And yet remove that fetus before it is viable and all those activities will cease and the fetus cannot survive. It is a symbiotic mass of tissues unable to sustain life on its own, or IOW, live without the need of the host. As I said, the law requires that the fetus be able to breathe on its own. That is a what is legal under the law. And what is also legal is that you or any of your kind cannot force a woman to bear this burden if she does not wish to. Period. She can decide to abort or not. You have no say in that.
-
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!
Abortion
- Thread starter Mycroft
- Start date
No fetus chooses to live, no fetus chooses to spontaneously miscarry either. It's a fetus, not a conscious being with any self awareness (that I know of.)
Sees
Dragonslayer
Isn't preventing/terminating the ability of the fetus to ever reach a stage where the choice could be made pretty much the same thing as taking away the choice?
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Can I ask what your definition of "conception" is?
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
I would say because the people who want to have abortion available to people as an option aren't saying anyone has to have an abortion, just that it can be an available option. I personally may never consider getting an abortion, but it doesn't mean I don't think other people shouldn't have the choice. And that's the thing about choice, you can get one, or NOT get one, depending on how you personally feel about it.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
I support all of those things for all people born into this world (excluding the Jesus part, which I don't believe).
Just so.
And this is where anarchy ties in. Too much control, too much regulation, creates rather than solves problems.
I think it is plausible that it meant the choice of the unborn baby. The question is: what would you do if the unborn baby chooses not to be born?
I am not sure I am a guy, but I will respond, nevertheless. I don't think that a couple of duplicating cells are a person.
Ciao
- viole
Cool! Thank you for sharing.
Here, a bonus for you, just in case:
http://www.religiousforums.com/thre...rude-if-it-is-used-with-a-mixed-group.163648/
Cool! Thank you for sharing.
Here, a bonus for you, just in case:
http://www.religiousforums.com/thre...rude-if-it-is-used-with-a-mixed-group.163648/
Well, yes. i heard that Americans include girls in the set of of things that have the property of being "guy", too.
Alas, like someone else said, Americans and Englishmen have many things in common. Except, of course, the language.
Ciao
- viole
I avoid using the word person in this discussion. It is not sufficiently well defined. Rather like "murder", it is mostly about opinions.
Those opinions fall on a broad spectrum of beliefs. People tend to jump around on the spectrum to suit whatever they prefer to believe.
So, instead of person I try to stick with the rather more clear "human being", and instead of murder "killing". Those words are far more precise.
I consider precision important in the discussion of life and death matters.
Tom
Well if it never chooses in the first place how can you remove the choice? This also assumes that we owe life to every fetus. I don't think we do. We can help it (pre and post natal care) but I'm sorry it's just a potential baby. Potential doesn't equal actual. It does not get a say in a discussion between it and an already developed human being.
Cephus
Relentlessly Rational
Let me know when you can interview a fetus and it tells you that it wants to live. Until then, forget it.
Emi
Proud to be a Pustra!
I disagree. The odds are so far against them and statistics show that they will generally live horrible lives. I'd rather them not suffer at all then never know the meaning of happiness.
I do understand why you'd want them to not be aborted as well. You believe in giving them the chance and the opportunity is better than not even allowing them that right. I understand that thinking, it shows you are a good and positive person. I just think differently. Especially with the overpopulation and all of the suffering people. I'd rather not be born than be born being told that I should die.
Emi
Proud to be a Pustra!
What are your views to women who are victims of rape or incest that wish to abort? They did not have a choice and were forced to conceive. Do you still want to torture them by forcing them to keep the baby, or would you allow abortion in this case?
leibowde84
Veteran Member
This can be very unhealthy, though (see below from US News):
When You Want To, But Don’t
Abstinence can become unhealthy – psychologically – when you want to have sex but aren’t. “People will say, ‘I want to but I’m shy,’ or ‘I don’t know how to approach people.’ That’s really hard for people and can make them feel awful about themselves.”
And the anxiety of unfulfilled desire, coupled with the pressure to have sex – whether it’s societal or self-inflicted – can become a vicious cycle, Herbenick adds. Those types of behavioral trends can start early. Studies looking at when people began having sex found that those who started late – mid-20s to early 30s – were more likely to suffer from anxiety that may prevent them from having sex. “If you’re so anxious you can’t try online dating,” it is not abstinence that will pose a health issue, but the anxiety or depression it causes.
“If a person strongly desires but is unable to because they are unwell physically, or can’t find a partner, that is distressing,” Lindau says, adding that doctors aren’t usually the ear for that type of malaise. “Normally they take that to a friend or a psychologist.”
People can have sex every day with zero chance of parenthood.
What you are doing here is called the fallacy of the excluded middle. There is a huge area between fertile sex and abstinence. I realize that fertile sex is the big favorite among heteros. But the fact remains that abstinence and fertile sex are not the only options, so your post is quite irrelevant.
Tom
Is it absolutely certain that it cannot be interviewed somehow, or known how it feels, in a way we cannot fathom? There are other cases in life in which we cannot communicate with or know how it feels for them. That does not mean we do whatever we want to them just because we want to or without giving considerations of how they feel.
Yes, "interview" here clearly relates to know if it is alive or has feelings.
Edit:
I deeply apologize to the concerned people for what I said. I edited it out.
Last edited: