-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Pro-choice vs Abortion
- Thread starter Willamena
- Start date
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
If a person has a genetic abnormality that can be passed on to future generations they should adopt children rather than pass on their genes.
They don't always have a choice to avoid a biological function.
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
On behalf of people with a genetic abnormality every where I cordially invite you to keep your genocidal opinions to yourself.
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Yes, but preachy judgemental hindsight is always 20/20.
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
Hmmm.
You never hear the anti-choice crowd lament that. You may have seen the post I left mentioning Gloria Allred and illegal abortion she had to abort her rapist's child, and nearly died of hemorrhage and infection. Nary a peep. It's acceptable carnage, and to the religious crowd, I suppose it's seen as a just punishment from God.
Yes. That's freedom. Freedom includes the ability to live life as one chooses. It's that pursuit of happiness thing.
Yes, but that's not relevant when considering an unwanted pregnancy. All that remains to be decided is who decides the fate of that pregnancy - the pregnant woman, or the church using the state to compel her to bring her unwanted pregnancy to term. I've decided in favor of the woman.
I agree with all of that.
There is no such line. Nor is one needed. Yes, the fetus is human, and if allowed to, is likely to become an adult human being. You seem to think that that alone makes aborting the human fetus immoral. I don't consider it a factor just as I don't consider the fact that the home invader that you might own a gun to shoot down is human is a factor in the decision of home invasion. You might say that that killing is justified because it is done in self-defense, and I would agree. The point remains that the humanity of the target was not a factor in the decision to end that life.
Agree again.
You seem to have different standards about what makes an act immoral. None of these factors matter. It's irrelevant that the fetus is human, or that abortion ends a human life, or that the fetus can potentially be an independent, free-living individual if born. Those aren't relevant to me, and simply mentioning them as if one should know that these facts make the act immoral is meaningless to those with different values from yours.
If you want to appeal to my conscience, you'll need to successfully argue that the procedure is cruel and causes suffering in the aborted fetus. Nothing else can sway me - not calling it murder, not calling it a baby, and not calling it human.
So is mine. Learn as much as others will teach you about safe sex and contraception, use these tools, and if an unwanted pregnancy results anyway, deliver a baby for adoption if you are unwilling to raise a child, or have an abortion if you are not. It's irrelevant who that offends. People that don't approve of abortion will not be forced to have abortions, and such people shouldn't have the ability to prevent them in others.
Yes, I consider the burgeoning world population and the threat of global warming imminent problems, and I have done my part in both arenas. I am the father of two children and have had surgery to prevent further conception, and my home is solar powered.
Feminism is not the insistence of women to be separate from men, but to not be dependent on them by virtue of having social and economic equality. Abortion rights help restore parity between the genders.
Isn't that an example of eugenics that is frequently rolled out to impugn Darwin or Sanger? I agree with your advice, but only for myself - not others. Let them do as they see fit.
RESOLUTION
Active Member
In this day and age the argument for or against abortion should not be so.
Morning after pills and the contraception methods available mean unwanted pregnancies should not exist other than rape and medical grounds.
If people want abortions then make them pay for them, themselves. Other wise don't get pregnant when you don't have to. As I said rape and medical grounds different. Problem solved.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
You probably shouldn't get your pregnancy or abortion information from Trump. He tends to not know what he's talking about. Also, he lies.
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
Fossil fuels are finite resources and so one needs to use solar energy as far as practicable, or wind energy as an alternative. Economics of the family will also dictate how large the family is and so we need to educate people in basic home economics rather than be concerned about the burgeoning world population as a threat to the environment for generating natural resources or for survival of human species.
My argument is that one needs to use contraception and surgery like you have done to prevent pregnancy and abortion is inhuman in terms of civilised conduct that we need to pay attention to.
Society's role is to educate people but leave them the freedom to carry out their duties as they see fit. I would not wish to have legislation to dictate eugenics in any way but the norms of society need to be moulded through culture development.
Last edited:
Something else I can't help but wonder about.
Given Trump's decades long life of hedonism, self centeredness, womanizing, and paying off people to cover up his misdeeds,
I wonder how many abortions he's been responsible for. Lots, is my guess. Including the illegal ones before RvW ruling.
Tom
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
The human population of Earth is 7.7 billion people. I think we'll be okay.
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
What is the optimal human carrying capacity of Earth: if it declines from this figure we must be doing something wrong that leglislation must correct. In this regard, as you saw Germany absorbed a million refugees arriving on its borders, so do we rely on the Third World to generate the humans that migrate to other countries where there is a shortfall of humans and we sit in comfort in the West carefree in terms of the utilisation of raw materials of the Earth? That is certainly what seems to have happened.The human population of Earth is 7.7 billion people. I think we'll be okay.
Education (family planning) and providing access to methods that prevent unwanted childbirth is how we go about addressing the very real threat of overpopulation.
"It took 127 years for the world population to double from one billion to two. By contrast, it took only 47 years, from 1927 to 1974, to double from two billion to four. Since 1960, world population has grown by about one billion every 13 years."
We're over 7.5 billion now. How many more doublings do you think the human race can comfortably accommodate?
I'd say that calling abortion inhumane or uncivilized is more of a personal value than an argument. I don't consider abortion inhumane or uncivilized, so my advice would be similar to yours - be safe, smart, considerate, and responsible - except that I would add that if a woman becomes pregnant and doesn't want a child, she chooses between giving it up for adoption or abortion.
Do you consider the morning after pill or the intrauterine devices that prevent implantation of the forming human being inhumane or uncivilized? I would think that you would have to in order to be consistent. What's the difference between causing the death of a zygote, morula, blastosphere, embryo, or early fetus?
What I was referring to was do-it-yourself eugenics by choice - choosing not to reproduce because of a genetic problem.
You do realize what you are saying: that women can be "taught" the "correct way to feel" about being raped...your "correct way to feel?" I am of the opinion that people have their own feelings, for their own reasons.
Let me turn what you've said around, so you can see in the mirror: your own beliefs have conditioned you not to have empathy for a woman who is raped and impregnated against her will. And you act accordingly.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
They already do.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
How Many People Can Earth Support?What is the optimal human carrying capacity of Earth: if it declines from this figure we must be doing something wrong that leglislation must correct. In this regard, as you saw Germany absorbed a million refugees arriving on its borders, so do we rely on the Third World to generate the humans that migrate to other countries where there is a shortfall of humans and we sit in comfort in the West carefree in terms of the utilisation of raw materials of the Earth? That is certainly what seems to have happened.
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
When humans kill each other for resources of the Earth, that would be the time to be concerned about the size of the planet's population. That point has not arrived so we can easily accommodate some more humans. When soil fertility declines and food becomes scarce than the home economics will kick in as long as we have good nations with adequate law enforcement to keep the peace.
A woman is a member of society and has to live according to the norms of the society. If abortion is made unlawful in certain countries she has to be careful not to fall into a position where the question arises as to whether to abort. She is not a free human being but a member of society.
You raise an important question: abortion should be defined as the termination of life that has the earliest phases of a central nervous system or mind because the mind thinks and coordinates the rest of the body. I do not know at what term in the pregnancy the mind forms in a human foetus.
The State has a role: it cannot be left to individuals to go their separate ways. We need a well-regulated society.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
I don't know how to be any clearer:
Being forbidden to abort does not, by itself, entail being treated as breeding stock.
You who?
I am neither pro-life nor pro-choice. Nor am I an American citizen. I live in a country where nearly all forms of abortions are forbidden by law.
What do you mean by my desires ?
What logical conclusion ?