Reply #3: My opinion isn't set, [View All]

and I know that C-sections are dangerous, if I had to choose between saving the mother's life and saving the baby's I would choose the mother, and I know there are no guarantees that the woman would have come through the C-section okay, but I still have some reservations about someone making that decision when the birth is imminent. That's where the issue get's a bit mucky for me. I've always described my position as "life does not begin at conception, and neither does it begin at birth." If one accepts that hypothesis than you're faced with a question of whether the health of the child or the health of the mother is more important. Well in this matter I'll take the part of the Elephant in times of drought - you can always make more babies. Assume then (hypothetically), that the health of the mother is not at risk (except for the addition of a rather nasty scar) does the child deserve to be born? Assume the mother was going to go through the birth until she found out that she would have to have a ceserean, than what? I know all operations are dangerous, so I don't expect you to conceed that this particular individual was wrong, and I don't know all the facts of the case, but is human life not conferred upon us until our heads have been pushed through a vaginal canal? Is it the light and sound that erupt around us when we peer out into the world? I'm sorry if I've been to strident, but I've never been black and white on this issue.