Abortion

[yolland]

But remember, my definition of murder is the "intentional killing of an innocent human being". In the scenario you are discussing, there is no intentional killing of innocent human beings. The soldiers are not intending to kill the civilians.

Well yes, your definition of murder (as well as of 'intentional,' 'innocent' and 'human being'). But presumably you wouldn't argue that if you drive drunk down a busy street weaving through red lights and wind up hitting and killing a pedestrian, you're therefore wholly innocent with regard to their death, even though you can honestly say you didn't intend to kill anyone. Again, I'm not trying to suggest a pregnant woman is analogous to a soldier or a drunk driver; I understand the different degrees of intentionality logic and the different circumstances logic. But at the very least, you're imposing your own preferred definition of the legal status of who or what is being killed on the equation, and that is what I was trying to get at. Who are you or I to say that the legal status "human being" is somehow altered by being in the wrong place at the wrong time (i.e., combat situation) such that it's OK for a soldier to go ahead and drop bombs on an area knowing that a few such persons will probably die, yet it's not OK for you to drive drunk knowing that someone innocent will probably die? No one really, but by general consensus as expressed in international law and US law respectively, it's "resolved" and thus treated as a given that those situations should indeed be legally evaluated in that way.

You and I would probably agree that at least in most cases those evaluations are morally as well as legally sound, but a pacifist would likely disagree, and in my view they have as much moral right as we would to attempt to have that legal evaluation changed; I can't think of any unchangeable, universally-seen-as-authoritative source we could appeal to to make the case that our evaluation of "unintentionally" killing civilians by dropping bombs (Whoops! Sorry, we try to minimize that kind of thing, honest!) is more innately morally right than theirs. Similarly, someone who doesn't share your view that killing a [fetus, unborn child, whatever you want to call it] is the moral equivalent of murder, has the moral right to oppose the state's equating an aborted [fetus/unborn child] with a murder victim, and their [mother, incubator, whatever you want to call her] with a murderer for legal purposes. In a legal context, "human being" means something simultaneously much broader and much vaguer than the minimalist, empiricist way in which an embryologist might use that term, and it seems to me that you're dodging that reality by framing this as a "biological science issue" neatly bookended by your preferred legal definition of murder.

 

[BVS]

I know this has come up many times. But why is it more important to spare the life of a murderer instead of executing him? Where as a developing fetus (one with a head, body, arms, and legs formed less important and we add it to the pile of slaughter?

Don't we play god in both situations. We spare the DP on one but exterminate the life of an innocent?

This comparison is as old as dirt and I never really understood why it even gets brought up.

You know where I stand on DP and I've made myself clear as to why I think legalizing abortion is a much safer and better means in the long run.

 

[BVS]

but exterminate the life of an innocent?

Oh you're wording in this post was quite brilliant by the way, using 'slaughter' and 'innocent' well done, taken directly from the pro-life handbook no doubt.

Here's a question for some of the more fundamental.

I know some in here believe we are born into sin, original sin, that's why we're baptized. So when exactly does this innocence wear off?

 

[Justin24]

The wording did not come from a pro-life pamphlet.

BVS do you remember the murder trial they had here in CA recently for Scott Peterson?? Do you think he killed two people or one?

 

[BVS]

The wording did not come from a pro-life pamphlet.

That was a joke.

BVS do you remember the murder trial they had here in CA recently for Scott Peterson?? Do you think he killed two people or one?

How many trials spell out your reality? I could probably list a whole threads worth that would go against your view.

The truth is these charges are made exactly for those reasons.

 

[Justin24]

Answer yes or know if it was one person or two that were killed? Is it only considered a person, human life once it leaves the mothers womb?

 

[BVS]

I can't remember how far along she was...

 

[Justin24]

She was 8 months pregrnant.

 

[BVS]

Well 8 months is developed enough to survive on it's own and wouldn't ever be aborted anyways.

 

[Justin24]

But the question is when she was killed there was a debate on wether to charge him with double homocide or single. So this ties in with abortion. Is the baby developing inside a woman considered life(human) or only when the baby is born?

 

[Rono]

Here's something I don't understand. If anyone can explain this to me, please do.

I understand why someone who does not think that a fetus is a human life would support abortion rights.

But there are people out there who do believe that a fetus is a human life and agree that it is murder, but they still think it should not be made illegal. Can anyone explain this to me?

I can only answer the last one,...I don`t have ( and want to have ) the morality superiority to make that kind of desicions for other people.

I have the right to be against abortions but i don`t have the right to forbid it ( especialy because i don`t want to take care of that kid )I only can agree with the new abortion law`s in the Netherlands that will give schools more money for sex education, give more money to information to women about other solutions than abortion, give more money to save houses for teenage mothers and give single parents welfare without the obligation to find a job in the first 5 years of the child`s yought.

 

[Liesje]

How can someone who believes it is murder think it's not the government's business? Why do they think that murder should be a personal choice?

It's a good question, but I already answered it from my perspective. Do I personally think abortion is murder? Yes, I do. Do I think the government should ban it? No, I don't, for reasons that aren't specific to abortion, like I've said several times already. I have serious problems with 1) the government regulating the sex lives of individuals and 2) doing so on religious grounds. Since those reasons aren't specific to abortion, it doesn't matter whether or not I personally think abortion is murder.

And how one defines murder is always a personal choice. This shouldn't surprise you. Think - war in Iraq, the death penalty, etc.

I've got another good question: How can religious conservatives argue in favor of secular legislation banning abortions, yet these "Christian" people have never gone out of their way to do ANYTHING for all of the unwanted and abandoned children they think they're trying to protect?

 

[80sU2isBest]

I've got another good question: How can religious conservatives argue in favor of secular legislation banning abortions, yet these "Christian" people have never gone out of their way to do ANYTHING for all of the unwanted and abandoned children they think they're trying to protect?

Wh do you think they don't?

I answered your question several posts ago, but I wll copy and paste it here:

"You've never met me. I've worked with lots of kids over the years.

There are many many Christian organizations that do the very things you said you've never seen. Shall I list all the Christian organizations that feed the starving children of the world? Or how about the shelters and missions run by Christians that shelter and feed homeless children? Or how about the missionaries who dedicate their lives to helping children in need? Shall I go on? It would be a very long list, I assure you."

 

[80sU2isBest]

It's a good question, but I already answered it from my perspective. Do I personally think abortion is murder? Yes, I do.

So, since you think abortion is murder, you think that at least one type of murder should be legal - abortion; is that a correct assessment of what you are saying?

 

[anitram]

There are many many Christian organizations that do the very things you said you've never seen. Shall I list all the Christian organizations that feed the starving children of the world? Or how about the shelters and missions run by Christians that shelter and feed homeless children? Or how about the missionaries who dedicate their lives to helping children in need? Shall I go on? It would be a very long list, I assure you."

Christian organizations are not the same as a Christian who is rabidly against abortion but never does anything concrete for children here. If you are not willing to personally adopt a child, or personally fund the raising of a child until the age of 18, then there is a certain level of hypocrisy.

We all know very well that there are not enough Christians adopting children and not enough Christian organizations (and really should we be promoting the institutional raising of a child?) taking care of abandoned kids by the sheer number of children who fall through the cracks in the system.

A child should not be reared in an orphanage, despite the good intentions of the Christians (or whoever else) running it. Why are there not enough homes if there are so many rabidly anti-choice people around?

 

[Liesje]

Christian organizations are not the same as a Christian who is rabidly against abortion but never does anything concrete for children here. If you are not willing to personally adopt a child, or personally fund the raising of a child until the age of 18, then there is a certain level of hypocrisy.

We all know very well that there are not enough Christians adopting children and not enough Christian organizations (and really should we be promoting the institutional raising of a child?) taking care of abandoned kids by the sheer number of children who fall through the cracks in the system.

A child should not be reared in an orphanage, despite the good intentions of the Christians (or whoever else) running it. Why are there not enough homes if there are so many rabidly anti-choice people around?

Exactly. The numbers of Christians relative to the numbers of abandoned children are really all the proof I need. And I'm not talking about aid organizations in Africa or southeast Asia, I'm talking about the kids right HERE in the USA. I've yet to meet a trained social worker, Christian or otherwise, who's life's passion and work is with child protective services who is in favor of banning all abortion.

 

[Liesje]

So, since you think abortion is murder, you think that at least one type of murder should be legal - abortion; is that a correct assessment of what you are saying?

I can't even answer that b/c you ignored the entire point of my original answer. Legislation and litigation are as much (if not even more so) about setting precedent than just saying in black and white "X activity is WRONG/illegal." Whether or not abortion is murder is not the only issue that would affect how courts rule.

There are a lot of things I personally think that are opposite of how the courts in this country rule. I'm OK with that, b/c I realize that most of my opinions have absolutely no place being enforced by the government and our court system.

And, like I've said all along, abortion isn't a political issue unless the government or court systems agree that life does in fact begin at conception and an embryo is a human being with the same rights as you and I. Maybe I see it as murder, but the courts don't, because you can't murder something that isn't a person.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Christian organizations are not the same as a Christian who is rabidly against abortion but never does anything concrete for children here. If you are not willing to personally adopt a child, or personally fund the raising of a child until the age of 18, then there is a certain level of hypocrisy.

So anyone who is not financially able to take care of a child has no say in how they are treated?

Okey dokey then, if my neighbor beats his kid, I have no rights to tell him to stop unless I can afford to take care of the kid myself? And if I do tell him to stop, I'm a hypocrite?

We all know very well that there are not enough Christians adopting children and not enough Christian organizations (and really should we be promoting the institutional raising of a child?) taking care of abandoned kids by the sheer number of children who fall through the cracks in the system.

Do we know that?

A child should not be reared in an orphanage, despite the good intentions of the Christians (or whoever else) running it.

It would be better for the child to have been aborted than to grow up in an orphanage?

Why are there not enough homes if there are so many rabidly anti-choice people around?

There are a number of valid reasons not enough people adopt, including the possibility that some, as you suggested, take a prolife stance but don't really care about kids when it comes right down to it. But there's so much more that maybe you ahven't even considered; maybe there's not enough people who can afford to adopt a child, or maybe there's too much red tape...the list of possibilities could go on and on and on...

 

[80sU2isBest]

I can't even answer that b/c you ignored the entire point of my original answer. Legislation and litigation are as much (if not even more so) about setting precedent than just saying in black and white "X activity is WRONG/illegal." Whether or not abortion is murder is not the only issue that would affect how courts rule.

There are a lot of things I personally think that are opposite of how the courts in this country rule. I'm OK with that, b/c I realize that most of my opinions have absolutely no place being enforced by the government and our court system.

And, like I've said all along, abortion isn't a political issue unless the government or court systems agree that life does in fact begin at conception and an embryo is a human being with the same rights as you and I. Maybe I see it as murder, but the courts don't, because you can't murder something that isn't a person.

I'm not asking you what the courts say or about legislation and litigation.

I'm asking you simply about what's in your heart. Here, I'll rephrase it a little, so that we can skip past the issues of the law and get straight to what I want to know about - your heart and belief system.

You have said that you believe that abortion is murder. If your belief is true, do you think that abortion should be legal?

 

[80sU2isBest]

Exactly. The numbers of Christians relative to the numbers of abandoned children are really all the proof I need. And I'm not talking about aid organizations in Africa or southeast Asia, I'm talking about the kids right HERE in the USA. I've yet to meet a trained social worker, Christian or otherwise, who's life's passion and work is with child protective services who is in favor of banning all abortion.

Why did you introduce the qualifier "trained social worker"? Does that mean that my service to children doesn't matter because I'm not a "trained social worker"?

 

[Liesje]

Why did you introduce the qualifier "trained social worker"? Does that mean that my service to children doesn't matter because I'm not a "trained social worker"?

Not for what I'm talking about. When it comes to facts and info about kids who've been abandoned, orphaned, or taken away, yes I ask trained social workers and not volunteers. I volunteer for the Humane Society and I don't expect people to consider me a good source of info relative to the veterinarians and behaviorists that have degrees and decades of experience working in all aspects of the field.

 

[Justin24]

Who said it only has to be christians that adopt children? Hell if Gay families want to adopt to help with adoptions then go ahead.

 

[LemonMelon]

It would be better for the child to have been aborted than to grow up in an orphanage?

This bothers me too. Would it really be better for someone not to have been born rather than to be born under less-than-perfect circumstances?

 

[A_Wanderer]

I'm not asking you what the courts say or about legislation and litigation.

I'm asking you simply about what's in your heart. Here, I'll rephrase it a little, so that we can skip past the issues of the law and get straight to what I want to know about - your heart and belief system.

You have said that you believe that abortion is murder. If your belief is true, do you think that abortion should be legal?

Does a foetus ever think? Does it ever have a realisation of self? Does it ever exist within society? Does it obey the laws and enjoy rights and liberties? Is it a human being?

 

[Liesje]

Who said it only has to be christians that adopt children? Hell if Gay families want to adopt to help with adoptions then go ahead.

Another good point. All the people I know (not peeps in this thread, real people in my life) who oppose abortion for religious reasons - which happens to be a LOT - also oppose gay unions and gays adopting. How does that work

Not only are they furiously advocating in favor for a situation that will only create more unwanted babies, they're also restricting the likelihood of kids being adopted. How Christian

 

[80sU2isBest]

This bothers me too. Would it really be better for someone not to have been born rather than to be born under less-than-perfect circumstances?

Thanks.

There are many great men and women who born in unfortunate circumstances who have risen to positively impact the world around them. Those circumstances include orphanages, foster homes, bad parents, poverty, etc.

My nephew has Cerebral Palsy. He has been a blessing to us all. I'm glad he's alive, my family is glad he's alive, and he's glad he's alive.

 

[Justin24]

Well there would be unwanted babies if people learned to have sex with a condom or not have sex at all. Then we could stop (sorry to say) but holocaust of the 21st century.

 

[Justin24]

You like to point out how "Very Christian." so to be christian mean to follow Jesus or God's footsteps and value all life. So how can you say you want to ban the DP because you must value his life, because it's god's choice, but are complete opposite with abortion? Would Jesus be Pro-Choice?

 

[Liesje]

I'm asking you simply about what's in your heart. Here, I'll rephrase it a little, so that we can skip past the issues of the law and get straight to what I want to know about - your heart and belief system.

I will not have an abortion because I have absolutely no reason to have one. If I became pregnant and it wasn't planned, I'd say "oh well, we were going to have kids anyway someday" and be very happy because a child is a gift from God.

 

[LemonMelon]

Would Jesus be Pro-Choice?

That's exactly it right there. What is the "very Christian" thing to do?

Christian = follower of Christ

So, what would Jesus' opinion be on abortion?