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: 4115

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Which was a most entertaining film!

Strega, I agree with everything except the massive population growth. Take a look at this and Hans Rosling's video from TED. He basically says that the world will top off at 10 billion people but it will take a long time to get to that, mostly due to developing countries having fewer and fewer babies. 


We are so past that!

We have been overpopulated for half a century! All previous faunal extinctions on this planet were due to geological events. This extinction phase the planet's been going though the past couple of thousand years is the FIRST TIME IN EARTH's history where mass extinction is attributable to a single species instead of a geological event.

So forget about all the charts that sooth people into thinking our growth is not growing as fast as it used to, they are entirely irrelevant, this is a long standing problem we're dealing with here, which will require massive lifestyle reorganisation.

IFF humans were overpopulating the earth, biology would have ways of shutting that whole thing down.

IFF... That's an acronym for what organization?

False in the short term. Biology does not devise ways to correct things. Equilibrium is a long term processes and Homo sapiens has screwed the system over by effecting our changes at such a fast pace. At this point it is unlikely that any disease could make any significant dent in our population.

Define "long term" and "fast" as it pertains to the biological processes which are valid for controlling overpopulation. HIV is certainly taking a toll in Africa, Ebola is a major threat, and you better hope next years HxNx virus isn't highly lethal (or the year after that, etc). That's not to speak of potential natural disasters, man-made war, or a breakdown in the food supply system.

Just because humans are on top of the food chain and believe ourselves to be highly intelligent doesn't mean we are no longer governed by natural processes. 

Biological negative feedbacks take thousands of years, our discussion is pertaining to now.

As for geological catastrophes, certainly a meteorite could hit us tomorrow and we'd could be mostly gone, but that's neither here nor there.

We have the know-how to resist all biological natural occurrences. If any disease decimates humanity, at this point in time, it is likely that it will be unleashed and engineered by humans.

Overpopulation is when a species has more members than the carrying capacity of its environment. When overpopulation is reached, the number of members start declining, the most common causes to the decline being disease, starvation, and competition. The latter usually manifests itself in humans as warfare. Seeing as the number of humans are increasing, you have no evidence to support your claim of overpopulation. 

Unless you believe humans to be divinely inspired and therefore disconnected from biological processes, that is. 

Arcus, of course, if our species were naturally regulated by resources, that would be true, but we aren't. We are able to MODIFY our carrying capacity through engineering. Therefore carrying capacity is not a useful tool when discussing Homo sapiens. The next available tool is our destruction of everything around us. By the time we die, I'm assuming you're within a 10y age of myself, most large animals we take for granted will have disappeared from the planet. This human cause mass extinction is unprecedented in earth's history.

Carrying capacity is equally valid for humans as any other species. We do indeed have the tools required to adapt the carrying capacity, but we have always had it, and it is exactly what has made us successful as a species. We are a highly adaptable species, but then again, there are other species which share this trait. The point is that we have always struggled with limited resources, but the resources we require have changed. 100 years ago we were running out of wood, today we are running out of oil, and in 100 years we'll be running out of something else.

While I haven't lived too long, I have learned that predictions about the future almost inevitably fails. I recall that prediction from a science mag circa 1990, which predicted extinction within a generation. That would be around 2020, and I believe it was next to the expected flying car and cure for cancer in the same time frame... 


© 2015   Created by umar.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service