From Personhood USA
We need your help and the children need a voice of reason. Please help us and join us to take back our rights."I've Noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born." Ronald Reagan
November 1, 2009
PersonhoodUSA.com
"I've Noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born." Ronald Reagan
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Let's see: You worship a god who had pregnant women and babies killed in the OT and is theoretically responsible for every miscarriage that ever happens, yet you still pretend that you christians are "pro-life".
ReplyDeleteWhy? Your god is obviously not consistenly "pro-life" himself.
Even if one were to buy into all the apologetic excuses that Robert Turkel or James Patrick Holding use to excuse those OT actions, guess what? All those rationalizations mean is that your own god operates and approves of "situational ethics"...that sometimes it's necessary to kill kids becuase of circumstances.
Fine by me, but then you religous people keep making the claim that you have "absolutle morality".
No, you don't. The only difference between you and us is that atheists are honest enough to admit that we don't.
PS: Yes, I know that RT and JPH are the same person...
ReplyDeleteReynold foaming again,
ReplyDelete>>Why? Your god is obviously not consistenly [sic] "pro-life" himself.
Really the Creator of the entire universe, in control of all souls, is not Pro Life?
You crack me up, dude.
There is a huge difference between our vantage point and His, I am sure you can agree. If God decides to remove someone, for the betterment of mankind, then that is His prerogative. He can send that soul to hell or bring them Home to Him, His choice. A choice we are not privileged to have. If He kills a baby, He can bring that soul to Him if he so chooses.
Do you admit that it is possible that an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent being has the power to see ahead as to whether that person (soul) is worth saving or not?
He knew how you and I would be at 40 when we were an infant in our mommy's belly. Agree?
So, if true, He could have a child killed because of the unrepentant evilness that child would have as an adult. In our viewpoint we see a child die, and depending on your presuppositions about God you will either trust His decision about that child or not.
Get it? At least that is my personal take on the matter.
Admittedly, I have no clue who is Robert Turkel (J.P. Holding), is it worth looking into or is his viewpoints just as fallible as ours?
Dan +†+ said...
ReplyDeleteReynold foaming again,
Why? Your god is obviously not consistenly [sic] "pro-life" himself.
Really the Creator of the entire universe, in control of all souls, is not Pro Life?
Just read the bible. Killing people and sending them to fucking hell does not sound "pro-life" to me.
You crack me up, dude.
Glad you find an actual moral stance funny. So if your baby had died as a result of a miscarriage, you'd have no questions, no anger at all towards your god?
Would you still find the question funny then, "dude"?
There is a huge difference between our vantage point and His, I am sure you can agree.
No. If there was, and he (as you later say) takes people out before they can bring great evil, then Hitler's life refutes that idea. Why'd he let him live?
If God decides to remove someone, for the betterment of mankind, then that is His prerogative.
**cough**Hitler**cough**
He can send that soul to hell or bring them Home to Him, His choice. A choice we are not privileged to have. If He kills a baby, He can bring that soul to Him if he so chooses.
Ah, the ol' double-standard. If god does it, it's good, if man does the same bloody action, it's evil. Sorry, I call bullshit.
If everything god does is "good" by definition, than how can you tell whether he's actually "righteous" or not?
No matter what he does, you people call it good.
Do you admit that it is possible that an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent being has the power to see ahead as to whether that person (soul) is worth saving or not?
Given the fact that people like Hitler lived to adulthood and did what they did, would seem to contradict that.
He knew how you and I would be at 40 when we were an infant in our mommy's belly. Agree?
Guess what? That doesn't help your case. Why let Hitler survive babiehood then?
Besides, remember...I don't believe your god exists in the first place...I'm just pointing out the moral hypocrosy you people engage in when you worship a being that's portrayed as he is in the bible.
So, if true, He could have a child killed because of the unrepentant evilness that child would have as an adult. In our viewpoint we see a child die, and depending on your presuppositions about God you will either trust His decision about that child or not.
Remember what I said about Hitler? The fact that people like him reached adulthood and did what they did refutes the point you're trying to make.
Admittedly, I have no clue who is Robert Turkel (J.P. Holding), is it worth looking into or is his viewpoints just as fallible as ours?
Just look up his site: http://www.tektonics.org
He's pretty much an asshole, but he's at least kind of well-read. Though he's got a habit of criticizing the scholarship of his opponents when he doesn't have any credentials in any relevent apologetic fields himself.
In the end, all it amounts to is that atheists are consistent when they say that there is no such thing as "absolute morality". You christians, as Dan proves again, use some double standard so that when god does stuff that you'd criticize humans for, you still say he's "moral".
Besides, isn't there some verse in the bible that says for us to be perfect just as he is perfect? If so, then your blather about "different vantage points" falls apart. He's admitting that we have the same standards to live up to as he does.
Otherwise, we can't "judge" god period, good or bad.
Yet xians aren't consistent there, either.
"Admittedly, I have no clue who is Robert Turkel (J.P. Holding), is it worth looking into or is his viewpoints just as fallible as ours?"
ReplyDeleteI think he is a sworn enemy of one of your favorite people, John Loftus.
"Do you admit that it is possible that an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent being has the power to see ahead as to whether that person (soul) is worth saving or not?"
ReplyDeleteRemember, you said that logical possibility of x does not constitute evidence for x. Your god is a hypocrite. He does not (on the assumption that he even exists) meet the standards he sets for people.
"If God decides to remove someone, for the betterment of mankind, then that is His prerogative."
So, you are saying he is evil. The way the bible has your god cursing all mankind with pain and suffering, it is unreasonable to suppose that he does anything for the betterment of same. At best, he does things for his own vanity. Such things are easy to spot. Just look for the codeword "glory."
Ronald Reagan, eh, Dan? Good ol' "If you've seen one redwood, you've seen 'em all" Reagan? National Guard wielding "If it takes a bloodbath to silence the demonstrators, let's get it over with" Reagan? I stood six feet away from him when he came to the UC Regents' meeting as Governer, and I had a good view of his thick pancake makeup. I was there: I got sprayed from a helicopter that was simply broadcasting pepper gas over the whole UC campus. Neoconservative Ronnie, who set new standards for hocking America into debt to fund drug runners? Are you sure you want to quote this guy, Dan?
ReplyDeleteZilch,
ReplyDeleteI carried Reagan's luggage when he came to visit us in Chicago. They put us up in a nice hotel (The Drake? Can't remember.) and we off loaded all his and his staff's luggage to the hotel and then we went to his speech that night. I was volunteering for his campaign in 1980(or 81) at the time. I stood about 6 feet from him also after the speech as we all discussed how it went. He was a nice man and we had a great time, especially for me as a 13 year old. First time in downtown Chicago and all. Good memories.
Dan, do you have anything that actually counters, or even deals with the points that zilch raised?
ReplyDelete"everybody that is for abortion..."
ReplyDeleteWho's 'for' abortion?
Dan: I can well believe you, when you say that Reagan was a nice man. By all accounts, he was a nice man- to other people in person. And he could be moved enough, as President, to send a personal check to a widow who didn't get enough from Social Security to live on. But that didn't stop him from dealing with people he had no contact with ruthlessly. Reagan was a prime mover in the trend that gave us Bush: lip service to the Republican ideal of small government while making record expenditures for war- but cutting funds to health, education, and welfare; zero environmental responsibility (do you remember James Watt? I do), shifting the tax burden from the rich to the poor, and an abysmal lack of knowledge of world affairs.
ReplyDeleteIf Bush Jr. hadn't come along, Reagan would have had a good shot at having been the worst President in the last hundred years.
Zilch,
ReplyDeleteI completely disagree with you about Reagan. He was a 'no nonsense' man that is for sure. The Iran conflict ended immediately and the wall came down under his watch. Reagan had some good fruit. Remember the Air Traffic Controller strike? They tried to hold the US hostage, so he replaced all of them. That is how I feel about unrepentant sinners and law breakers. Get rid of them if they refuse to understand what they are doing to us all.
I believe the true "Neo-Con" movement started with Bush Sr. and continued with Bush Jr., they had an agenda for sure, and they even got away with most of it.
Reagan was a true leader and did good for the most part in the US. War on drugs was well intentioned and was right. The populace that disregarded the laws of the land, (Romans 13) like alcohol prohibition, the "people" created and funded gangs and cartels that are very large and powerful these days. It was the druggie nation that created the crap we are dealing with today, not Reagan and his zero tolerance for drugs.
I am not comparing Reagan to God by any stretch of the imagination but if you think about it, if the people would follow the laws we would be in a much better place economically. It is the law breakers that are the problem, not the law abiding citizens or Reagan who was leading the nation, that is not the case now. Now we are being hijacked by a guy that says we will turn our heads and you can buy your drugs from baby killing cartels.
Don't blame Reagan for rapists and murders. Don't blame God for rapists and murderers. Blame the rapists and murderers for breaking our civil laws to rape and murder. Same with the drug addicts. The only reason we have murderous cartels today is because of those anti-civilians that just wanted to break laws and fund the drug dealers of the world. If no one shopped at Wal-mart there would be no such thing as Wal-mart. The drug addict criminals that were against the laws created a very dangerous world for us all and will pay for those decisions in the end. Rev 21:8 says drug addicts will burn in hell. Repent.
Can I blame God for creating both the THC molecule and the people who made it illegal?
ReplyDeleteHugo,
ReplyDeleteThey should be legal, and infrequent.
I certainly think there are circumstances where it is not my place to make the decision.
I would only say that abortion should NOT, under any circumstance, be used as a form of birth control. Outside of that, who am I to say that a 17 year old rape victim should keep the baby, or the woman who's just found out that the child will have serious birth defects, etc. etc.
Dan, or any other absolute pro-lifer can argue until they're blue in the face, but they can never put themselves in that womans shoes.
So I guess you could say that I'm pro-life with exception.
I suppose we could have the philosophical discussion on what constitutes life?
ReplyDeleteIs sperm life?
Is egg life?
When sperm meets egg, is that life?
Is a month old fetus life?
At what point does there stop being life? How far back do you have to go?
What does it mean, Dan, for there to be life?
I have 2 kids, and in between and around those kids my wife had 5 miscarriages, 2 of them were far enough along that she couldn't pass them and she had to have a DNC - which is a euphemism for, "they had to suck it out and scrape out her uterus".
So was that life, or just the potential for life?
Let me put that another way:
ReplyDeleteDid they have to suck 2 dead babies from my wife, or 2 unsustainable fetuses that for whatever reason were not developing properly?
>>or the woman who's just found out that the child will have serious birth defects, etc. etc.
ReplyDeleteOh so it's only human if they are wanted. Got it. My brother has cerebral palsy, maybe I would never have a funny brother with your plan. Sad.
Didn't Hitler speak of a superior race also, you know void of defects? Have you ever met a child with downs syndrome? They are by far the most loving and kind people on the planet. What a sad world it would be without them.
>>Is sperm life?
Nope
>>Is egg life?
Nope
>>When sperm meets egg, is that life?
Yes!!
>>Is a month old fetus life?
Yes!!
>>I have 2 kids, and in between and around those kids my wife had 5 miscarriages, 2 of them were far enough along that she couldn't pass them and she had to have a DNC - which is a euphemism for, "they had to suck it out and scrape out her uterus".
Gulp, that sucks and I'm sorry. I will ponder this point.
Well, if you were a Christian, at least you would have the opportunity to meet your children in Heaven.
>>So was that life, or just the potential for life?
Life that didn't make it to old age, would be my viewpoint. I know one thing that is for sure, God gives life. Without the blessing of God none of us have a chance of survival. He does, after all, hold that Book of Life.
Dan,
ReplyDeletemy point with the 2 examples I gave (and I noticed you avoided the 17 year old rape victim example) was that I don't put myself in a place to make that decision. i.e. whether I agree or disagree with an abortion under certain circumstances is irrelavent to whether or not it's my place to be making the decision. I'd never make the abortion decision for myself under any circumstances (at least not that I can imagine in the short time thinking about it), but that's just me.
So what you're saying, Dan, is that if you terminate a pregnancy immediately after sperm has entered the egg, you've committed murder?
What is your take on Chimeras?
ReplyDelete@Andrew
ReplyDeleteI agree with you completely, let's reply to Dan...
@Dan
I don't know why but I am not surprised to read that you are against abortion, completely.
Actually, you are even against the "morning" pill that can be taken after having a sexual relation with risk of pregnancy.
This has to be what you believe because you said, quote:
DAN:">>When sperm meets egg, is that life?
Yes!!
>>Is a month old fetus life?
Yes!!"
That is ridiculous. And that has NOTHING to do with religion by the way...
I actually debated an ATHEIST once, who believe the exact same thing as you Dan. I find both HIM AND YOU utterly ridiculous for believing in such things.
You say that a human life starts when the sperm meets the egg. Actually, there is a problem here.
The question was:
When sperm meets egg, is that life?
It did not specify "human" life, which is completely different.
And it did not mean "normal" human life either, which is different too.
So, if asked the same question:
When sperm meets egg, is that life?
I would answer yes, because that is life. But it's not human life yet, it's not even what I would call a "potential" human yet.
But, obviously, the way you answered Dan imply something else... It implies, and I might be wrong, please correct me if I am... it implies that you believe that a 1 minute old zygote IS a human life? You do agree with that? Right?
Come on, that's not how we define a "person", a "human". You're more than a mixing of DNA!!!
You really think that the second mitosis ends, we have a human being?
Wait, did I used a word to complex for you Dan right there? mitosis?
Do you think a human starts when mitosis is done? It's ridiculous... it's only a new combination of DNA at that point, nothing else. It's not a thinking human being, it's nothing special, it's just the combination of a ransom sperm cell with a random female egg cell...
Oh, but wait, you theist pro-lifers like to say that Atheist believe everything is random, and that life as we know it is a consequence of "chance", and that evolution is only random "chance", hahahah, it's so funny...
Look I am Dan: and I laugh at evolutionists because I think that Atheist evolutionists believe that everything is totally a consequence of randomness, hahaha, they suck...
Now, the sides have switched, didn't they?
Now, Dan and his fellow pro-lifers, are the ones who believe in total randomness.
The irony is that pro-lifers REALLY believe in randomness, while atheists and/or evolutionists, as Dan likes to call them, are not people who necessarily believe everything is caused by random events...
People who understand evolution do not think that evolution happens by chance. It's quite the opposite actually...
Anyway, Pro-lifers, on the other hand, do believe in the "power", or "purpose" of randomness, because they want to let the randomness of life do its part.
Think about it. Why would you have such a fetish on a DNA strands?
Each and everyone of us has its own single DNA. So what? We know it, we know how it works, and we even know how it's built when fertilization occurs...
So why would each and every single one of these DNA molecules matter?
Why?
Because Dan, that IS what you believe. No matter how you put it. Considering a distinct human life as starting at egg fertilization simply equals DNA fetish for me, and that IS believing in randomness.
You believe that each and every single unique kind of DNA molecules are worth something.
Because that's what you "worship" clearly, you worship the power of mitosis. Next Sunday, at church, you should pray Saint-Mitosis, she is one of your many Goddess...
And you accused people of believing in randomness?
lol, make me laugh...
Is sperm life?
ReplyDeleteNope.
Sperm is alive. It has life.
>>and I noticed you avoided the 17 year old rape victim example
ReplyDeleteI answered with "Oh so it's only human if they are wanted. Got it." A rape victim has an unwanted pregnancy. You just claimed that it is wrong as a birth control also. Someone would be very proud to call that baby their own, that is all I am saying. It was not the baby's fault so why vacuum their head off for that? Would you like to take a guess as to the percentage of the 46,000,000 babies every year were rape vicims? If you said one percent you would be way, way too high. Rape pregnancies are rare indeed.
>>So what you're saying, Dan, is that if you terminate a pregnancy immediately after sperm has entered the egg, you've committed murder?
If we forcibly terminate the pregnancy then yes it's murder, hence the term. (To finish or end; to halt or kill)
>>Actually, you are even against the "morning" pill that can be taken after having a sexual relation with risk of pregnancy.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely that is an abortion. I would go as far to say that all birth control pills are a form of abortion.
>>You're more than a mixing of DNA!!!
According to whom? Evolutionists? They would disagree and would claim that even you are just mixing of DNA, but I digress.
>>When sperm meets egg, is that life?
I would answer yes, because that is life. But it's not human life yet, it's not even what I would call a "potential" human yet.
And that would merely be your opinion. According to God's Word life begins before birth. So because it specifically does not indicate when the exact moment the soul enters the body, I err to caution and let God take care of such things instead of man. A baby's heart starts to beat at 18 days so abortions stops a human heart literally.
Let God decide (tinyurl.com/StopsHearts)
A termination, like I said is to finish or end; to halt or kill by definition alone.
>>it implies that you believe that a 1 minute old zygote IS a human life? You do agree with that? Right?
No implying necessary, that is what I believe. People do have funerals for miscarriages you know. They do feel the bond and it is a tragic event.
>>Wait, did I used a word to complex for you Dan right there?
Ohh a snarky murderer.
>>Next Sunday, at church, you should pray Saint-Mitosis, she is one of your many Goddess...
And yet another thing you are incorrect about, they are stacking up.
>>No matter how you put it. Considering a distinct human life as starting at egg fertilization simply equals DNA fetish for me, and that IS believing in randomness.
And yet another thing you are incorrect about, The DNA already has determined the hair color and the height when that child is 20 years old and how that person will deal with issues and who they will be attracted to, what jobs they will be good at, size of their fingers, etc. etc. All BEFORE they are born. Hardly sounds random to me. You are sad to believe otherwise. Murderer
>>Sperm is alive. It has life.
ReplyDeleteTrees are alive also, are you claiming that we are murdering trees? Go hug a tree.
A carrot is alive. Does a carrot have dignity?
Dan quoting someone else:
ReplyDeleteWhen sperm meets egg, is that life?
Yes!!
How so? A zygote is JUST ONE CELL at conception. Just as the sperm is one cell and the egg is one cell.
Sure, the zygote goes on (unless that god of yours wants it to miscarry---"pro life" my ass!) But guess what? Without the nutrients it gets from the womb, it can't grow into anything more.
Something else...a one-celled zyogote has no blood (the bible says that the life of the flesh is in the blood), no nerves, no brain, no organs...nothing to fell pain with.
How is a zygote compare with a baby? Or a fetus that's almost ready to be born.
Which would you save if you only had a choice of saving just one, Dan?
Dan,
ReplyDeleteyou said:
"A carrot is alive. Does a carrot have dignity?"
So essentially you're saying that in order for a murder to have taken place (where murder = the termination of life) that living thing must have dignity. So essentially murder is not the "termination of life" (since everything is essentially alive and living), it's the "termination of dignity".
So then, the moment sperm meets egg, dignity is somehow created?
OK, why?
You are essentially taking a concept that's in your mind, and placing it [absolutely] in the world.
Show me dignity...
@Dan
ReplyDeleteHUGO:You're more than a mixing of DNA!!!
DAN:According to whom? Evolutionists? They would disagree and would claim that even you are just mixing of DNA
Why are you using the word "evolutionists" here? What does this have to do with abortion? Why would "they" disagree? From your point of view atheists are evolutionists, or the other way around, whatever, so I am an evolutionists according to you, therefore I disagree with myself? Great... lol
Anyway, the point is only that a human being is much more than a random sequence of DNA in my opinion. And yes, it is an opinion. This answers what you said next... but it is a matter of opinion for anybody, and that is why I am pro-choice...
But it's also more complicated than that, because obviously we don't want people to allow women to get abortion when the foetus is viable... but that is not my job to decide, we have competent doctors and specialists who are much better than you or me to decide when a foetus is viable or not, and I trust these people. You, Dan, however, seems to trust other kind of people:
According to God's Word life begins before birth.
God's Word, your Bible, had to come into the game of course... even though it's not a subject directly related to religion... It's not surprising of course... but anyway, the important thing here is that you trust a book written by men two thousand years ago. It's one thing to believe in God, it's another to believe an ancient book written by people who know nothing about biology, human reproduction, contraception, and so on... way to go Dan!
So because it specifically does not indicate when the exact moment the soul enters the body, I err to caution and let God take care of such things instead of man.
Soul entering the body... haha, make me laugh...
No Dan you are already the one deciding when you want to have kids, so it's not God who decides anyway. Choosing to have sex or not on a particular day is a decision that you make, because your God gave you free will, so it's very dishonest to say that you let God take care of "such things". You pick and choose, that's what you do...
I will even push it farther to show you the non-sense in your reasoning. If you really wanted to let God take care of "such things", then you would just get laid as soon as you have the feeling that you want to, and you would let any teenager do the same, anybody, anytime, because God made us this way, so who are we to prevent our sexual hormones to let us reproduce as much as they want us to?
The DNA already has determined the hair color and the height when that child is 20 years old and how that person will deal with issues and who they will be attracted to, what jobs they will be good at, size of their fingers, etc. etc. All BEFORE they are born. Hardly sounds random to me
Wow, you're the one who's completely out of the track. The way you put it is almost as if we did not even have free will, did not even have an opportunity to choose the job we want to do, or what we want to train ourselves to. You are correct concerning the physical traits, but that's it, there are so many other factors that influence the way we grow up and change throughout life that you cannot say that it's all in our DNA!?
DAN: All my babies have positive blood as I am also positive. My wife, on the other hand, has a negative blood type. So maybe blood is life for a fetus.
ReplyDelete- Babies have + blood type
- Dan has + blood type
- Mommy has - blood type
- "So maybe blood is life for a fetus"
Huh??
DAN: Like I said the heart beats at day 18-22 so it has to be pumping something. Wwith the advice of the Bible, life begins at day 15-22 when there is blood. After that it is murder. I will buy that for now. It appears to be Biblically consistent. Something to ponder though.
Ya Reynold brought a very interesting point. So did you suddenly change your mind?
You don't consider a 2-hour old zygote to be a human life anymore, since it does not have blood?
I doubt that this is what you meant... I would be proud of you though if you did change your mind! It would be the first sign of actual rationality I see you portrait here on this blog!
>>Show me dignity...
ReplyDeleteAndrew I already have. You do not have a mother mourn for a carrot. She feels a true bond with the child and some have funerals and most all go through some grieving process. I don't see anyone grieving over the veggies at the "soup and salad" restaurant.
DAN:
ReplyDeleteAndrew I already have. You do not have a mother mourn for a carrot. She feels a true bond with the child and some have funerals and most all go through some grieving process
I don't want to reply for Andrew, but I guess the point was this:
So then, the moment sperm meets egg, dignity is somehow created?
Nice try to avoid the question Dan.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDan,
ReplyDeleteTo even hear that admission.WOW. Now for yours.
Oh,so it's only human if they are wanted. Got it.
In biblical times deformed and sickly babies were,except for the rich and nobility,left out for the animals.(Hey it's not abortion and had god's stamp of approval.)
Lets see 46,000,000 abortions a year would mean that every female in the U.S. from 0yrs to 100 yrs would have an abortion every 3yrs. That's +- of course. Now if you take the women of childbearing years in the US that means that everyone of them has an abortion every year.Now if you take out christian women.
Shit. It goes down. Oops. Either you have bad sources or you're a liar. I will defer opinion.
I don't like abortion. Neither does my wife. But we support it as an option.
Tell me Dan. Have you ever been to an orphanage? The children you see are the ones who weren't wanted,the less than perfect ones.How many of your good christian fellows will take one of these Oliver Twists. You want more children? Why didn't you adopt?
@Dan
ReplyDeleteGreat reasoning!
Of course personally I would not use the Bible as a source, but besides that, you believe a rational claim, and came to a conclusion that was different than you previous belief; it's always good to adjust ourselves.
Dan,
ReplyDeleteWhat is dignity and how is it created?
You want to show me dignity by pointing to a grieving mother. What about the mother who does not grieve, the one who looses a 1 or 2 week old pregnancy and shrugs it off with a “better luck next time attitude”. I know this attitude, I’ve seen it. So, evidently the “fetus” had no dignity in this instance.
The problem is, Dan, your idea of dignity is completely arbitrary, which is fine…. It’s subjective. All you’re doing is trying to force your arbitrary subjective opinion on everyone else, with little else but an argument from authority…. So what.
Dax,
ReplyDelete>>"Either you have bad sources or you're a liar. I will defer opinion."
On the side panel under my abortion tag it has the link for the source. I thought it was high also but here is the source for those figures.
>>You want more children? Why didn't you adopt?
We discussed it. We are going to move to a bigger house someday soon if possible, and we maxed out our Van for passengers, but we have considered adopting after we get this parenting thing down. It's still an option and we may be moved to do so sooner then we thought. How about you?
from Dan's source:
ReplyDeleteApproximately 26 million legal and 20 million illegal abortions were performed worldwide in 1995, resulting in a worldwide abortion rate of 35 per 1,000 women aged 15–44. Among the subregions of the world, Eastern Europe had the highest abortion rate (90 per 1,000) and Western Europe the lowest rate (11 per 1,000). Among countries where abortion is legal without restriction as to reason, the highest abortion rate, 83 per 1,000, was reported for Vietnam and the lowest, seven per 1,000, for Belgium and the Netherlands
Hum, how can secular immoral socialist liberal states have such low abortion rate!?
Dan, I'm personally philosophically pro-life from implantation to sentience; and would be politically pro-life from sentience onward.
ReplyDeleteI can't justify giving something non-sentient privellege over a sentient person, even if one day it might become sentient. However I think that society needs to change to become more accomodating toward single parents, poor working parents etc; and that this would drastically reduce the amount of people who believe that their only choice is a swift abortion.
To say "well the baby can be adopted after nine months, what's the big deal," is to disregard the illness that pregnancy can sometimes bring on - when I was pregnant I was basically bedridden/hospitalized for the first six months with hyperemesis (vomiting everything up, even liquid, constantly) - it was hellish mate; and I chose to go through with it. But I couldn't vote to force other women to go through with it before their pregnancy has advanced to the point where the baby is sentient. So while my personal stance is pro-life; I've yet to find justification to extend that to others before their child is sentient.
I think that a woman had the right to decide whether or not she wants her uterus to be hospitable to beginning life (after all, a fertillized egg without a healthy uterus has zero potential for development; and the ones that every woman loses never grow to think or feel). So birth control pills are merely a woman deciding before implantation that she doesn't want implantation to happen.
What are your thoughts on IVF?
Thanks Sarah for your cander and your story. That is a shame you had to go through those things like that, it must of been hard. I hope you had good people around you to support you during that.
ReplyDeleteWe take things for granted when all is well. Pregnancies and births can go south fast.
Personally, and Biblically, I feel that if you are not ready for children then you should not be doing acts to create them. Period. It is selfish to think anything else. Fornication is a sin indeed and we pay for those sins, I should know. God can create and gave us the ability to create also, but he split the duty up between us. Could you imagine Agamogenesis humans? Things would sure get out of control quickly. There must be a unity, an agreement/covenant, to be able to create as God can. It is a great responsibility and we should never take it lightly or for granted. Even on prom night.
Not a huge fan of IVF. I am one to squirm at anything "man made" though, so that should be no surprise. I do not feel we should get involved in altering God's gifts. If a couple is having trouble having babies naturally then they should look to God's plan instead of pushing for their own. Adoption is always a great option for the right people, stress right people. I am sure we can all agree at the total failure on man's part to allow Octomom to have so many children. To me that is not the definition of "God's plan". God will do the right thing for them. I am the eternal optimist.
Yay! Just what America needs - an anti-feminist movement whose goals will force young women into having coat-hanger and back-alley abortions!
ReplyDeleteThank you Dan!!!
>>Yay! Just what America needs - an anti-feminist movement whose goals will force young women into having coat-hanger and back-alley abortions!
ReplyDeleteYour logic is so flawed it hurts. Are you saying that we should legalize murder and rapes? Should everyone that breaks the law be allowed to do it because they broke the law?
Look, there is a plethora of anti-societal people that will break the laws that we set out. Apparently by your admission these criminals are the same ones that want to have abortions. If so they deserve jail. Law breakers should not be coddled, and accommodated, by passing the laws they are breaking. Like the pot heads that created huge dangerous Cartels, they need to be punished for their wicked behavior. They are the ones making this world more dangerous. Look at the mob that created Al Capone, the Kennedys, and the like during prohibition. It was the law breakers that made those monsters, not the law abiding citizens.
"Your logic is so flawed it hurts. Are you saying that we should legalize murder and rapes? Should everyone that breaks the law be allowed to do it because they broke the law?"
ReplyDeleteNo, Dan. The point is that making abortion illegal will victimize many if not most women. Making something illegal doesn't stop it from happening, it usually means you're going to get what you want from less desirable means and methods.
This isn't about who gets thrown in jail or who doesn't; that's a red herring.
What you can't seem to grasp is that passing anti-abortion laws will have far reaching consequences and won't stop abortions from taking place. If you're rich, you'll fly to another country and get an abortion, but if you're poor, you'll go to back alleys and use coat hangers.
Besides, it's not your place to impose your views on other people. That's also not the purpose of the law. If you think abortion is bad, so be it, but many disagree. You are not so special that you get to impose your will and opinions on everyone even if you can find people who agree with you.
Did you know that if you say "Beer Can" in a British accent, it sounds like "bacon" in a Jamaican accent?
ReplyDeleteTry it yourself, I kid you not!
>>Making something illegal doesn't stop it from happening,...
ReplyDeleteWhat is the point of a civil society then?
Society exists for the mutual benefit of its members.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure where you're trying to go with this one, because what DM said is a fact. Murder is illegal, yet it still happens.
Hi Dan i followed that link you gave for dignity .
ReplyDeleteOn the other dignity thread you said.." Respect for the dead as evidenced in funerals and memorials is a distinctly human experience lacking any correspondence to animal activities.
If we are merely advanced animals, why can't we discover any primitive behavior in the animal response to death that "evolved" into our more advanced ceremonies?"
Dan this is a interesting subject and my opinion is humans are not the only ones that display dignity.Yes human dignity is further advanced than animals,but some animals still do show signs of dignity.
Have a read of this.
http://www.tapirback.com/journey/elephant.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-399615/Elephants-grieve-lost-relatives.html
http://elephant.elehost.com/About_Elephants/
Senses/Grieving/grieving.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1221754/Magpies-grieve-dead-turn-funerals.html
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/animal-emotions/200910/grief-in-animals-its-arrogant-think-were-the-only-animals-who-mourn
Dan.."Non believers cannot account for dignity."
Dan i think dignity is a type of respect and its about worth.We see dignity in Wolve packs,and Elephants and plenty of animals.In societys of humans and some animals where beings benefit from each others presense its natural we gain respect in company of others and then display dignity when they sick or gone and being missed also.
Dan..."I've Noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born." Ronald Reagan"
Of course that is so true.
But we could also put it a very differnt way too.We could say ..Ive noticed that everybody who`s pro life,isnt that somebody somewhere who is just wishing like hell they was dead.
And Dan there is a fair number of them around too!,once born through pro life the being then has no choice but to try living.That needs to be remembered!.Surely this must form atleast "part" of the moral equation,to infact be moral.
Thats why when we decide on these moral matters of contraception and abortion etc.While fighting for pro life, the best likely possible chances of "quality of life" for person/s being fought for needs to ALSO be considered also.
In one sense Dan im very much a pro lifer too,i far far prefer life.Abortions i much prefer not.
And i honestly very much doubt many people AT ALL ever likely really enjoy any abortion!.It seems quite absurd to even think many/any really do.
I wonder sometimes if maybe we humans tend to think "every" single moral actually always has to be some black or white answer.Some how i dont think it always works so good!, specially when taking into account and contemplating ALL the matters of whats actually the best outcome.
Debunkey Monkey has already mentioned the fact that a black or white type judgment, can cause more suffering too.And banning doesnt stop it happening,it just happens in back alleys instead.
I do think its a great thing to see you seem to really honestly care about folks Dan,but i still wonder if we humans can sometime tend to get a bit to caring of others sometimes.And then forget and overlook certain things,and so just end up hurting somebody very much more instead.
I was contemplating something earlier about blood being life and such but I wanted to clear something up.
ReplyDeleteBiologically, human life begins at conception, right when the egg gets fertilized. The fertilized egg has all the information in the genes that makes a human being, even blood type.
All the information that makes you, you.
For the rest of your life, no new genetic information is ever added so human life begins at conception.