Mark Felt
Muse
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2008
- Messages
- 518
Sure.
If there is no afterlife, then this life is all. If this life is all, then the worst thing that you can possibly do to someone is to kill them; any experience is better than no experience.
I find it funny when arguing with assorted christians on the subject of abortion; why would the baby give a turd? He's partying with Christ, right?
If there is no afterlife, then this life is all. If this life is all, then the worst thing that you can possibly do to someone is to kill them; any experience is better than no experience.
I find it funny when arguing with assorted christians on the subject of abortion; why would the baby give a turd? He's partying with Christ, right?
Last edited:
paximperium
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 30, 2008
- Messages
- 10,696
There are actually some. Most atheist that I know who are against abortion is mostly due to ethical objections to abortion.
They believe it cheapens life and believe there are better ways of birth control than abortion. Funny thing is unlike many theistic excuses, they don't condemn it per se, they just believe it is suboptimal and a failure of a system of sex education. I'm also against abortion partially for this reason but am opposed to those to who seek to limit it. I believe in better sex ed.
They believe it cheapens life and believe there are better ways of birth control than abortion. Funny thing is unlike many theistic excuses, they don't condemn it per se, they just believe it is suboptimal and a failure of a system of sex education. I'm also against abortion partially for this reason but am opposed to those to who seek to limit it. I believe in better sex ed.
I have to say I do respect people that are against abortion but also are against the death penalty. It's confusing me to how people can be anti abortion yet pro death penalty. It's like "all human life is sacred" .. well no not ALL human life....
There are health issues. Too many abortions can hurt ones chances of carrying successfully later on. Also, telling the parents is an issue I can see both sides of. If you 14 year old is preggers, maybe as parents you'd want to know so you could figure out your 14 year old was having unprotected sex. I think the ability to talk to a judge or therapist and get an excemption is very important though.
I don't know anyone for just free and unlimted abortions no matter what the age of the person. I also know from one person that has had several abortions that the psychological damage from her abortions is very difficult to deal with now. She has serious problems and has needed some therapy to deal with what was an easy issue in her teens ...and is now in her 20's a feeling of depression as she counts the ages her children would be. (this person is a JREF member and an atheist!)
I don't know anyone that is PRO abortion. It's just not a good choice even when it is the only choice. But I'm for safe and affordable abortions.
There are health issues. Too many abortions can hurt ones chances of carrying successfully later on. Also, telling the parents is an issue I can see both sides of. If you 14 year old is preggers, maybe as parents you'd want to know so you could figure out your 14 year old was having unprotected sex. I think the ability to talk to a judge or therapist and get an excemption is very important though.
I don't know anyone for just free and unlimted abortions no matter what the age of the person. I also know from one person that has had several abortions that the psychological damage from her abortions is very difficult to deal with now. She has serious problems and has needed some therapy to deal with what was an easy issue in her teens ...and is now in her 20's a feeling of depression as she counts the ages her children would be. (this person is a JREF member and an atheist!)
I don't know anyone that is PRO abortion. It's just not a good choice even when it is the only choice. But I'm for safe and affordable abortions.
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 13,844
I am an atheist, I am pro-life and pro-abortion.
My argument for atheism is simple. There is no evidence of any god and with all the searching man has done, it is very unlikely that one exists.
My pro-life argument is simple. I prefer to never have an abortion (which I can't anyway) or to cause someone else to have one and I live my life accordingly.
My pro-abortion argument is also simple. The decision on whether or not to have an abortion is a personal one. I don't think anyone has the right to interfere with the personal decisions of others. Therefore, I support easy access to abortion for anyone who wishes to have one.
My argument for atheism is simple. There is no evidence of any god and with all the searching man has done, it is very unlikely that one exists.
My pro-life argument is simple. I prefer to never have an abortion (which I can't anyway) or to cause someone else to have one and I live my life accordingly.
My pro-abortion argument is also simple. The decision on whether or not to have an abortion is a personal one. I don't think anyone has the right to interfere with the personal decisions of others. Therefore, I support easy access to abortion for anyone who wishes to have one.
maxpower1227
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 1,998
Keeping population under control by means of abortion is cruel and inhumane. Keeping population in control by widespread starvation, disease and war is far more optimal.
There you go. ^ No religion needed.
There you go. ^ No religion needed.
Egg
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2007
- Messages
- 1,585
For me, the strongest argument against abortion isn't on religious grounds at all. It assumes that murder is wrong and then poses the question of when life starts. If we wouldn't consider it to be okay for a mother to kill her 2 year old, her 1 year old or her 2 day old baby, why is killing an unborn baby so different?
JoeEllison
Cuddly Like a Koala Bear
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,270
First off... let's drop the "pro life" spin. Everyone is for life. We're talking about being anti-abortion. Hardly anyone is "pro-abortion" either, because very few people consider it the best of all possible choices. Finally, there's no such thing as an "atheistic pro-life argument" on account of atheism not being a belief system from which other arguments can be made.
Having said all of that, I find that there's no compelling argument for banning abortion, although there are plenty of reasons to provide other choices when possible.
Having said all of that, I find that there's no compelling argument for banning abortion, although there are plenty of reasons to provide other choices when possible.
Kevin_Lowe
Unregistered
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2003
- Messages
- 12,221
Shorn of the emotive stuff, there is no good atheist, anti-abortion argument.
"Women should not be allowed to get abortions because they might regret it later" is not a good argument. They might equally well regret having a baby later, too, and then they get to have regret and an unwanted dependent.
You can't guarantee that nobody will ever regret an abortion, although frankly I suspect any regret is based on delusions of a fantasy-baby rather than a realistic view of how happy a baby makes you. Reported happiness on average drops after people have kids, it doesn't rise. You can guarantee a person's right to decide for themselves how they will live their lives, however.
"Women should not be allowed to get abortions because they might regret it later" is not a good argument. They might equally well regret having a baby later, too, and then they get to have regret and an unwanted dependent.
You can't guarantee that nobody will ever regret an abortion, although frankly I suspect any regret is based on delusions of a fantasy-baby rather than a realistic view of how happy a baby makes you. Reported happiness on average drops after people have kids, it doesn't rise. You can guarantee a person's right to decide for themselves how they will live their lives, however.
I was about to say QFT, but I reconsidered the bolded bit. In some situations it can be a good choice (though I suppose 'good' is in the eye of the beholder) - a woman who decides to abort after being raped, for example, I would consider a good choice.
But on 99% of what you said, I agree.
Delvo
Дэлво Δε&#
The only way the question even makes sense is with the assumption that atheists have no problem with murder. Some theists might believe that, but it's not something I would have expected to see here.
Piggy
Unlicensed street skeptic
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2006
- Messages
- 15,905
I'm not.
I am an atheist, and I see no issues with a 1st trimester abortion WHAT SO EVER.
2nd gets somewhat questionable but it's still a gray area
3rd tri I can only see it as a legitimate choice IF the mothers life is at risk.
Why? It's real simple. Google a picture of a REAL - not the BS Anti-abortion propaganda stuff that is placketed at abortion clinics - and read real info about the status and viability of such a thing surviving outside of the womb.
Now second tri the odds are getting better for the fetus.
3rd - it is clear that a 7, 8 and 9 month old can survive BUT IMHO not all life is equal. Given the choice, and the wishes of the mother, I believe that the mother has a higher priority.
Having said all that - ideally if pharma co's would spend a quarter of the money they spent on Viagra on better birth control for woman and developing one that worked half as good as the current one for women that was for men. Made it accessible along with proper sex ed, then all the "pro-lifers" could go home because all the abortion clinics would go out of business. But of course that's really against their agenda.
2nd gets somewhat questionable but it's still a gray area
3rd tri I can only see it as a legitimate choice IF the mothers life is at risk.
Why? It's real simple. Google a picture of a REAL - not the BS Anti-abortion propaganda stuff that is placketed at abortion clinics - and read real info about the status and viability of such a thing surviving outside of the womb.
Now second tri the odds are getting better for the fetus.
3rd - it is clear that a 7, 8 and 9 month old can survive BUT IMHO not all life is equal. Given the choice, and the wishes of the mother, I believe that the mother has a higher priority.
Having said all that - ideally if pharma co's would spend a quarter of the money they spent on Viagra on better birth control for woman and developing one that worked half as good as the current one for women that was for men. Made it accessible along with proper sex ed, then all the "pro-lifers" could go home because all the abortion clinics would go out of business. But of course that's really against their agenda.
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
In my experience the overwhelming majority of trauma that a woman experiences after an abortion is a result of society's negative attitude towards abortion, and not some sort of inherent emotional trauma.
It's akin to the returning Vietnam War veterans - their society rejected them causing them severe psychological trauma, and then their society used that trauma as further justification for rejecting them more.
What's truly sick is that I think a lot of the more vocal anti-abortion crowd know this only too well, and do it on purpose.
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 13,844
You are taking the term out of context. Pro-life in this context simply means allowing a fetus to develop into a baby. Not everyone is for that and certainly not everyone is for it in all pregnancies.
I disagree. Often it is the best possible choice which is why it should be available. I am pro-abortion because I believe people should have options even if I would never choose the option for myself.
All my beliefs are influenced heavily from the fact that I am an atheist. How can you not have a belief based on your values? That's like saying you are an atheist but you believe there is a god.
This I agree with. Options should be provided to each and every person and a person and those options must include abortion.
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 13,844
Abortion isn't murder.
I don't think abortion has anything to do with the baby. It is a question of who owns a woman's body, and the Supreme Court has (correctly) said that the government does not, does not even have the right to know if a woman is pregnant or has an abortion.
That said, I think abortion is a terrible thing, and I hope that birth control methods continue to improve to the point where all pregnancies would be planned in the future, making it a mute point.
That said, I think abortion is a terrible thing, and I hope that birth control methods continue to improve to the point where all pregnancies would be planned in the future, making it a mute point.
JoeEllison
Cuddly Like a Koala Bear
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2007
- Messages
- 7,270
Not even your own?
I'm pro-choice (I believe in souls, but I also believe that a soul in an aborted body would simply incarnate in another non-aborted body). But let me take a stab at an atheistic pro-life argument.
Suppose, in the future, someone will come up with an incontrovertable proof that abortion, at any stage in the life of the fetus, is murder (excepting when the life of the mother is at stake). If we continue on our pro-choice ways, and such a proof is offered, then we will have allowed millions of people to be murdered. However, if we outlaw abortion now there will be a certain amount of death and suffering (mainly due to illegal abortions), but nothing like the millions of murders that go on every year.
Without knowing whether such a proof is possible or not, isn't the safest course of action to assume a pro-life position? If a proof that the pro-life position is wrong appears, the worst that happens is some deaths from illegal abortion, and emotional suffering of women being forced to carry nearly all pregancies to term. If a proof that the pro-life position is right appears, however, millions will have been murdered. In the absence of a clear position, shouldn't we strive to minimize the worst-case scenario?
The argument turns on the probability (possibility) of a definitive "proof" being offered in the abortion debate one way or another, but it's not impossible. Slavery was believed by millions to be morally justified. There wasn't a single argument that reduced it to the morally reprehensible position it is today, but more of a gestalt shift in societal values. But that same shift may also happen in abortion- in 100 years, we may look back in horror at all the murders that took place. Our moral positions have evolved on other issues- forcing people to fight to the death, rules of warfare, interracial marriage, suffrage for women, etc. Why not abortion?
Wthether by proof or gradual evolution of values, might abortion be one of those things we look back at with horror, and if the possibility that we might look back at that way exists, should we assume a pro-life position, just to be on the safe side?
Suppose, in the future, someone will come up with an incontrovertable proof that abortion, at any stage in the life of the fetus, is murder (excepting when the life of the mother is at stake). If we continue on our pro-choice ways, and such a proof is offered, then we will have allowed millions of people to be murdered. However, if we outlaw abortion now there will be a certain amount of death and suffering (mainly due to illegal abortions), but nothing like the millions of murders that go on every year.
Without knowing whether such a proof is possible or not, isn't the safest course of action to assume a pro-life position? If a proof that the pro-life position is wrong appears, the worst that happens is some deaths from illegal abortion, and emotional suffering of women being forced to carry nearly all pregancies to term. If a proof that the pro-life position is right appears, however, millions will have been murdered. In the absence of a clear position, shouldn't we strive to minimize the worst-case scenario?
The argument turns on the probability (possibility) of a definitive "proof" being offered in the abortion debate one way or another, but it's not impossible. Slavery was believed by millions to be morally justified. There wasn't a single argument that reduced it to the morally reprehensible position it is today, but more of a gestalt shift in societal values. But that same shift may also happen in abortion- in 100 years, we may look back in horror at all the murders that took place. Our moral positions have evolved on other issues- forcing people to fight to the death, rules of warfare, interracial marriage, suffrage for women, etc. Why not abortion?
Wthether by proof or gradual evolution of values, might abortion be one of those things we look back at with horror, and if the possibility that we might look back at that way exists, should we assume a pro-life position, just to be on the safe side?
Last edited: