Questions for pro-lifers

[peptoabysmal]

A human oocyte or sperm has a potential to grow into a conscious being who might contribute to human understanding. Or not.

A human embryo has a potential to grow into a conscious being who might contribute to human understanding. Or not.

A fetus has the neural potential to grow into a conscious being who might contribute to human understanding. Or not.

Potential just matters to those of us who both had that potential and then had the stimuli that occurs after birth.

To those in the uterus, there are little stimuli and therefore little dendrite growth.

sense: photoreceptors: stimuli: no change in uterine environment
sense: chemoreceptors: stimuli: depends on mother's dietary intake
sense: mechanoreceptors (pacinian, aural hair cells): stimuli: little change in uterine environment (heartbeat always; put loud music or hollering into mother's environment, then some stimulus may get through)

So those people who insist on human embryos and fetuses as having the same rights as born people are basing those rights on potential, not on the fetus' current state of being.

Romanticizing.

Some women who have abortions may feel guilt because of these romanticizations.

My sister did not, and the fetus which did not experience its potential had less pain than any born being has ever experienced.

We need to stop romanticizing.

geez.

Why don't we just drop the nukes and end this veil of tears called life for everyone?

n.b.; To those with their fingers on the big red shiny button, I'm just kidding!

 

[peptoabysmal]

And yet we hear of all the millions of federal dollars going to abstinence-only education. Abstinence only.

Yeah, let's not tell them how to put on a life preserver, it will only encourage them to swim. If they swim anyway, they deserve what they get.

I agree, it is ridiculous. We aren't going to return to an age where this might have worked any time soon. I may go back there as soon as I get my time folding device working again.

 

[peptoabysmal]

Yes, it is. This is why I'm both for keeping abortion legal AND legalizing prostitution.

So I guess you'll be understanding when your daughter comes to you and says "Dad, I need to get an abortion because I've been earing a little extra money..."

 

[peptoabysmal]

I will never understand people who are pro life and pro death penalty.

Innocent people have been executed and unless you are willing to state that your justice system is %100 perfect at all times you must admit that more innocent people will be executed.

Its ok to kill innocent adults but not embryos?

Can we stop the whole pro life thing now and call it anti abortion everybody is pro life.

I'm against the death penalty for the reason you state above and the fact that it hasn't proven to be an effective deterrent to violent crime.

I'd like to add that in the case of a Geoffrey Dahmer or a BTK killer where the evidence is overwhelming and the guilty has confessed, nay, even bragged about their deeds, I am not opposed to torturing them to death.

The other thing I might mention is that we don't trust the law and the court system completely on the issue of determining guilt or innocence, why trust them completely on anything else?

 

[mumblethrax]

Well, there you go. Some etymology:

You might want to consider updating your lexicon more often than every 30 years. Incidentally, to make love now means to have sex. Man, that one can be embarrassing when you're talking to 90-year-olds. About having sex. And to have sex now means to engage in horizontal refreshment, not to have biological gender. And gender now refers to sex (either biological or sociological), not simply a grammatical class...what was I saying?

Oh, yes. While you're at it, you should talk about a fetus as a human life and not a human being; the latter phrase tends to imply consciousness, which fetuses would seem to lack. To borrow a turn from the self-help movement, fetuses are properly human doings, not human beings. That's why anti-abortion rights groups (hey, I coined a neutral term!) are loathe to use it; you wouldn't, after all, want to introduce a morally relevant distinction when the goal is to conflate two meanings of the word human in the mind of the listener.

 

[El Greco]

Which is why I said El Greco's desire to keep morality out of this topic was wishful thinking.

Predictably. But I did get some answers. BTW, I think that pro-choicers can more often than not leave morality completely out of this. This doesn't mean that they don't have their morals; on a personal level they may feel abortion is completely wrong. Yet, they can often argue about this issue strictly from a sociological or scientific point of view, without ethical involvement. OTOH, pro-lifers almost always raise the issue of morality to justify their opinions. This is not to say that bringing morality into play is wrong, but it certainly makes the arguments way more subjective.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

I go away for a while, and guess what? More circling around the subject, no straight answers.

If an egg fertilised by rape is still a human being, what makes it okay to murder it? We don't murder adults just to make rape victims feel better, so I cannot be to make the rape victim feel better. Saying "it's all complicated" is not an answer.

 

[Luke T.]

Predictably. But I did get some answers. BTW, I think that pro-choicers can more often than not leave morality completely out of this. This doesn't mean that they don't have their morals; on a personal level they may feel abortion is completely wrong. Yet, they can often argue about this issue strictly from a sociological or scientific point of view, without ethical involvement. OTOH, pro-lifers almost always raise the issue of morality to justify their opinions. This is not to say that bringing morality into play is wrong, but it certainly makes the arguments way more subjective.

So when is a "pro-choice" person going to explain why they are against abortion "without ethical involvement" and "leave morality completely out of this"? Still waiting.

 

[Luke T.]

You might want to consider updating your lexicon more often than every 30 years. Incidentally, to make love now means to have sex. Man, that one can be embarrassing when you're talking to 90-year-olds. About having sex. And to have sex now means to engage in horizontal refreshment, not to have biological gender. And gender now refers to sex (either biological or sociological), not simply a grammatical class...what was I saying?

Okay. Let's get jiggy with it! Fashizzle!

And you aren't just a guy who pumps gas. You are a "petroleum transfer engineer". And you aren't a bum, you are "homeless".

It's pro-abortion. You want to get all heated up over it and angry, then explain yourself or get over it. Explain why you are pro-choice but not pro-abortion. What are the reasons we need to avoid the term pro-abortion?

 

[Luke T.]

I go away for a while, and guess what? More circling around the subject, no straight answers.

If an egg fertilised by rape is still a human being, what makes it okay to murder it? We don't murder adults just to make rape victims feel better, so I cannot be to make the rape victim feel better. Saying "it's all complicated" is not an answer.

I don't think killing a fetus produced by rape is okay. It is not the child's fault how it was produced. I would prefer the woman have the child.

My wife and I have discussed this and we agreed that even if she was raped and became pregnant, she would still have the child.

But the real deal about the rape and incest and mother's health issues is to provide a pathetic smokescreen to hide the tens of millions of abortions behind that have absolutely nothing to do with rape and incest. It's like getting hysterical over a leaky faucet in the bathroom when the town dam has burst.

 

[Atlas]

I go away for a while, and guess what? More circling around the subject, no straight answers.

If an egg fertilised by rape is still a human being, what makes it okay to murder it? We don't murder adults just to make rape victims feel better, so I cannot be to make the rape victim feel better. Saying "it's all complicated" is not an answer.

Taking of life is justified within human judgement. Self defense is an example, a judgement we make allowing for the destruction of your attacker.

When the white man encroached on Indian lands, here in America, he slaughtered all that was dear to the Indian. If they couldn't get at the one who was raping the land they went after those settlers incubating in their cabins more voracious, rapacious white men.

When an invader (a rapist) violently takes what is precious to you, against your will, and leaves behind someone to rule your life, taxing you without relief - we allow that you have a right to reclaim what is left of what was yours. For a woman, that would be her body.

That's how I justify it, Kevin.

eta: It's a different situation completely from inviting a stranger into your nest, engaging in family building behaviors joyfully, and then choosing to throttle the result.

 

[Mark]

Just as others find pro-choice equally so. I take it 'baby murder' is little too strong for you.

Nope, just ignorant.

 

[Luke T.]

No.
Not at all.
Can you not comprehend the possibility that a person might decide against abortion for themselves, on the basis of their own personal morality...whilst having absolutely NO desire to impose that morality on others? THAT'S being pro-choice...accepting that each person has the right to decide differently.

(Clearly, this is a difficult concept for some people to grasp...the idea that one's own moral choices should not be imposed on others).

Do you think murder is wrong? Are in favor of your moral "choice" being imposed on others?

 

[TragicMonkey]

So when is a "pro-choice" person going to explain why they are against abortion "without ethical involvement" and "leave morality completely out of this"? Still waiting.

Well, I thought I kinda did in my posts so far, although I wouldn't characterize it as you did above. I'm pro-choice because I don't think I'm wise enough to determine what's right for other people. And even if I were certain I was right, I couldn't take the ethical consequences of imposing my view of what's right on other people. Personally, yeah, I think abortion is wrong. But I won't make that decision for other people, because sometimes, for them, it might not be wrong.

Plus, let's face it, I'm not exactly likely to ever run into a situation where my input on a real-life should-we-or-shouldn't-we-abort is going to be asked, wanted, or needed.

 

[Mark]

Do you think murder is wrong? Are in favor of your moral "choice" being imposed on others?

Bank robbery is wrong, too, but it has nothing to do with this topic, so I don't see why it should be brought up.

Terminating a pregnancy in the first trimester is not murder. I can see the argument made for late term abortions, if that makes you feel any better.

You know, in the early days of this country when abortion was totally legal (look it up) and was the preferred form of birth control, life was thought to begin at "quickening" which was when the fetus started to move, around the 4th month. I have always thought it interesting that "God" didn't get around to telling people that abortion was "murder" until the advent of modern science.

Oh, and the reason abortion was originally made illegal was from lobbying by doctors---not preachers---who thought the methods of the day were unsafe (which they were).

 

[Luke T.]

Some "pro-choice" person who is against abortion is going to have to explain why they are against abortion better than "I just think it is wrong for personal reasons." Explain why you think it is wrong.

The only reason I can think of that someone would be against abortion is that they believe a human being is being killed and they know it. Not "tissue with potential." Not a collection of DNA. A person.

Otherwise, what's the big deal? Why does it bother you?

If a person is against abortion because they think it is a person being murdered, and yet say they don't want to impose their morality on someone else, why doesn't that principle carry over into every crime? Before you answer that other crimes affect other people, remember why you are against abortion.

 

[DavidJames]

It's pro-abortion. You want to get all heated up over it and angry, then explain yourself or get over it. Explain why you are pro-choice but not pro-abortion. What are the reasons we need to avoid the term pro-abortion?

Ok, so someone who is personally against abortions but believes others should make their own decisions is pro-abortion.

I guess that means someone who is personally against smoking dope but believes others should make their own decisions is pro-smoking dope.

Someone who personally doesn't believe in God but believes other should make their own decisions is pro-God.

Someone who is personally against liberals and their causes but believes other should make their own decisions is pro-liberal.

Luke, the pro-liberal

 

[Luke T.]

You know, in the early days of this country when abortion was totally legal (look it up) and was the preferred form of birth control, life was thought to begin at "quickening" which was when the fetus started to move, around the 4th month. I have always thought it interesting that "God" didn't get around to telling people that abortion was "murder" until the advent of modern science.

Oh, and the reason abortion was originally made illegal was from lobbying by doctors---not preachers---who thought the methods of the day were unsafe (which they were).

This is a synopsis straight out of Roe V. Wade. I'm probably one of a few people here who have actually read it several times.

 

[Luke T.]

Ok, so someone who is personally against abortions but believes others should make their own decisions is pro-abortion.

I guess that means someone who is personally against smoking dope but believes others should make their own decisions is pro-smoking dope.

There is a difference between "personally against smoking dope" and "smoking dope is wrong". For instance, I am personally against smoking dope for myself because I am a recovering alcoholic and must avoid all mind-altering substances, but I don't think smoking dope is wrong. From what I'm hearing, though, there are pro-choice people who think abortion is wrong. And I want to know why they think it is wrong.

ETA: If I thought smoking dope was wrong, I would favor laws against it.

Someone who personally doesn't believe in God but believes other should make their own decisions is pro-God.

I don't see the word "wrong" in there, either.

Someone who is personally against liberals and their causes but believes other should make their own decisions is pro-liberal.

Wrong? Where is it?

Luke, the pro-liberal

Luke T. barely tolerant of liberals.

 

[Mark]

This is a synopsis straight out of Roe V. Wade. I'm probably one of a few people here who have actually read it several times.

It is amazing how many people don't know about it. Particularly lunatics like Pat Robertson who claim abortion is why God has turned his back on us (well, that and gays). Apparently, God was OK with it until the 20th century.