Concerning Abortion: Pro-Choice - Discussion
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-09-2014, 11:56 PM
RE: Concerning Abortion: Pro-Choice - Discussion
I never said that was the case. Im not comfortable with abortion. That is not my position. You are bringing up straw-me, now.

Im just explaining why abortion should be legal and we people are allowed them. I agree, having an abortion is not that great, especially so late, but we have logically come to a conclusion that always abortion to be a right.

“Take the risk of thinking for yourself, much more happiness, truth, beauty, and wisdom will come to you that way.

-Christopher Hitchens
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2014, 11:58 PM
RE: Concerning Abortion: Pro-Choice - Discussion
Matt Dillahunty (despite his attitude) did a good job explaining it here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYDdsgDmS-w

“Take the risk of thinking for yourself, much more happiness, truth, beauty, and wisdom will come to you that way.

-Christopher Hitchens
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2014, 12:19 AM
RE: Concerning Abortion: Pro-Choice - Discussion
Quote:This is always going to be a grey area, unless science can establish the point at which a fetus becomes a sentient being, capable of thought, emotion etc...


Most jesus freaks never get there.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2014, 12:56 AM
RE: Concerning Abortion: Pro-Choice - Discussion
(11-09-2014 11:40 PM)Sam Wrote:  I've explained my position. I've never once said I would force my opinions on anyone.


(11-09-2014 11:40 PM)Sam Wrote:  I'm fine with early abortions... But I do think there must be a cut off point.
If you won't force your opinions on anyone then how would you look to implement this cut off point?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2014, 01:02 AM (This post was last modified: 12-09-2014 01:14 AM by Stevil.)
RE: Concerning Abortion: Pro-Choice - Discussion
(11-09-2014 11:28 PM)Just Another Atheist Wrote:  We are pretending that the fetus is indeed a person with equal rights to a human.
"human", "human being", "person", "personhood", "rights"

These are often used as arbitrary labels to support already held opinions.

Don't be so eager to rush in and forcibly interfere in the actions of a stranger.

EDIT: Not directed at Just Another Atheist, just taking your comments and flowing with it. I understand you are pro choice.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2014, 06:20 AM
RE: Concerning Abortion: Pro-Choice - Discussion
(11-09-2014 10:35 PM)Just Another Atheist Wrote:  Again, naturalistic fallacy. Why are you all of a sudden obligated to go through a pregnancy? Where is this coming from?

Also, why is that if you take contraceptives and STILL get pregnant you are allowed an abortion? Or rape cases? The fetus did not "choose" to come into existence, in both cases the fetus was forced in.

Nobody is blaming the fetus. Where is THIS coming from? Im saying the fetus (or baby) does not have a right to life by using the mothers body without her consent no matter how long, or whatever. But both the fetus and newborn do have the right to life, but like the newborn, it DOES NOT HAVE the right to life at the expense of the mothers body without her consent.

Nope, that's where your argument is flawed.
There are three categories, not two. You are not differentiating among them.
There is a fetus, and there is a new-born, but in between there is a person not yet born. You cannot ignore that and expect to be taken seriously.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2014, 06:31 AM
RE: Concerning Abortion: Pro-Choice - Discussion
(12-09-2014 01:02 AM)Stevil Wrote:  
(11-09-2014 11:28 PM)Just Another Atheist Wrote:  We are pretending that the fetus is indeed a person with equal rights to a human.
"human", "human being", "person", "personhood", "rights"

These are often used as arbitrary labels to support already held opinions.

Don't be so eager to rush in and forcibly interfere in the actions of a stranger.

EDIT: Not directed at Just Another Atheist, just taking your comments and flowing with it. I understand you are pro choice.

Maybe to some these are arbitrary, but they are easily defined to leave very little doubt and very little grey area.

There is a point where the fetus has a brain and a nervous system (sometime around start of month 7) and there is a later point where the fetus is viable outside the womb (sometime around start of month 8).

These are not arbitrary definitions, they are facts.

For six months a woman should have the option to abort; after eight months, not without a compelling reason. Between seven and eight months? That may be a little grey.

Women don't wake up one day seven months pregnant. For six months she had a choice. By not aborting then, she has made a choice.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
12-09-2014, 01:26 PM
RE: Concerning Abortion: Pro-Choice - Discussion
(12-09-2014 06:31 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-09-2014 01:02 AM)Stevil Wrote:  "human", "human being", "person", "personhood", "rights"

These are often used as arbitrary labels to support already held opinions.

Maybe to some these are arbitrary, but they are easily defined to leave very little doubt and very little grey area.

There is a point where the fetus has a brain and a nervous system (sometime around start of month 7) and there is a later point where the fetus is viable outside the womb (sometime around start of month 8).
I agree that there is a point where the brain and nervous system develops and I agree there is a point where viability outside the womb becomes a high percentage.

But I disagree that either of these points denote a change from non person to person or from non human to human.

I also disagree that there is anything sacred about a "person" or a "human".
I strongly disagree that your beliefs in personhood give you any "rights" to interfere in the choices of the woman.

(12-09-2014 06:31 AM)Chas Wrote:  For six months a woman should have the option to abort; after eight months, not without a compelling reason. Between seven and eight months? That may be a little grey.

Women don't wake up one day seven months pregnant. For six months she had a choice. By not aborting then, she has made a choice.
This is your opinion, but my opinion is different. In my opinion, if it doesn't impact you then it isn't your business to interfere. Using force on a pregnant woman is an act of violence on your own behalf. Hiding behind law and police just delegates the physicality and risk to them rather than on you. They become your henchmen. But just as the person who contracts a hit man is accountable of the crimes of the hitman, you are accountable for the actions of your police if you have put into law and obligation for them to interfere.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2014, 01:28 PM
RE: Concerning Abortion: Pro-Choice - Discussion
(11-09-2014 07:21 PM)Just Another Atheist Wrote:  Premise 1: An unborn baby is equal to a new born baby
(11-09-2014 09:07 PM)Just Another Atheist Wrote:  Pro-lifers tend to fight for the idea that a fetus is indeed equal to a newborn baby, correct? Well, you can actually grant them that premise and still win the argument. Make sense?
No it doesn't make sense and I disagree with premise #1. If you put a seed in nutrition-rich ground, cover it, and water it, is it a plant? No, not yet. And neither is a fertilized egg a person. At some point between that time and just before birth, the fertilized egg does become a person, at which point it would be morally wrong to abort it. It's quite debatable exactly when the fetus has progressed enough to be considered a person.

But, if you grant premise #1 to pro-lifers, then an abortion would equal killing a person. It wouldn't matter if the fetus is a health or death risk to the mother. If two people were locked in a room and one had a terminal and contagious illness, would the healthy person be justified in killing the sick person just to save him/herself? No. In the case of the pregnant mother, that "no" is underscored by the fact that she got herself into that situation (except in cases of rape). What saves the pro-choice position is exactly not granting premise #1. And there is no reason to grant it. A fetus, at least up to some point, is not a baby. And, because it's next to impossible to agree upon exactly when a fetus becomes a baby, the abortion decision should be left to the mother, her conscience, and anyone else that she wants to include in her choice.

I am not accountable to any God. I am accountable to myself - and not because I think I am God as some theists would try to assert - but because, no matter what actions I take, thoughts I think, or words I utter, I have to be able to live with myself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-09-2014, 01:36 PM
RE: Concerning Abortion: Pro-Choice - Discussion
(12-09-2014 06:31 AM)Chas Wrote:  For six months a woman should have the option to abort; after eight months, not without a compelling reason. Between seven and eight months? That may be a little grey.

Women don't wake up one day seven months pregnant. For six months she had a choice. By not aborting then, she has made a choice.
Chas, I agree with you in principle. And my own person sense of morals says third stage abortions are a bad idea. But I don't believe this should be legislated upon. The exact point that the fetus becomes a person is too arguable. I'm not sure whether you are saying it should be legislated on, but I just wanted to raise the point.

I am not accountable to any God. I am accountable to myself - and not because I think I am God as some theists would try to assert - but because, no matter what actions I take, thoughts I think, or words I utter, I have to be able to live with myself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: