In this discussion I would like to talk about abortion. It is always something I have felt very strong about and would argue to the ends of the earth on. I have always been Pro-Life, always. Ever since I became an Atheist, this topic keeps popping up in my head. Since it is something I have not wanted to confront, I have been pushing it to the back burner. Now that I have given it some thought I would like to tell you where I used to stand and where I stand now. When I was a Christian my thought process was "Abortion is Never the right choice unless the mother and child will both die." So even if the child were to survive and the mother dies, abortion is still not the right choice. Some might even consider that murder, I guess. To answer this question I'm sure someone will ask, Yes I would have and still would give up my life for my child. Well, now I'm sort of seeing things a bit different. If a female gets raped and gets pregnant from it, abortion is ok, (sad all the way around - for everyone).  If a woman chooses to abort a baby due to the risk to the mothers life, Ok. If the baby will have a very very very difficult life and in turn make the parents have an equally difficult life, ok. To me abortion is a horrible thing, if someone wants to have an abortion just because oops I got preggo. That is horrible. If you don't want kids do everything in your power to NOT get pregnant. Simple as that. Life is a beautiful an precious thing, and yes I do believe it is special.  Any and All comments are welcome :)

Tags: abortion, pro-choice, pro-life

Views: 3419

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I know this is going to sound terrible, but I hate to think of our overly populated world more full of unwanted babies, more people homeless or living on welfare, more crime etc etc...all because every fertilized egg of every young girl, or woman (except in the horrible case rape) absolutely had to result in a birth. You just have to realize that not all people are capable, (mentally, physically, geographically, etc.) or going to make the mature decision of adoption if they are not capable (bc nobody realizes what they are in store for) and that this world could not support all of those people that have sadly been cut short of a chance of life. It is horribly sad but a horribly sad choice that I don't think should be taken away from any individual. I just think so much more horrible things would result if that choice was to be taken away. Poverty, hunger, abuse, homelessness, so many things would skyrocket inevitably if that choice was ever taken away. If everybody was like you, possibly mature, smart, maybe financially secure, yes it would be easy to say that every precious little fetus should be given a chance, but unfortunately its survival of the fittest and not all are fit to parent or even carry a baby. I certainly cannot make the decision of who is fit and who is not...let those people decide for themselves.

 

 

@Zach ~

I understand that you think that a zygote is a human and therefore has a right to live. But here's the problem: there is no such thing as human rights except for those you are first willing to define and then defend. There are no automatic rights.

For most of history this wasn't a problem. This whole alleged pro-life thing seems to be a relatively new phenomenon. Ancient Romans didn't think you were fully human until you were an adult. Abortions were performed by Christians into antiquity. In the OT, killing babies seems to have been routine. In Napoleon's time he had to have turntables installed in the walls of convents because so many left babies on the doorstep and they died of exposure before they were found.

My own opinion is that abortion is a necessary option. There are a great many reasons why it is not always feasible to carry a fetus to term, and by all means, do it as early as reasonable or possible. Worldwide, giving women options regarding childbirth would help to control poverty, misery, and the rape of the planet's resources.

As to the rights of the fetus, it's a hitchiker, a parasite, wholly dependent on others for survival while the world's survival as well as the survival and well-being of the parent(s) is often dependent at least to some extent upon the wisdom of the decisions made regarding it.

To sum it up - Zach believes any form of BC that prevents the egg from being fertilized and thus, prevents a non-existent person from coming into existence is acceptable. All forms that may prevent implantation are equal to murder because an egg magically becomes a person at the instant of fertilization (but not when the sperm is only 3/4 of the way in - I asked) and should then be granted full human rights including protection from murder.

He cannot understand why no one here seems to follow this logic.

@ Jewelz - Okay, so now I am wondering if Zach approves of the rhythm method as an acceptable form of birth control.

I am wondering if Zach approves of the rhythm method as an acceptable form of birth control.

According to Zach's logic, the following methods of birth control are acceptable: abstinence, the rhythm method, tubal/vasectomy, condoms, and diaphragms.

Women who use any other forms of birth control are murdering babies.

I'm coming in late on this.. and admittingly haven't read all the posts. Has he covered the Morning After pill.? It doesn't prevent fertilization, just implantation of the fertilized cells. 

Now my next question is, does Zach consider it murder if a woman/girl get's pregnant then her body naturally aborts the baby. Just so we're clear, I'm not talking still-births

Please correct me if I'm wrong, Zach, but I'm fairly sure he would think a natural abortion would be the same as an infant dying of natural causes.

However, he would assert that any birth control method that may allow fertilization but prevent implantation would be equivalent to murder. We already covered the morning after pill, but this thread is nearly 50 pages long now so some might have missed that.

I am sorry for being gone for so long, but I had some family troubles and could not bother with this discussion. But yes, if I understand what you are typing, Jewelz, you are correct on my stance.

However, he would assert that any birth control method that may allow fertilization but prevent implantation would be equivalent to murder. We already covered the morning after pill, but this thread is nearly 50 pages long now so some might have missed that.

@ Jewelz - Thank you for pointing that out. I did miss that.

So now it is my understanding that Zach believes the split second the sperm kisses the egg, a termination should not occur, in most circumstances, if not all.

I seem to recall Zach saying he was undecided on some of these circumstances. This is where it gets murky as far I am concerned; why Zach may feel certain circumstances are okay to abort and certain circumstances, not.

It depends upon your perspective as to when life begins. Your change of heart already points to the fact that there is some grey area as to the beginning of life. For me life begins at birth. However, I realize that's not a fact, Its just my perspective. Its not better or worse than the perspective that life begins at conception. There is no definitive answer or way to prove the beginning of life. As such, everyone needs to make their own decision on abortion and no it doesn't make you a terrible person to abort if there was an accident. People have sex. Hopefully they use some type of contraception. Accidents happen. Rapes happen. Incest happens. In any of these cases the decision of whether or not to abort comes down to the person most affected, the mother. 

Religious people hate grey matter, so they need a definitive, all or nothing law. No aboritons. Not in any case. Not even when a 12 year old is raped. Jesus H Christ. Be pro life if you choose, but be pro life for yourself and not for others. 

Hi all--just joining the conversation, read the first few pages of comments and skipped to the end, I can't possibly read 49 pages of comments right now, so I apologize if this was already said.  I am pro-choice, but am against late term abortions unless it is for a medical reason.  I have not seen the women's rights side of this debate mentioned here.  I think that is a key component in whether a person is pro-choice or pro-life.  I know it is for me. 

You have not seen the women's rights side of it????????????????

Women's rights are the main issue that has been discussed here. Above and beyond any other possible argument, it is my right to to make the final decision as to whether or not a foetus will come to term in my body. Women's rights are the ONLY argument... IMO My body, my decision. Any day a foetus of any age spends unwanted time in my womb is a day too many.

I agree with you, and it looks like I should have pages 5-48 of comments before posting.  Sorry...

RSS

Support T|A

Think Atheist is 100% member supported

All proceeds go to keeping Think Atheist online.

Donate with Dogecoin

Members

Forum

Science Isn't About Truth

Started by Ari E. S. in Philosophy. Last reply by Simon Paynton 1 hour ago. 22 Replies

Blog Posts

Zella Mae Jarrett

Posted by Philip Jarrett on April 19, 2014 at 11:35pm 0 Comments

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Into life hacks? Check out LabMinions.com

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service