Why I am no longer pro-choice no longer.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-03-2014, 12:22 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
I'm not reading 28 fucking pages, so if this has already been said then I apologize.

Muff's, there's a difference between using abortion as both control and using abortion as a last resort.

I'm pretty sure no one here (at least I don't) wants abortion to be used as BC. You should sterilize people that do in my opinion. But having sex? That's natural, everyone does it; everyone wants it. Comparing it to murder is a false analogy.
You want a consequence? How about knowing that your decision is the sole purpose for killing your unborn child? That your mistakes are what led to it? Abortion isn't a reset button for [most] people. There are major emotional side effects.

Atir aissom atir imon
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Im_Ryan's post
19-03-2014, 03:30 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(19-03-2014 12:00 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  
Quote:it's that I don't hold the beliefs that a fetus is not a person and the beliefs that it is wrong to harm persons
Why is it not wrong to harm a person?
This question could fill up a thread all on its own.
Do you believe in objective morality?
If not then how can you ask a question such as "How is it not wrong to do X?"
Do you really expect that there is a truth to be discovered? One that all observers will be able to discover? Such that the action X has an inherent property M where by the value of M can be objectively discovered to be either "Wrong", "Right" or "neutral".
If you do accept objective morality and have evidence to back it up then a dispute such as:
Person A thinks that X is wrong
Person B things that X is not wrong
This disagreement can be resolved simply by pointing Person A and Person B to the evidence. They would both look at the evidence and know the answer.

Myself, I don't believe in objective morality, so to answer your question "Why is it not wrong to harm a person" my answer is "Because harming a person cannot be objectively determined to be wrong".
Another aspect about myself. I don't accept the concept of "Moral obligation", so even if X were to be determined as wrong, I don't feel that to be a compelling reason to avoid doing X and I certainly don't feel compelled to force other people not to do X.
What exactly are the consequences of doing wrong? Will I sprout horns, and a spear tail and will my tongue fork down the middle? Will my odor become sulphorous? Will I be tortured in hell? Will some bad karma come my way? Does the universe care if I am a bad person? Will Jessica Alba ever have a one night stand with me?
These and many more questions spring to mind.
(19-03-2014 12:00 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  
Quote:The reason why it is not murder to abort a fetus is because the government don't make it illegal
No.. its not "murder" its manually terminating a pregnancy a fetus is not a different entity it is created by the mother and belongs to the mother.
Two parts to your statement here:
1. a fetus is not a different entity
2. it is created by the mother and belongs to the mother.

1. a fetus is not a different entity
I have addressed 1 already, but it seems you disagree with the logic I presented.
I read a book a while back, one section of the book was discussing the difficulties in assessing whether something is an individual or not. It discussed Dicty which is an amoeba with a very fascinating behavior. Watch this YouTube clip, it is truly amazing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpdIvlSochk
When all these individual amoebas get together they stop being individual amoebas and collectively they become one slug organism, one individual rather than a collection of hundreds of organisms.
We call a single plant an individual, but within its leaves are chloroplasts, these are what does the photosynthesis allowing the plant to feed off sunlight. Chloroplasts are separate organisms from the plant and have their own unique DNA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chloroplast
Quote:Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, contain their own DNA, which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor—a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell. Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell, and must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division.
But because the plant and the chloroplasts work so well together (they have overcome any competition between them) we refer to the plant and chloroplasts as one unique individual.

With regards to the human body, we are made up of various different cells which work together rather than compete. e.g. Our muscles and bones work together, our immune system does not compete or attack our bodies.
But a fetus has separate DNA from the mother, unique and distinct (much like chloroplasts within a leaf), however the mother's body must turn off its immune system in order to not fight the fetus. The impact is that the mother is vulnerable in that area, her immune system will not fight the fetus and it will also not fight any disease in that area. This doesn't mean that any disease becomes united as a single individual with the mother. The fetus itself is competing for nutrience and taking that away from the mother's body. The immune system if turned on would attack the fetus as a foreign body. The fetus is a unique individual albeit dependent on and living off the mother's body. It is better likened to a parasite (much like a tape worm) rather than merely a part of the mother's body.

2. it is created by the mother and belongs to the mother.
This logic is guff, when you hear it spoken from the mouths of the religious, not doubt you cringe and wonder how a person can believe what they are saying.
The religious rephrase it as
"God created us, we belong to god, he can do as he pleases with us" They use it as an excuse when defending the deeds that god did in the old testament such as killing the children for calling a prophet "baldy" or for drowning everyone in the flood, or for killing the Egyptian first born...
By law we don't go down that path. It is illegal for a mother to kill her baby even though she created it. She is not deemed as the owner but instead as the care giver and by law this is her responsibility whether she wants it or not.

(19-03-2014 12:00 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  
Quote:A human being has 46 chromosomes A sperm or egg only has 23 chromosomes
that's bullshit.. chimps have 48 chromosomes are they human too?
A Human has 46 chromosomes a Chimp has 48 hence they are clearly different.
The scientific acceptance of species is whether they can procreate, Humans and Chimps cannot procreate.
An Egg and a Sperm are part of the procreation process, but an egg is not a human female and a sperm is not a human male. The egg only contains half the DNA required for a human, the sperm only contains half the DNA required for a human. To be human you need 23 pairs of chromosomes and those chromosomes must be so similar to other humans that you can procreate with them.
(19-03-2014 12:00 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  
Quote:Natural abortion is an integral part of that process, yes. But elective abortion is something entirely different.
Just as natural death is an integral part of the cycle of life, elective murder is something entirely different
Your analogies make no goddamn sense,selective abortion is not murder,its merely women taking control of their own bodies.
Please stay focused.
Murder is a legal term. Murder is the illegal killing of another human.
We are not discussing law in this conversation, we are discussing how a moral believer can accept the rights of a mother but ignore the rights of a fetus.
During selective abortion, the mother is choosing to kill her fetus.
1. The mother rids her body of the fetus
2. The fetus dies
A well balanced morality and argument will consider both perspectives 1 and 2. It is not well balanced to simply ignore item 2.

(19-03-2014 12:00 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  
Quote:Great the "personhood" of a fetus is irrelevant then and so your own moral beliefs on this matter are also irrelevant
Well the moral beliefs are relevant to me!
I understand that your moral beliefs are somehow important to you, but it is irrelevant with regards to your own relationship to the mother.
You have stated that it is the mother's decision (not yours) so therefore your own personal beliefs are irrelevant with regards to whether she has an abortion or not.
(19-03-2014 12:00 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  ... and secondly what about the personhood of the Sperm&the menstrual eggs?
I am unconcerned with regards to "personhood", it is part of a belief system that I don't have. Personhood has no objective scientific meaning.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-03-2014, 04:47 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(19-03-2014 03:30 PM)Stevil Wrote:  If not then how can you ask a question such as "How is it not wrong to do X?"
Well i don't have to believe in any objective morality to say that pointlessly hurting others is bad and is not healthy for our society.
Quote:my answer is "Because harming a person cannot be objectively determined to be wrong".
By that logic i can murder your family and say "Well murdering your family cannot be objectively determined to be wrong"
Quote:What exactly are the consequences of doing wrong?
Well for starters you go to jail.
Quote:It is better likened to a parasite (much like a tape worm) rather than merely a part of the mother's body
Even in that case that tapeworm would technically belong to me not anyone else,if something comes from my body that's my property.
Quote:This logic is guff, when you hear it spoken from the mouths of the religious
No dude just stop.. i don't care how much you think abortion is murder or how much of an "individual" a fetus is,not everyone shares the same opinion.

I don't consider a fetus to be anything more than a union ovum&sperm cell which can be terminated,i don't know exactly when it gains consciousness but i'm pretty damn sure women should NOT be forced to have babies they don't want.
Quote:A Human has 46 chromosomes a Chimp has 48 hence they are clearly different.
Well a chimp only has 2 more than us that doesn't make much difference,it should be a person too otherwise you'd have re-evaluate sperm&ovum's chromosomes too.
Quote:but ignore the rights of a fetus.
[Image: 1388108528268.jpg]
Quote:During selective abortion, the mother is choosing to kill her fetus.
During masturbation you are choosing to kill your sperm/

1) You rid the body of sperm
2) The Sperm dies

A well balanced morality and argument will consider both perspectives 1 and 2. It is not well balanced to simply ignore item 2.Laugh out load
Quote:You have stated that it is the mother's decision (not yours) so therefore your own personal beliefs are irrelevant with regards to whether she has an abortion or not.
Yeah...its not like anyone in this universe has any right to say otherwise except for maybe the father of the fetus and even he cannot force her to carry the child.

Let's say we consider that abortion is murder,what alternative solution are you going to suggest? force the woman to carry the child?

See this is why most abortion arguments go nowhere,there's really nothing to argue here you either force a woman to have a baby or you don't

Dreams/Hallucinations/delusions are not evidence
Wishful thinking is not evidence
Disproved statements&Illogical conclusions are not evidence
Logical fallacies&Unsubstantiated claims are not evidence
Vague prophecies is not evidence
Data that requires a certain belief is not evidence
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-03-2014, 05:12 PM (This post was last modified: 20-03-2014 05:21 PM by Stevil.)
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(20-03-2014 04:47 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  Well i don't have to believe in any objective morality to say that pointlessly hurting others is bad and is not healthy for our society.
To say "pointlessly" is a matter of subjective opinion.
To say "hurting others is bad" is a proclaimation of objective truth.
(20-03-2014 04:47 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  
Quote:my answer is "Because harming a person cannot be objectively determined to be wrong".
By that logic i can murder your family and say "Well murdering your family cannot be objectively determined to be wrong"
I agree with you. Killing my family is not objectively wrong.
(20-03-2014 04:47 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  
Quote:What exactly are the consequences of doing wrong?
Well for starters you go to jail.
No, Jail is one of the potential consequences of breaking the law.
Law does not define what is "wrong" and what is "right". Most people consider at least some legal actions to be wrong. Some people even consider some laws to be wrong.
(20-03-2014 04:47 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  
Quote:It is better likened to a parasite (much like a tape worm) rather than merely a part of the mother's body
Even in that case that tapeworm would technically belong to me not anyone else
This is your personal belief. It isn't a scientific truth.
(20-03-2014 04:47 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  
Quote:This logic is guff, when you hear it spoken from the mouths of the religious
No dude just stop.. i don't care how much you think abortion is murder or how much of an "individual" a fetus is,not everyone shares the same opinion.
Are you reading what I write?
I don't consider abortion to be murder.
Murder is a legal definition. In some countries it is murder, in other countries it is not.
A fetus can scientifically be demonstrated to be a seperate entity from its mother, this is not an opinion, it is a scientific fact.
(20-03-2014 04:47 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  Well a chimp only has 2 more than us that doesn't make much difference,it should be a person too otherwise you'd have re-evaluate sperm&ovum's chromosomes too.
Again, you haven't been reading what I have written.
I do not consider the unscientific term "person" or "personhood" to be any value as I have no belief system that requires this concept.
(20-03-2014 04:47 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  Let's say we consider that abortion is murder,what alternative solution are you going to suggest? force the woman to carry the child?
If abortion is considered murder then I think it would make sense to change the law and make abortion not to be murder.
(20-03-2014 04:47 PM)IndianAtheist Wrote:  See this is why most abortion arguments go nowhere,there's really nothing to argue here you either force a woman to have a baby or you don't
This conversation is going nowhere because you are not reading what I write, you are not addressing my position. You keep insisting that I think abortion is murder and that I want to force a woman not to have abortions.
It seems to me you just want to argue rather than discuss my actual point of view.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2014, 07:55 AM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
I dont differentiate between a baby outside the vagina and one inside the vagina. It is biologically not the mother because its genes are a recombination between the father and mother. In cases of rape, yes. But otherwise, no, have the baby, and put it up for adoption if you don't want it. If you hav unprotected sex you must accept the risk that you might get a baby, it is your own doing. The "choice" has already been made. even if you have protected sex there is still a risk of pregnancy due to functional failure, so it still falls back on the couple's heads.

IN short, I love babies.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2014, 08:01 AM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(21-03-2014 07:55 AM)Bjorn Wrote:  I dont differentiate between a baby outside the vagina and one inside the vagina.

I love babies too. Like the kind that have been born and no longer are parasites within a woman's womb.
By the way...babies NEVER live inside a vagina. Never.
The vagina makes for the birth canal during birth. But the fetus *exists* (not lives) inside the uterus.

You're ok with that slip-up somewhere like here. Here nice people will give you the heads up. Elsewhere you'd get burned at the stake for that kind of mistake. So I though I'd help you out.
It is sincere help intended even if I disagree with you (apparently) on abortion.


all goodThumbsup

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WitchSabrina's post
21-03-2014, 08:40 AM (This post was last modified: 21-03-2014 08:44 AM by Losty.)
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
I don't understand why people get so upset over imaginary sin and non existent children. I think eating poop is disgusting. I don't know that I would call it morally wrong but it is definitely worse than having sex on a good-bad scale. And let's face it there are people out there who really eat poop. When they get some kind of sick bacterial infection or worms, should they be legally required to keep those worms as a consequence for eating poop?
I realize that people need to be more responsible, but sometimes having an abortion is the most responsible choice. If someone does something that is not legally 'wrong', like having sex or eating poop, the government has no business stopping them from dumping the consequences by taking medicine or other things that affect no one but themselves. If a woman gets pregnant and is forced to carry to term as a consequence, what consequence shall the potential father face? Shall we infect him with a parasite and force him to keep it until the baby is born?

Swing with me a while, we can listen to the birds call, we can keep each other warm.
Swing with me forever, we can count up every flower, we can weather every storm.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Losty's post
21-03-2014, 08:42 AM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(21-03-2014 08:01 AM)WitchSabrina Wrote:  By the way...babies NEVER live inside a vagina. Never.

Thank you

Swing with me a while, we can listen to the birds call, we can keep each other warm.
Swing with me forever, we can count up every flower, we can weather every storm.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2014, 08:44 AM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(21-03-2014 08:40 AM)LostandInsecure Wrote:  I don't understand why people get so upset over imaginary sin and non existent children. I think eating poop is disgusting. I don't know that I would call it morally wrong but it is definitely worse than having sex on a good-bad scale. And let's face it there are people out there who really eat poop. When they some kind of sick bacterial infection or worms, should they be legally required to keep those worms as a consequence for eating poop?
I realize that people need to be more responsible, but sometimes having an abortion is the most responsible choice. If someone does something that is not legally 'wrong', like having sex or eating poop, the government has no business stopping them from dumping the consequences by taking medicine or other things that affect no one but themselves. If a woman gets pregnant and is forced to carry to term as a consequence, what consequence shall the potential father face? Shall we infect him with a parasite and force him to keep it until the baby is born?

Rarely do people understand my use of the term: parasite.
Thanks for using it!!!

I've been thinking lately that only women who've carried babies to term AND have also had abortions should be the ones making this decision.

Sort of like - I don't have a fucking clue how to fix a car engine so I really shouldn't be involved in discussion, much less any legislation on what might regulate that particular field.

But........ my wish that ONLY Mothers or women (period) making decisions on what happens or does not happen to women's bodies is just a dream
It's just a dream. Besides I do honestly go back and forth about the sheer importance of men's involvement. (since they become fathers and it DOES require a sperm for conception to occur)

dunno anymore........ I just wish I had better answers to this issue.

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WitchSabrina's post
21-03-2014, 08:50 AM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
I don't think abortion should be a legal issue. I don't think anyone really should have a say besides the specific woman who is making the decision. I do, however, believe that a potential father should have the right to metaphorically abort a fetus with the same time frame as the woman as for an actual abortion. Men should also have the option to dump the consequences so long as they do it within a time that the woman has the knowledge of their choice to help her make hers.
If that made sense. Sometimes in know something in my mind be I have a hard time putting it in words.

Swing with me a while, we can listen to the birds call, we can keep each other warm.
Swing with me forever, we can count up every flower, we can weather every storm.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Losty's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: