You consider a lump of cells a baby? Do you consider sperm a baby? What about an egg, or the DNA strands inside the sperm? Are those babies?
Abortion is wrong no matter what! Part 2
- Thread starter Rawisbetter!
- Start date
Well of course it is, nobody's going to argue that killing babies is a good thing to do. But that's not the issue; there *is* another side. The issue is, really, what constitutes a human life, and under what circumstances is it permissible to terminate it? All societies have accepted that killing humans is justifiable under certain circumstances. The most obvious ones are self defence and war, but those don't really apply on the matter of abortion, except perhaps in those rare circumstances when attempting to carry a baby to term genuinely represents a threat to the mother's life so the "self defence" argument might apply. Bit of a stretch though.
I think you--and some others here--are trying to define a very complex ethical question in too simple terms. You've essentially stated that abortion is murder, murder is wrong, therefore abortion is wrong, which is really the logical fallacy called begging the question: the conclusion is one of your assumptions. Your characterization of it as immoral and a sin also suggests your position is religiously based. You're entitled to your opinion of course, but understand that that's all it is, just an opinion, not a fact, and you're not entitled to condemn others who have different opinions that are at least as logically defensible as yours. Clearly you would also deny the legitimacy of any such defences, but that again is religiously based and therefore does not apply outside the circle of believers who think as you do.
You should also know that no argument against abortion can be made from biblical references. The claim in the OP in the now-locked original thread that the Bible says it's wrong is simply false. The Bible says almost nothing directly about abortion, and nowhere does it explicitly declare it to be wrong. The Bible nowhere explicitly specifies what a human life is either, though the various instructions it offers about taking a census suggest it doesn't consider anyone less than a month old (or female) to be a person. There are also several passages in which god himself causes or threatens to cause abortions in women who've displeased him, so you can't argue that god thinks its absolutely wrong.
You could of course try to stretch the "Thou shalt not kill" commandment to cover abortion, but that again is too simplistic and begs the question. That commandment is clearly not a blanket condemnation of killing humans. The Israelites who received it then proceeded to slaughter people left and right in their takeover of the Promised Land from the people who occupied it at the time, with the connivance and obvious approval of god. What it means is "Thou shalt not kill each other," i.e. Israelites. Anybody else is fair game.
maybe i'm taking what you said wrong, but everyone gave their own opinion. This is my main reason for thinking what I do about abortion (maybe it will open up the reasons why I say what I do). I never tell people the reason for it. I was raped and I got pregnant, I was never once given the option of having an abortion. I see the guy who raped me every day and he raped me not one but twice both times I got pregnant. I had a miscarrage both times, but having the option of having an abortion and not having to deal with the stress I went though would of been nice.
I'm 20 years old now and I found out less then 6 months ago that I can't have kids, I have endometreosis so badly that if I want kids the only way is having a surgery done and even then it's not guaranteed that I will be able to have kids. It pisses me off and depresses me alot to read of these 9-17 year old girls who have unprotected sex and have had 10-20 abortions and still have unprotected sex. If they really don't want to get pregnant then maybe they should either stop having sex or use protection.
Alot of teenage girls use abortion as birth control and if I could I would talk some sense into them. I guess you'd have to be in my position to understand what it's like for me.
If a person is having a child, and they find out that after 4 months of pregnancy that the childs brain has not formed and they have only a 0-2% chance of survival after birth and the mother decides that she cannot go through the agony of going through the pregnancy to only have to bury her child, would that also be considered immoral, a sin or murder?
There are many reasons why women have abortions, not just because of rape or incest, but what about those that have abortions due to handicap, or becaue its a life or death situation such as the mother may not survive? I believe it is the womans choice, even if they have been "stupid between the sheets" is that any reason to bring a child into the world that was clearly not wanted or planned, would that be far crueler to the child if they mother was forced to keep the child and they then spend a lifetime goign from foster parent to foster parent.
Im not saying abortion is right but for the individual I think that they should have that choice.
I see alot of realy interesting ideas and thinking transpiring in this thread, as apposed to the outright ignorance that transpired in the other.
I would have to agree with Zz, that hate is not acceptable, but hate begets hate. Unfortunetly, religous zealots have alot of hate for those that merely do not follow the teachings of their God and in my eyes, are only minutely better then Muslim extremists, due to the fact that they don't send their children to kill innocent people. But they preach and spread intolerance without conscience and that is unacceptable.
I do harbour a considerable amount of hate organized religions that seek to enforce their BRAND of ideologies on the masses. The Catholic Church in particular is a real sore spot for, having experienced their evils first hand. But I try to let by gones be by gones and live on in peace, until I see them start their crusades, then I feel compelled to act. Yes my actions seem bigotous and hate filled, but that bigotry is for the most part under control and not spread in the name of a superior being until drawn upon in defence.
In other words, if they chose to live on and not condemn those that live in peace without the "benefit" of their God, I would not be forced to bear my teeth as it were.
btw, I find it entertainingly humourous that all the Church goers seem to fail to respond to my first major contribution to this thread. I wonder why that is?
I would have to agree with Zz, that hate is not acceptable, but hate begets hate. Unfortunetly, religous zealots have alot of hate for those that merely do not follow the teachings of their God and in my eyes, are only minutely better then Muslim extremists, due to the fact that they don't send their children to kill innocent people. But they preach and spread intolerance without conscience and that is unacceptable.
I do harbour a considerable amount of hate organized religions that seek to enforce their BRAND of ideologies on the masses. The Catholic Church in particular is a real sore spot for, having experienced their evils first hand. But I try to let by gones be by gones and live on in peace, until I see them start their crusades, then I feel compelled to act. Yes my actions seem bigotous and hate filled, but that bigotry is for the most part under control and not spread in the name of a superior being until drawn upon in defence.
In other words, if they chose to live on and not condemn those that live in peace without the "benefit" of their God, I would not be forced to bear my teeth as it were.
btw, I find it entertainingly humourous that all the Church goers seem to fail to respond to my first major contribution to this thread. I wonder why that is?
TenPenny
Way back on page 3 we had an exchange and I wanted to add something to your comment - while at the time I first read it I was involved only in some of the situations women may opt for abortion whether we agree or not....
You have voiced a concern for the "option the male should have" and I agree - in all cases where love and consideration between the couple exists - even if it is not a question of marriage or life-long
partnership.... when pregnancy occurs because of a genuine enjoyment of sexual relations between two responsible individuals... BOTH responsible partners should have input as to whether an abortion, pregnancy, adoption or single parenting should be discussed.
Mistakes happen and nature is a particularly demanding force.... many people become pregnant without planning ahead... even if they use protection sometimes pregnancy still results.... this would be the majority of cases of course and I hope the "father to be" would have a choice as well as
the "mother to be"..... it should not be a woman's decision alone.
In the cases I wrote about earlier when a woman becomes used for sex and/or battered or unable to consent for other reasons.... I honestly believe other rules come into play.... that is what I was writing about.
I have to restate one issue which is of import.... no woman has ever had an abortion who does not carry that burden of decision for the remainder of her life....whether acknowledged in her conscious mind or not.... it becomes part of her past and her future, if she is of rational mind.
Way back on page 3 we had an exchange and I wanted to add something to your comment - while at the time I first read it I was involved only in some of the situations women may opt for abortion whether we agree or not....
You have voiced a concern for the "option the male should have" and I agree - in all cases where love and consideration between the couple exists - even if it is not a question of marriage or life-long
partnership.... when pregnancy occurs because of a genuine enjoyment of sexual relations between two responsible individuals... BOTH responsible partners should have input as to whether an abortion, pregnancy, adoption or single parenting should be discussed.
Mistakes happen and nature is a particularly demanding force.... many people become pregnant without planning ahead... even if they use protection sometimes pregnancy still results.... this would be the majority of cases of course and I hope the "father to be" would have a choice as well as
the "mother to be"..... it should not be a woman's decision alone.
In the cases I wrote about earlier when a woman becomes used for sex and/or battered or unable to consent for other reasons.... I honestly believe other rules come into play.... that is what I was writing about.
I have to restate one issue which is of import.... no woman has ever had an abortion who does not carry that burden of decision for the remainder of her life....whether acknowledged in her conscious mind or not.... it becomes part of her past and her future, if she is of rational mind.
.............So does anyone know of a free proxy I can download? Because I have some unfinished arguments to deal with on Gametalk.
You'll have to wait until the rest of the fascist religious zealots come online, none of us lovers of freedom want to help you spread your virus.
I highly doubt you contain the compassion nor the reverance for woman, to conduct yourself in meaningful debate.
A bit of advice...
Of the "Free Proxies" that are around, most will not allow you to do http: post or http: get, which are 2 functions you need to post on a forum. If you want those 2 capabilities, you will have to pay for them. There are some 100% free proxies around, but you will run into extremely slow data transfer problems because you requests are being routed half way around the world.
You see, to me that points out the real devil of selfishness which has been the curse of the mid/late 20th century through now. "Global warming may affect me so I'm all for finding and supporting those who want to stop it and thereby help me. But as for abortion: if I want a baby I'll have one. If I don't, I'll abort, and nobody had better try to stop me. And of course, if it isn't my baby involved, I don't really care one way or the other. If I wouldn't have an abortion personally, I certainly can't presume to tell somebody else how to live her life. . .and since I am not having an abortion personally I'm totally morally in the right for being tolerant enough to allow others their abortions."
How have we come to this, that we call ourselves Christians and have stood idly by for a generation while innocents are brutally killed in a silent holocaust?? I am ashamed all people today. How can we let this go on?
How have we come to this, that we call ourselves Christians and have stood idly by for a generation while innocents are brutally killed in a silent holocaust?? I am ashamed all people today. How can we let this go on?
honestly why do you think you can lay down the law on other people's bodies? If i started a religion which made noses a sin, would you be happy if i told you to cut yours off?
Last edited:
Then preach, preach love and try and understand that there are those that will not see your point of view, being a fascist about it is hardly Christian. Condemning and labeling is about the same.
No he would laugh, call you a satanist and then call for you to be burned at the stake.
First off not all of us call ourselves Christians. I won't bother bringing up the atrocities levelled at groups of people under the banner of religion.
"How can we let this go on?"
It's not your place to determine what is and what is not allowed to happen. Abortions are rarely as simple as the pro-lifers would have people believe. This message is sprinkled throughout the thread, but it appears that some keep insisting it is their god-given right to police us all.
There are studies that suggest the drop in crime rate in NYC is due more to abortion than anything, so by that measure, abortion is a good thing for society.
