not equally respect human life by opposing abortion. She asked that this issue be addressed. I would like to do so, especially since it's a common concern. Most animal rights advocates have been asked, 'Why don't you do something to save aborted babies?' although, surely nearly all the hecklers who ask this question have never done anything to oppose any abortions. [1] Although the hecklers usually don't stay for an answer, I provide one below.
Should your views on abortion influence your views on animal rights? Should your views on the moral status of animals influence your views on the moral status of human fetuses? Generally, no. Most arguments against abortion have no implications for animal rights and those that might seem to be poor arguments against abortion. And arguments for animal rights only have implications for rare, later abortions of conscious fetuses, not the majority of abortions that affect early, pre-conscious fetuses. On the other sides, though, a common of objection to animal rights does support a pro-life view and an influential feminist pro-choice argument does suggest positive implications for animals, though. Overall, the topic of abortion presents with an inherent complexity never analogously present in animal rights issues – the perspective of the pregnant woman whose life and body the fetus depends on – and so the issues are importantly distinct.
2016 •
Animals and Ethics 101 helps readers identify and evaluate the arguments for and against various uses of animals, such: - Is it morally wrong to experiment on animals? Why or why not? - Is it morally permissible to eat meat? Why or why not? - Are we morally obligated to provide pets with veterinary care (and, if so, how much?)? Why or why not? And other challenging issues and questions. Developed as a companion volume to an online "Animals & Ethics" course, it is ideal for classroom use, discussion groups or self study. The book presupposes no conclusions on these controversial moral questions about the treatment of animals, and argues for none either. Its goal is to help the reader better engage the issues and arguments on all sides with greater clarity, understanding and argumentative rigor. Nathan Nobis, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Philosophy at Morehouse College in Atlanta, GA USA. NathanNobis.com Nathan Nobis. Animals & Ethics 101: Thinking Critically About Animal Rights. Open Philosophy Press, 2016. Buy the book on Amazon in paperback for $5.99 or Kindle for $2.99, or download the book for free. Reviews on Amazon and the Open Textbook Library. Available through www.AnimalEthics101.com
International Journal of the Humanities
“Consistency in Ecofeminist Ethics: Contextual Moral Vegetarianism and Abortion" (2005/2006)2006 •
Feminists today are internally divided on the question whether they ought also to champion the interests of non-human animals. Some ecologically-minded feminists (or ecofeminists) have advanced contextual moral vegetarianism as a logical outcome of feminism. Other feminists have been either non-committal or even hostile to that view for a variety of reasons, one being a fear that animal advocacy will affect the abortion debate in a manner unfavourable to “choice.” This article examines whether an ecofeminist drive toward contextual moral vegetarianism must come at the expense of these more conventional feminist commitments and ultimately concludes that it need not. Methodologically speaking, I describe the advantages and limitations of the three ways that vegetarian ecofeminists commonly make their case for contextual moral vegetarianism and assess their implications for abortion in each. The first approach provides accounts of animal moral standing, generally employs the “argument from marginal cases,” and is largely associated with the work of male academicians. I show how even this approach which grants comparable moral standing to some animals and fetuses of late gestational age can nevertheless avoid compromising standard feminist commitments to reproductive freedom. The second approach is an “ethic of care” toward animals that takes seriously our affective response to, and concrete experience with, both animal suffering and well-being. I demonstrate how care-theory can likewise avoid important concessions with respect to abortion, though also submit that care-theory, if left unpoliticized, holds dangers of its own. The final approach is an analysis of the larger socio-political context in which current meat consumption and production takes place. While this approach best explains why vegetarian ecofeminists generally prescribe contextual—not universal—moral vegetarianism, vegetarian ecofeminism would most benefit from a combination of all three.
2015 •
When a child is born very prematurely, everything is done to save him. If this is not possible, he receives comforting care and is supported until his death. Neonatal palliative care is well developed in many hospitals. The situation is different for those children who are born alive after an abortion. Every year in Europe, children are born alive at the time of the abortion procedure after the 20th week of pregnancy. They are abandoned to die without care, struggling to breathe, sometimes for several hours, or they are killed by lethal injection or suffocation, and often thrown away with medical waste. The method most often used to perform late abortions in some countries is called “dilation-evacuation,” where the cervix is dilated to remove the baby with surgical pliers, which is very painful. He is often extracted in pieces. Generally, analgesia or feticide are not used beforehand. You will find in this report official data and testimonies of medical practitioners who witnessed these practices.
Abortion is the ending of pregnancy by removing a fetus or embryo before it can survive outside the uterus. An abortion that occurs spontaneously is also known as a miscarriage. An abortion may be caused purposely and is then called an induced abortion, or less frequently, "induced miscarriage". The word abortion is often used to mean only induced abortions. A similar procedure after the fetus could potentially survive outside the womb is known as a "late termination of pregnancy".
Monash Bioethics Review Vol 31 N 2
WHY POSTNATAL ABORTION THROWS THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATH WATER (pre-review version)2013 •
2012 •
2021 •
90 NUMARALI EDİRNE ŞER'İYYE SİCİLİNDEKİ TEREKE KAYITLARINA GÖRE DÖNEM DEĞERLENDİRMESİ
90 NUMARALI EDİRNE ŞER'İYYE SİCİLİNDEKİ TEREKE KAYITLARINA GÖRE DÖNEM DEĞERLENDİRMESİEnvironmental Monitoring and Assessment, Springer
Speciation of selected heavy metals geochemistry in surface sediments from Tirumalairajan river estuary, east coast of India.Design, Control and Applications of Mechatronic Systems in Engineering
Sensors and Digital Signal Conditioning in Mechatronic Systems2017 •
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Neural Information Processing, 2002. ICONIP '02.
An abstract model of a cortical hypercolumnThe Turkish journal of pediatrics
The mechanical properties and stiffness of aorta in obese childrenJournal of research in health sciences
Levels of alarm thresholds of meningitis outbreaks in Hamadan Province, west of Iran2015 •
Studi Irlandesi a Journal of Irish Studies
The Smart Wizard: Literature as a Lie, Theatre as a Rite (Giorgio Manganelli reads W.B. Yeats)2012 •
Proceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management
From Known to Unknown