Abortion

C

charles cure

Guest
It really bothers me when you hear some christian right wing politician say something like "last year 400 children were killed in Nebraska, but if you count all the little children who were victims of abortion, that number rises to 1,200". lets not lie to ourselves, abortion isnt murder.

i think at the core of this issue for me is that i read the other day that if our current population explosion is sustained at the rate it is at today, there will be 3 billion more people on the earth by the end of the century. this will create a massively unmanageable logistics problem on a worldwide scale. famine, deforestation, ozone depletion, overcrowded hospitals and medical facilities, skyrocketing healthcare costs...etc. the bottom line is that humanity's ability to survive through artificial means (ie: the prolonging of life through hospice care and advances in medicine and technology) is userhing us into an era where we are going to BE FORCED to make choices about who lives or dies and when. we are going to have to decide when it is ok for ourselves to be taken off the respirator, we are going to have to control our reproduction, we are going to have to come to terms with the fact that death is a necessary part of life or life will become valueless and even worse, the repercussions could eventually result in the destruction of the environment and the earth itself and therefore humanity.

why is it that western culture places the ultimate importance on the preservation of unborn life, when (as sadistic as it may seem) some countries like China have been able to see that the preservation of what is already alive sometimes goes hand in hand with the destruction or prevention of that which has not yet come into being?

I see it as a function of the religious values that pervade our culture.
anyone want to comment?
 
PS. im sure that the people who post on here all the time will be like "weve already debated this a million times on here" well i havent and i dont feel like looking for the thread that started it all so humor me ok. thanks.
 
Or as one of my friends once said:

"I think abortion should be allowed until the kid has reached the age of 8-9, since it won't be able to survive himself before that anyways."

I don't know how he thought :p, and of course I don't agree. But it puts everything in a different light.. What's the different between a 1 month old baby and a '20 weeks to birth' baby?

On the other hand, I fully support abortion. I believe it's a human right to choose wheter or not to have a baby.
 
charles cure said:
lets not lie to ourselves, abortion isnt murder.
Click to expand...
Quite right.
A fetus is not a human yet, and therefore it isn't killing a human.
Even if it were, what's wrong with killing people? There's too many humans upon this wretched planet as it is.
 
If someone is against abortion for non religious reasons then their opinions have merit. If they are against it because of the ignorance of their religion, they should be ignored.
 
i think at the core of this issue for me is that i read the other day that if our current population explosion is sustained at the rate it is at today, there will be 3 billion more people on the earth by the end of the century. this will create a massively unmanageable logistics problem on a worldwide scale.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think so. If mankind has to kill each other for population control, then mankind should die off.

famine, deforestation, ozone depletion, overcrowded hospitals and medical facilities, skyrocketing healthcare costs...etc.
Click to expand...
If hospitals are overcrowded then we might do to build more. And if society hasn't enough doctors, then perhaps we oought to train those whom would otherwise be aborted to become doctors. But merely killing people to preserve some vague notion of quality of life is quite, well obsurd. And furthermore, who knows. Maybe some of those who were aborted would have otherwise found some medical cure or invention.

the bottom line is that humanity's ability to survive through artificial means (ie: the prolonging of life through hospice care and advances in medicine and technology) is userhing us into an era where we are going to BE FORCED to make choices about who lives or dies and when.
Click to expand...
Humanity has survived despite having little or no hospital care.

why is it that western culture places the ultimate importance on the preservation of unborn life, when (as sadistic as it may seem) some countries like China have been able to see that the preservation of what is already alive sometimes goes hand in hand with the destruction or prevention of that which has not yet come into being?
Click to expand...
An unborn fetus is alive and is a human being. These are all documented medical facts. For at birth we didn't suddenly become alive or into being. That, I think, would be quite a supernatural feat.
 
I think the real issue is when dose the child become sentient and I think the real answers is we don’t know. We have done a lot of research on the topic but what it comes down to is that we don’t know how to define our own conscious self so we can’t define what it should represent in others.

Lacking proof for either side it becomes a moral decision for the individual and one that I at least feel nobody has a right to infringe on. If you think there is such a thing as a soul and that a child has one from the moment of conception then don’t get an abortion. Other people, though, don’t agree and it would be rather intolerant to force them to follow decisions based on an unproven opinion.
 
One thing I can say for sure is that no one will ever know how they really feel about abortion until they have one.
 
Lori_7 said:
One thing I can say for sure is that no one will ever know how they really feel about abortion until they have one.
Click to expand...
I knoew how I really feel, now.
For the first, last, and eternally final fuckin' time: It's the woman's child, it's the woman's choice. She is carrying it, she decides the fate.
 
lori: does this mean that it is impossible for someone male to know how they feel about abortion?
 
An argument against abortion based on science and law:

The defining characteristic of a distinct human being genetic individuality, or in the case of identical twins, seperate forms. A zygote is genetically distinct from both mother and father. A zygote, in the normal course of events, shall develop through the other stages of life until it eventually emerges from the womb, after which it will continue to grow to the stage of an infant, then to a toddler, to a child, to a pre-teen/pre-pubscent, to a teenager/adolescent, to an adult, at which the growth process towards a higher state is finished, and a degeneration into old age begins. Since, scientifically, a zygote is definitely human as mentioned above, and not to mention that a prepubscent is no less human than an eighty year old man, to add a "common sense" proof to this scientific reality, it becomes utterly ridiculous to state from any objective standpoint that even a zygote is not worthy of being considered a human being. Indeed, to state otherwise is to fall into a pseudo-religious belief, based on presumption and bias, which is not only non-scientific, but in fact, antiscientific. Therefore, since they are human beings, and abortion surely fits the definition of murder (homocide with malicious intent and forethought), the perpetrator, accomplice, and all other guilty parties ought to accountable infront of a court of law, charged with first-degree murder and other offenses.
 
Prince_James said:
the perpetrator, accomplice, and all other guilty parties ought to accountable infront of a court of law, charged with first-degree murder and other offenses.
Click to expand...
So what? Even if it were murder, I see nothing wrong with it.
There are far too many humans on this planet, anyway. Spawning any more would be a crime against humanity...
 
What if having an abortion was what led me to Christ?

Then the 6 week long life of my child, inside the womb, would have served a much greater purpose than all of my thirty some odd years.

If you're a Christian, according to your own doctrine, the spirit of an aborted baby would go straight back up to heaven. While the probability occurs (as the path is narrow), that if the child had been born, they would have not received Christ and become born again, and so upon death would then go to hell. Sooooo what does that mean exactly?

To me, it all comes down to whether or not you believe that you have a right to take that life...and logically, that would have a great deal to do with whether or not you believe in God. When I had mine, I called myself an agnostic. I didn't know if God existed and didn't claim to. And honestly, didn't really want to know, though I would have never admitted that...even to myself. At that particular time, in light of my circumstance, and what I was doing, I would say that I had never wanted to not know more. But that changed over the years. Because of what I did, I eventually had to know. And now I do.

In my opinion, having an abortion is the most hideous and heinous thing I've ever done. And the same people who abhor and condemn the Christian God of the OT for his violence and judgement are pro-abortion...hypocrits.

But honestly what difference does it make if it's legal or not? I mean, if the only reason someone doesn't have an abortion is because it's illegal, then does it really matter that they're not having one? And so, is the fact that it is illegal to kill someone who has been born the only thing that's keeping this same someone from killing you or me? And what kind of parent is someone like this going to be do you think?

I have such a hard time with politics...it's all such a fucking game.
 
Lori_7 said:
I have such a hard time with politics...it's all such a fucking game.
Click to expand...

this is unfortunate. the entirety of your life is politics. understanding this is a first step into success at any given endeavour.
 
Prince_James said:
An argument against abortion based on science and law:
A zygote is genetically distinct from both mother and father. A zygote, in the normal course of events, shall develop through the other stages of life until it eventually emerges from the womb, after which it will continue to grow to the stage of an infant, then to...

...Since, scientifically, a zygote is definitely human as mentioned above, and not to mention that a prepubscent is no less human than an eighty year old man, to add a "common sense" proof to this scientific reality, it becomes utterly ridiculous to state from any objective standpoint that even a zygote is not worthy of being considered a human being....
Click to expand...

The key part there is “as mentioned above” you are passing an opinion off as the scientific definition of humanity. I will agree that one aspect of humanity, and all life, is that we are unique, but I don’t see how it has any bearing on being alive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top