Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Is Abortion Immoral?


StPaul

Recommended Posts

Basically, it is a living, separate person who like all others, depend on its environment to live. It is simply in the unique situation where its environment is that of the mother's body. Because it is a human, the mother has no right to kill it.

 

The fetus is in the unique situation where the environment it is using resources from is a separate, living person. Because the mother is living, separate person, the fetus has no right to harm (and in some cases kill) the mother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe it is wrong for one simple fact. The growing fetus/embryo/baby... person, is dependent on its mother's uterus, umbilical cord, blood, etc. to live. Basically, it is a living, separate person who like all others, depend on its environment to live. It is simply in the unique situation where its environment is that of the mother's body.

 

Well you have the right to believe whatever you believe. For what it is worth I agree with you about a fetus being a person after the 1st trimester. However we disagree about a mother's right to kill that person. That is okay because we can agree to disagree.

 

Because it is a human, the mother has no right to kill it. If you say she does, then why can't she kill it the minute it's born? Or a month later?

 

If you have to kill someone then doing it before birth is the most merciful time to do it in my opinion.

 

I also boldly proclaim that there is no book or anything invisible in the sky telling me I should feel this way. It's just my gut belief.

 

Good for you. I mean that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe it is wrong for one simple fact. The growing fetus/embryo/baby... person, is dependent on its mother's uterus, umbilical cord, blood, etc. to live. Basically, it is a living, separate person who like all others, depend on its environment to live. It is simply in the unique situation where its environment is that of the mother's body. Because it is a human, the mother has no right to kill it. If you say she does, then why can't she kill it the minute it's born? Or a month later?

Now all the arguments will start about how late or early into the whole developmental process it's ok. It doesn't matter to me. All humans have a right to life. Period.

 

Btw, that includes children with birth defects and chromosome abnormalities. Go ask a parent of a Down Syndrome kid.

 

And please don't bring the rape/incest/life-of-the-mother into this because those are extreme exceptions. This is about the topic in general as it relates to 99.9% of cases.

 

I also boldly proclaim that there is no book or anything invisible in the sky telling me I should feel this way. It's just my gut belief.

 

My question to you then what do you do about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many embryos, around half, are auto-aborted by the mother's body anyway. If the body can choose to abort, then why can't the mind of the mother choose to abort within a limited time frame?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So y'all are arguing for a loving, trustfilled, committed relationship? This is not Biblical?

 

:lmao:

 

Which part? The part where god the father made a bet with the devil and totally fucked over his child Job? The part where the loving father chose to create a system that demands sacrifice and infinite punishment for finite crimes? The part where he blessed those who followed him, such as David and Sol with hundreds of wives and concubines?

 

Exactly what part of the bible discusses loving family values and committed trust-filled relationships?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe it is wrong for one simple fact. The growing fetus/embryo/baby... person, is dependent on its mother's uterus, umbilical cord, blood, etc. to live. Basically, it is a living, separate person who like all others, depend on its environment to live. It is simply in the unique situation where its environment is that of the mother's body. Because it is a human, the mother has no right to kill it. If you say she does, then why can't she kill it the minute it's born? Or a month later?

Now all the arguments will start about how late or early into the whole developmental process it's ok. It doesn't matter to me. All humans have a right to life. Period.

 

Life is a state of a cell or organism characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction. A fetus is life, just as an embryo, a sperm, an ant, an acorn, and a tree, are all life. All these forms of life have no rights. The characteristic of life is necessary to possess rights, but it alone is insufficient.

 

Children, unlike fetuses, do possess individual rights. A new born child, unlike a fetus, is a physically separate entity. A fetus cannot exist as a sovereign entity, but requires a host to survive. A fetus' so called right to life boils down to the "right to remain in the womb"—and such a "right" is only possible by the violation of the actual right of the pregnant woman to her body. In contrast, observe that a child's right to life does not contradict the rights of anyone else. The principle here is that any alleged "right" that by nature entails the violation of the rights of another is not a right. There is no such thing as "trading one's rights for the rights of others."

Btw, that includes children with birth defects and chromosome abnormalities. Go ask a parent of a Down Syndrome kid.

 

Down Syndrome isn't the only chromosomal abnormality in the world. Ever seen a kid with Tay-Sachs disease? Sirenomelia? Anencephaly?

Put yourself in this guy's shoes:

 

And please don't bring the rape/incest/life-of-the-mother into this because those are extreme exceptions. This is about the topic in general as it relates to 99.9% of cases.

 

When something happens to YOU, it never feels like an "extreme" exception or rare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago I watched an episode of the PBS science show Nova called "The Secret Life of the Unborn Child." Using fibre optics (Like I said it was a while ago... Lol) they documented the development of an unborn child from zygoat to birth. It was not "pro-life propoganda" by any means, or anything like that, it was simply a science show. I'm sorry... I don't care what kind of philosophical pro-choice bullshit you throw my way, or ex-Christian back-lash, after watching that show I will never be in favor of abortion... Ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago I watched an episode of the PBS science show Nova called "The Secret Life of the Unborn Child." Using fibre optics (Like I said it was a while ago... Lol) they documented the development of an unborn child from zygoat to birth. It was not "pro-life propoganda" by any means, or anything like that, it was simply a science show. I'm sorry... I don't care what kind of philosophical pro-choice bullshit you throw my way, or ex-Christian back-lash, after watching that show I will never be in favor of abortion... Ever.

 

That's perfectly fine as a personal opinion, as long as you realize its none of your business to impose your personal views on anyone else's actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago I watched an episode of the PBS science show Nova called "The Secret Life of the Unborn Child." Using fibre optics (Like I said it was a while ago... Lol) they documented the development of an unborn child from zygoat to birth. It was not "pro-life propoganda" by any means, or anything like that, it was simply a science show. I'm sorry... I don't care what kind of philosophical pro-choice bullshit you throw my way, or ex-Christian back-lash, after watching that show I will never be in favor of abortion... Ever.

 

Rather convincing testamony MWTP, thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The part where the loving father chose to create a system that demands sacrifice and infinite punishment for finite crimes?

Exactly what part of the bible discusses loving family values and committed trust-filled relationships?

 

I would ask who broke the initial relationship per the story. Why would there not be a need to then sacrifice to regain the unity. And for whose benefit is it? Gods?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The part where the loving father chose to create a system that demands sacrifice and infinite punishment for finite crimes?

Exactly what part of the bible discusses loving family values and committed trust-filled relationships?

 

I would ask who broke the initial relationship per the story.

 

If the story is the word of God then God is a tyrant with the self image of a young child.

 

ME GOOD! you bad!

Do what I say or else you die!

Don't like it? Then die!

I make the rules so you better believe I'm good

And worship me! I said worship me!

 

Why would there not be a need to then sacrifice to regain the unity. And for whose benefit is it? Gods?

 

Certainly not for the benefit of all the animals who were just minding their own business but were killed by humans to satisfy the religion's requirements. What did the poor fluffy animals do to God? Oh that is right - they are innocent.

 

The truth is this was based on older paganism that wasn't all that different than offering animal sacrifices to Zeus or similar idols. When the religion changed to monotheism the culture changed slowly and they couldn't remove the inconsistencies. So people cover it up with "God is mysterious".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The part where the loving father chose to create a system that demands sacrifice and infinite punishment for finite crimes?

Exactly what part of the bible discusses loving family values and committed trust-filled relationships?

 

I would ask who broke the initial relationship per the story.

 

If the story is the word of God then God is a tyrant with the self image of a young child.

 

ME GOOD! you bad!

Do what I say or else you die!

Don't like it? Then die!

I make the rules so you better believe I'm good

And worship me! I said worship me!

 

Why would there not be a need to then sacrifice to regain the unity. And for whose benefit is it? Gods?

 

Certainly not for the benefit of all the animals who were just minding their own business but were killed by humans to satisfy the religion's requirements. What did the poor fluffy animals do to God? Oh that is right - they are innocent.

 

The truth is this was based on older paganism that wasn't all that different than offering animal sacrifices to Zeus or similar idols. When the religion changed to monotheism the culture changed slowly and they couldn't remove the inconsistencies. So people cover it up with "God is mysterious".

 

Dude, could you see it in your heart to just leave me alone. I really don't like your perspective and it's tempting me to be an ass. Please sir, I would appreciate it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And please don't bring the rape/incest/life-of-the-mother into this because those are extreme exceptions. This is about the topic in general as it relates to 99.9% of cases.

 

Please do not diminish the heartache the vast, vast, vast majority of women endure as they debate the agonising decision of whether to carry or abort the child inside of them. Abortion is an EXTREME decision to have to make in the first place. And I have not met one single woman who had an abortion, regardless of their reasons for it, and as vastly different as they may be, who did not think about that aborted child for the rest of their lives, of how old that child would be now. Not only that, but please do not diminish the strong maternal instincts the women who have abortions have. Women who have abortions are not emotionless, uncaring beings without maternal instincts. They simply have found themselves in a situation where they have to consider a decision that is very painful and even abhorrent to many of the women who do have an abortion. I am pro-choice. But there is no way in hell I would ever want to face such a decision, and I think that the women who do face that decision are very, very, very brave, because they know that there will always be someone out there willing to condemn them for that decision, regardless of the reasons for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm uncomfortable with the idea of terminating a pregnancy that's fairly advanced, after the nervous system and internal organs have developed, but at the same time I would not attempt to impede a woman from obtaining an abortion because she should retain the right to control her own body.

 

I would actually prefer much easier access to abortion early in the pregnancy (up to 6-8 weeks or so); hopefully that would translate into fewer later-term abortions.

 

I agree. I can't really understand why a woman (unless she just was trying to get money together and couldn't afford it before then) would wait to get an abortion. The earlier the better. I think part of the problem is... when a lot of people talk about abortion and are against it... in their heads they're thinking about third trimester abortions... fetuses that actually look like babies... when most women who plan to abort want to do it as SOON as possible. But then you have these weird waiting periods and all this red tape to get through to get an abortion. So it seems fairly counter productive. If people are really that concerned about late term abortions then they need to get out of the way of the women in their first trimester who are trying to get one. Do they not connect the dots and understand the concept of the time elapse that happens between a woman finding out she's pregnant, bizarre waiting periods in some states and counseling and blah blah... and the time continuing to tick away on the pregnancy during that period? They need to make up their mind. If their biggest concern is third trimester (even if they hate it all the time they seem to hate it more THEN), then they need to back out of the way and stop putting pressure on legislators to create all this ridiculous red tape that makes it far more likely the fetus will be a lot more developed before it's aborted.

 

None of this is going to stop women who want abortions. Making it illegal wont' stop them either. Some women will go to ANY lengths to not have a child. I know because i'm one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a woman has absolute control of her body, then how is it that she is not liable for spreading her legs, knowing what is "going on down there", and later killing the results of the union that she feels growing within her?

You can't own everything, and then blame some stuff on somebody else.

 

LMAO. I totally wasn't wrong for pointing out on the other abortion thread that it's not about life... it's about punishing a woman for spreading her legs. i even used the same phrase. Nice. The problem with trying to legislate personal moral issues like drugs, porn, prostitution, abortion... is that you really can't legislate everybody's lives and no matter what laws are enacted, people find ways around them to do the things they want to do which they don't feel are immoral. And who is blaming stuff on anybody? It's not a blame issue. Unwanted baby. Abortion. No blame in that equation. Just making a life choice and not allowing oneself to be enslaved by their biology. Women haven't been mere incubators for quite awhile now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am finally finally learning how to rest. I am learning how not to be so clever.

 

I think this abortion issue is a grey zone. I didn't vote in the poll because both options seem... strange. I think this is a place for compromise. I really really have a great deal of contempt for the pro-choice people who will not acknowledge that a human life is initiated at conception. And I also have a great deal of contempt for the pro-life people who will not acknoweldge the facts of natural power.

 

Here's the compromise I have reached in my own mind. If I was a dictator of a nation this is what I would tell my people...

 

"Good citizens, it will be acknowledged that mothers have a natural right and power to kill their newly developing offspring. However this right of female brutality will be regulated by the State. She will be legally allowed to excercise this right between conception and 3 months of gestation. I have spoken and so it is."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The woman is the vehicle....it's not her right to kill.

 

 

 

 

Ewww. A volvo is a vehicle. I'm a person. (and whether or not a fetus is a person is irrelevant, it's a completely parasitic entity for 22 weeks,)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an aside... are there any other women here who feel that if abortion became illegal that it would be simpler not to deal with men at all? If I were single, I could definitely see myself switching to women over this issue alone. Orgasms without risk! Sign me up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago I watched an episode of the PBS science show Nova called "The Secret Life of the Unborn Child." Using fibre optics (Like I said it was a while ago... Lol) they documented the development of an unborn child from zygoat to birth. It was not "pro-life propoganda" by any means, or anything like that, it was simply a science show. I'm sorry... I don't care what kind of philosophical pro-choice bullshit you throw my way, or ex-Christian back-lash, after watching that show I will never be in favor of abortion... Ever.

 

How about if you got to watch the pain and suffering a woman goes through that was forced to have an unwanted pregnancy and give birth with all the attendant risks and pain and emotional upset and financial upset and generally life-ruining situation that causes for many women? Would it take the shine off the polished turd? Many things can be infinitely miraculous from a distance... or if you choose it. Like if you get pregnant and you think it's all miraculous and amazing... that's lovely for you. But no one should have to go through pregnancy, birth, or the stress and financial drain of raising a child if they do not CONSENT to it.

 

Just like sex can be a beautiful thing between two people sealing their union when there is consent. Without consent it devolves to the ugliness of rape. It baffles me how people get such a hard on for the unborn, while simultaneously finding a rape-like situation A-okay just so they can vicariously feel wondrous rapture at the idea of another fetus dropping out another vagina into this crappy world.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Badpuppy, welcome to ex-C.

 

I don't like you. But people change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Badpuppy, welcome to ex-C.

 

I don't like you. But people change.

 

Not sure why you shouldn't like me. You don't know me. Though I do like your thoughts about the mother's natural rights. Not sure how anything I've said in any way conflicts with anything you've said. Thanks for the back-handed welcome anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure why you shouldn't like me. You don't know me.

Some native Americans thought that the human soul is comprised of two wolves. The one wolf is filled with anger, bitterness, jealosy, etc. The other wolf is filled with harmony, peace, and good will etc. These wolves are constantly struggling for dominance. And the wolf that wins is the wolf you feed.

 

Now maybe you had little choice, but it seems to me that you have overfed one wolf.

 

How fitting that you have chosen the name of Badpuppy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me you like to WAY overanalyze people you have just met. You are judging me based on what I've said in like one or two threads. Abortion happens to be an extremely hot button topic for me. I'm not nearly that "angry" about everything else. Stick around, get to know me, or don't. Not sure I really would value the friendship of someone who on their first day speaking to me says: "I don't like you but maybe you'll change" basically. Yeah, that's not condescending at all. So, how long you been out of Christianity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me you like to WAY overanalyze people you have just met. You are judging me based on what I've said in like one or two threads. Abortion happens to be an extremely hot button topic for me. I'm not nearly that "angry" about everything else. Stick around, get to know me, or don't. Not sure I really would value the friendship of someone who on their first day speaking to me says: "I don't like you but maybe you'll change" basically. Yeah, that's not condescending at all. So, how long you been out of Christianity?

:HaHa: Fair enough Badpuppy, fair enough. I know there's a good puppy within you too.

 

I have been out of Christianity for about 20 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incidentally... if you scroll down this page you'll find a post I made in the Ex-Christian Spirituality forum before I found the abortion threads here: http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/48711-one-woo-for-another/page__st__60 (Note there is nothing bitter or angry in anything I say there... even though I'm responding to the OP who basically said all other religions are a bunch of "woo", too.)

 

The abortion topic upsets me. Severely. (Though even so, I still think I've been fairly civil. Attacking arguments, not people.) But I'm pretty sure if you were a woman and saw how your rights might easily be eroded until you couldn't control your own body... you might be a little irked about it, too. It would be one thing if people said: "Well, I don't like abortion, I think it's killing an innocent child, so I won't be having one". But no one leaves it there. They instead wish to legislate MY body. That's upsetting to me and it would be upsetting to any person given that it's basically a form of reproductive enslavement. People get a little antsy when you try to enslave them. Go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.