Some sincere questions for pro-life atheists, no debate intended

[Imago]

......

[Imago]

(12-09-2014 06:56 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  I am pro-life -- not pro-natal.

Pro-natal meaning pro-birth? What do you mean by pro-life?

[Imago]

(12-09-2014 09:03 PM)Sam Wrote:  

(31-08-2014 06:21 PM)jojorumbles Wrote:  Questions:
If you are a pro-life atheist -
*Do you make any exceptions for abortion? What are they, if you do?
*How would you want your opinions enforced in our nation, how should unborn human life be protected?

1) Yes, but I don't consider abortion to be a black and white issue. The longer the pregnancy goes on before ultimately getting an abortion, the more it troubles me. First days, weeks, and maybe a couple of months I don't have an issue with. Late stage pregnancy abortion I do have a problem with. The longer it goes before termination, the bigger the problem I have with it.

2) How do I want my opinions enforced? I don't.
I would like to see schools take up teaching kids proper sex education. None of this abstinence only bullcrap.

This...

I would generally consider myself pro-choice, but the longer a pregnancy goes on the more uncomfortable I feel with abortion.

At an early stage I view it as little more than a last resort, emergency contraception. But as time goes on, things do get much more complicated, and in the final stages of pregnancy, an abortion for any reason other than to save the mother's life in my opinion, would be murder.

I was thinking about "birth control" the other day, because I like to think about words. Contraception by definition prevents pregnancy. Abortion ends pregnancy. Pregnancy is defined as once the zygote has embedded itself in the woman or girl's tissues (could be the uterus - normal, could be a Fallopian tube - ectopic, etc.). Abortion can never be emergency contraception. Contraception does not control birth, it controls pregnancy. Abortion is the real birth control, while contraception is pregnancy control.

[doniston]

(31-08-2014 06:21 PM)jojorumbles Wrote:  Questions:
If you are a pro-life atheist -
*Do you make any exceptions for abortion? What are they, if you do?
*How would you want your opinions enforced in our nation, how should unborn human life be protected?

1) Yes, but I don't consider abortion to be a black and white issue. The longer the pregnancy goes on before ultimately getting an abortion, the more it troubles me. First days, weeks, and maybe a couple of months I don't have an issue with. Late stage pregnancy abortion I do have a problem with. The longer it goes before termination, the bigger the problem I have with it.

2) How do I want my opinions enforced? I don't.
I would like to see schools take up teaching kids proper sex education. None of this abstinence only bullcrap.

I strongly agree

[doniston]

(01-09-2014 06:27 AM)DLJ Wrote:  I am pro-life because of the growing number of atheists.


I'm thinking ... food supply.

I'm puzzled. please explain I would think the reverse

[doniston]

(01-09-2014 10:40 PM)DLJ Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 10:37 PM)Imago Wrote:  ...
So the cause of the pregnancy or reasons for wanting to abort are not what bother you - just how much fetal development has occurred? As in, if you're going to abort, decide quickly, for humane reasons? Since the more developed the unborn are the more likely they are to feel pain, etc.?

How many causes of pregnancy are there?

I can only think of one.

I think she is considering Rape, incest, etc.

[doniston]

(02-09-2014 09:04 AM)wazzel Wrote:  What do you mean by pro-life? If you mean it by the pro-life political movement, then no. If you mean it as in life should be protected when ever possible, then yes.

Like jojo it is not black and white for me. I do not want to see the procedure made illegal or unduly restrictive. At times it is a medical necessity and I do not want those women to die because the procedure is not availably and if it is made illegal some women will still seek them out and will die from less than adequate facilities providing the service illegally.

I have no problems making it restricted to medical necessity after the point of viability. My opinion is if it could live it should live. I also feel if you have not decided by then to bad.

I have issues with the abortion loophole for minors. IMO minors should not receive non-emergency medical treatment with out parent or guardian permission or a court order.

strongly agree

[Stevil]

There is no person more qualified in the abortion debate than the pregnant woman herself, living her life, experiencing her pregnancy.

Politicians and self-righteous know-it-alls living fat in the comfort of their luxury lives can ponder what they believe is Best in hypothetical situations. They can dream up the concepts of "personhood" of "life" vs "non life", they can set their own value levels on the fetus or the late term unborn, they can compare that against their own self appointed value of the woman's rights. They can write up laws controlling how people (they have never met) are to be legally obliged to live by even though they have no idea as to the impact these laws will have on the lives of the individuals.

But it doesn't change the fact that...
There is no person more qualified in the abortion debate than the pregnant woman herself, living her life, experiencing her pregnancy.

My advice to these politicians and know-it-alls, give up on the idea that YOU know Best, give up on the idea that you have the right to control others. Do not endorse unnecessary violence (police obligation to enforce law) against strangers, live your own life and stop concerning yourself with with how you can interfere in the lives of others.

[calmblueocean]

When I consider the abortion issue, I think first of all that, as has been said in this thread, the pregnant woman should have the final say, as it's her body. Regardless of whether she later regrets her decision (either way), it's her body; it's her choice.

When thinking for myself what the best course of action might be for a particular person in this situation, I would consider any health issues, medical or psychological (for mother or potential child), and also the overall situation of the mother. Will this child, if it's born, be born into a situation where it can't be properly provided for? Won't be loved? If the potential child is bound to suffer because its mother can't or won't care for it (be the reasons financial, emotional, educational, whatever), I think it would be better for it to not be born. There are a great number of children living through situations like this, and surely this affects them in adulthood, should they reach it. I know there are a lot of people who have come through situations just like this and are strong, intelligent, worthwhile people, perhaps even more compassionate than they would otherwise have been because of what they've endured. But just because a person can survive such adversity doesn't mean s/he should be forced to do so. (As a zygote s/he can't make any kind of decision like this, so it falls to those who can. And now I'm getting myself a bit too deep, perhaps, heh.)

Overall, I would prefer to minimise suffering among everybody and everything that's capable of feeling it.

[Drunkin Druid]

(27-11-2014 10:27 AM)doniston Wrote:  

(01-09-2014 06:27 AM)DLJ Wrote:  I am pro-life because of the growing number of atheists.


I'm thinking ... food supply.

I'm puzzled. please explain I would think the reverse

Not one to speak for others but I'm pretty sure it was a joke.