The discussion on Friday seemed like it moved from science and morality to purely morality and there are a number of questions that I would like to pose concerned both the scientific nature and also about ethics/morality:

Everyone seemed to accept the definition that the fertilized egg at conception was a "child" and not a collection of cells -- scientifically is this fair? accurrate? If we do not accept that definition of "child", what happens to the debate?

It was interesting to see the discussion focus only on the females and their decision, or lack of one, in this process. Likewise the responsibility of men's actions were absent. IN SD, should men be held responsible for the pregnancy as well? How?

If a man gets a woman pregnant should he be required to pay for prenatal care? Doctor's visits?

Should he be forced to go to the doctors and baby classes (which would mean missing school or work)?

Should his name be distributed as getting this girl pregnant?

If he tells her to abort, should he be charged with a crime?

If she decides to keep the baby, should the man be forced to take care of the baby (at least every other week)? Why or why not? What if the woman does not want to take care of the child? Should the man also be responsible for the child's other needs?

What if the man does not want to give the child up for abortion?

Many couples can not take care of children with severe deformities or mental deficiencies. Should they be forced to nurture a deformed or mentally deficient child for 9 mos?

Most likely that child will be raised by the state; is that fair to the child? How will the state pay for this? Medicare and medicaid already can not handle the people they serve now and many states are being bankrupted by these responsibilities, so how will this fit in? Should money even be a consideration?

There are millions of spontaneous abortions every year -- if a woman exercises too much and has a miscarriage, should she be charged? Can a man bring suit against her if she thinks she is not doing enough to protect the fetus?

If a woman can not afford good prenatal care and has a natural abortion, can she sue the state for not providing her with the care she needed to properly care for the fetus?

Nietzsche states that degenerates who can't control themselves are the worst moralizers and argues that they just want to determine "guilt" and "punish" others. Is the SD law in this vein? How so? Or why not? Explore?

Should we outlaw contraception? Is contraception just a way to "kill" a possible child? Many religious people believe this to be so, so should we listen to them? If not, which religious people should we listen to? Why?

If a person can not afford contraception, should they not be allowed to have sex?

If a state bans all contraception (as suggested in MO -- at least to the poor), should those people not have sex since there is no 100% effective way to make sure a woman does not get pregnant?

How do we justify forced sterilization of some people while arguing abortion is murder?

These were some of the questions off the top of my head -- your thoughts?