Non-Religious Argument Against Abortion

[Neverfly]

?? It makes sense to me.


?? Confused again. Your previous post indicated that we'd agreed on terms, and you just quoted back something where I said not everyone had to agree with my terms. We haven't agreed on terms. I'm okay with that.

You seem to misunderstand.
The agreement was that there was no true defining term.
That it's not black or white- it's a gray area.

In agreeing with this- you cannot claim yours as factual... even if sticking two words together makes sense to you.

And the fact that there is no world standard on "personhood" or "humanness" shouldn't be news to anyone. The Catholic church (among others) argues that human life begins at the moment of conception, and others (including me) argue that a zygote/embryo/fetus is not a human being until the moment of its birth.

If I wanted to, I could probably make a pretty good and strong argument that an infant is not a person, either. It isn't until their mind develops enough to be self aware etc...
And even THAT will be debatable and hard to define.

The way I see it, if a person conceives, they have conceived and are stuck with the responsibility. Why take the cowardly easy way out and Kill It like a spider?
Oftentimes, abortions are not a matter of medical emergency etc- But of convenience.

Just because you, personally, arbitrarily drew a line defining when a person is a person, does not give that line substance or reality.
All you're really doing is shifting the goalposts in order to justify killing a person, by claiming it is not a person.

Let's take a look at my own personal line- It's back around the first trimester or so. To ME- a cluster of cells is not yet a person. So your line is further out then mine.
So why don't I support abortion up 'til the first trimester?

Because I am aware that I have also shifted the line. Knowing this, I refer back to the Only Known defining line- Conception.
So although I don't draw the line at conception- I cannot prove where the line falls.
I CAN prove where it doesn't.

Soes that make sense?

Yes you did, and you also falsely quoted me saying "A term I just made up." I never said that. I understand it was just an attempt to make me look stupid, and that's okay.

No.
Had I been quoting you, I would have parsed what you said.
I WAS mocking what you had said, because what you said makes no sense.

Okay, now you're really trying to make me look stupid. I have been trying to figure it out. If you've been delivered of your mother's womb, you've been born. Was it by C-section? I don't remember arguing that a c-section wasn't a birth. I know lots of people born by c-section. Are you saying that you don't have a birth certificate for some reason? Honestly, I'm not trying to be thick. I'm just stunned that I'm having an internet exchange with someone who's never been born. Are you a computer program?

I did got frustrated but it was not my intention to make you look stupid, either.

I was a C-Section- thus I was never born.

The Point is- This is what happens when a person arbitrarily draws lines in gray areas: People can take it to easy extremes.
By your definition, I was never born. Therefor- I am not a person.
I'm sure you will disagree with that interpretation, but it is not my intention to defend it- Only to make it apparent that interpretations can be made.


Like the proto chicken vs. chicken thread- We cannot define, exactly, when a fetus becomes self aware- a person.
When you are left trying to make a decision to Do The Right Thing, stick with what you can define and do know. Don't just guess and then use that as a justification later.

 

[steffanie]

Person was a bad choice of word. I guess the more developed a fetus is the more human-like they are the more i would have a problem with it. Am i making sense?

 

[Neverfly]

This applies to Steffanie's argument as well:

I don't like it either. What's special about being human? Is it wrong to disconnect someone who's been in deep coma for twenty years, with no hope of recovery, just because he/she is human? I think the relevant category is not human, but person, in the following specific sense of the word: a person is any entity capable of having desires. And yes, that includes some animals and future artificial minds.
What the arguments you've presented fail to grasp is that the whole point of morals is to avoid suffering. Once you start holding on to metaphysical notions such as "wrong", "innocent", "sacred" and such, the argument becomes hopelessly muddled, and you can reach conclusions that actually increase suffering instead of diminishing it.
Since an embryo has no nervous system, it cannot have desires, and hence cannot suffer. Why should it be morally unacceptable to kill it? Who suffers?

There are times when one person must kill another.
To prevent harm
self defense
etc

But convenience?

An abortion may be necessary in certain situations. But convenience strikes me as a pretty lame reason.

 

[Neverfly]

Let's take this to another logical conclusion:

If we assume
- a woman has the right to choose what to do with her body...
- the child in the womb is somehow magically the womans body (How to justify that claim I have no idea at all but let's assume it anyway)
-the child in the womb is not a person - it's just a THING... nothing more

Then the expectant mother is should have the right to abuse drugs, alcohol and tobacco all while carrying the child.
She should have the right to engage in extreme sports, boxing and night clubbing.

 

[steffanie]

Not to pull holes in your opinion Neverfly but I don't like the word convenience. I am sure any one who decides to have an abortion did not sit down and think 'Is it convenient for me/us to have this baby?' It's a pretty tough decision to make and would take alot of thinking about nevermind what the after affects are.

 

[Neverfly]

Not to pull holes in your opinion Neverfly but I don't like the word convenience. I am sure any one who decides to have an abortion did not sit down and think 'Is it convenient for me/us to have this baby?' It's a pretty tough decision to make and would take alot of thinking about nevermind what the after affects are.

Maybe the word IS a bad choice. You're right.

But can you define it with a better one?

I have watched people give up children to adoption... And I have seen the agony it is for them.

But again- I had that option too, right?
It would have been the "easy road" to run off or give up...

But to me, it was not an option AT ALL.

The most common reason for abortion is that pregnancy and child raising will disrupt the wants and plans of those involved.

 

[truethat]

The C section argument is pretty interesting. If someone had an emergency C section at 5 months, they would do everything in their power to keep the baby alive. It would be a birth and the child would get a birth certificate.

But if you do the same thing in an abortion clinic then its just a mess of cells?

I think the commentary about "KILL IT" is really spot on. I feel guilty about killing waterbugs and mice. I can't understand how people can be so cavalier about killing a baby.

weird.

 

[Neverfly]

The C section argument is pretty interesting. If someone had an emergency C section at 5 months, they would do everything in their power to keep the baby alive. It would be a birth and the child would get a birth certificate.

But if you do the same thing in an abortion clinic then its just a mess of cells?

Exactly. Where the line gets drawn is entirely dependent on the arguers selfish wants.

 

[Piero]

Person was a bad choice of word. I guess the more developed a fetus is the more human-like they are the more i would have a problem with it. Am i making sense?

Of course you are. I believe most people would feel that way, not only with regards to humans, but to animals too. Why are kittens cute? Because they look like they can suffer, so we can identify with them. Why aren't spiders cute? Because they have no face, so we cannot tell whether they are suffering. My point is that we should not cause suffering-capable entities to suffer, and that's about all the morals we'll ever need.

 

[Fiona]

Decided against it

 

[truethat]

Of course you are. I believe most people would feel that way, not only with regards to humans, but to animals too. Why are kittens cute? Because they look like they can suffer, so we can identify with them. Why aren't spiders cute? Because they have no face, so we cannot tell whether they are suffering. My point is that we should not cause suffering-capable entities to suffer, and that's about all the morals we'll ever need.

I agree with this. One of the reasons I can't stand killing waterbugs is because you can see their face. Its really awful to see it running for its life and swack swack swack chasing it down. Shudders.

 

[Neverfly]

I agree with this. One of the reasons I can't stand killing waterbugs is because you can see their face. Its really awful to see it running for its life and swack swack swack chasing it down. Shudders.

I'm the sort that believes in killing out of necessity only.
To provide food. Safety. Use all of what you kill, do not waste it.

Respect the life.

I'm the sort that will catch a bee or spider and release it outside. Because although it's a lower life form, it's still life. And it's a relatively harmless form of life.
If I come across a Brown Recluse spider in my home, I will kill the spider. Because it's venom is toxic enough for it to be a threat to my son.
Same with a rattlesnake.
But a rat snake or garter snake is simply transported elsewhere.

Same with bacteria. Although the lowest forms of life, I know it IS life. I will wash my hands and food for safety reasons for my son and I.
I will kill bacteria for safety reasons.
But at the same time, I don't buy Clorox brand Counter wipes either. I don't sterilize the house as I see some people do. A little bacteria is also GOOD for us.

 

[steffanie]

Maybe the word IS a bad choice. You're right.

But can you define it with a better one?

I will work on finding a better word Neverfly I am sure there is one.
Okay so i am curious....
Where do you stand on a woman being raped and getting pregnant and to make this situation even more harrowing, her attacker is a relative?

Or a woman is told very early on her baby shows signs of a life threatening disease and will not survive beyond a few hours of birth and if it does the quality of life would be zero.

 

[truethat]

Most women who have abortions are not rape victims. Why do people always trot out the rape victims when they discuss abortions but not like the actual reality which is most people have abortions out of convenience?

Hypocrite much?

 

[steffanie]

Can i also just say i am not in favour of abortion in general. I have a friend who decided it was the right thing for her, purely because she was single, it was a holiday fling and she was not financially fit as she put it, plus she wanted to travel etc. There was a guy out there who didn't know he was a dad for a few weeks. This upset me.
I remember feeling very angry at her for ages, i didn't let her know this because i thought who am i to judge? She needed my support right?
Anyway i think this example is what Neverfly is talking about. I agree with it but certain circumstances may apply IMHO.

 

[Neverfly]

Most women who have abortions are not rape victims. Why do people always trot out the rape victims when they discuss abortions but not like the actual reality which is most people have abortions out of convenience?

Hypocrite much?

Not hypocritical at all. It IS a valid point. Just as asking when to kill any person is a valid point.
You cannot murder your neighbor for playing loud music all night and annoying you, but you can if he attacks you with a machete.

I will work on finding a better word Neverfly I am sure there is one.
Okay so i am curious....
Where do you stand on a woman being raped and getting pregnant and to make this situation even more harrowing, her attacker is a relative?

Or a woman is told very early on her baby shows signs of a life threatening disease and will not survive beyond a few hours of birth and if it does the quality of life would be zero.

Pain is a part of life.
If it was My Choice- I would choose to have the child. It is not the childs fault were I a woman who was raped.
If the child had a life threatening illness, I would choose to give them a chance Anyway. Even if it was short lived, we would have Lived through it together, I would have that brief memory and I would choose to carry that pain with it rather than give up, bow out or kill to achieve my own delusions of hiding.

I KNOW this because I have had to face and carry a great many similar choices in my life.

I also understand that other people on this world could be overwhelmed to the point of self destruction.

As I said already, there are times when termination is necessary. Self defense... Safety...
Sometimes an abortion IS the only productive route.

But just as sometimes killing a person that attacks you is productive, you still cannot kill people for annoying you.

 

[steffanie]

Most women who have abortions are not rape victims. Why do people always trot out the rape victims when they discuss abortions but not like the actual reality which is most people have abortions out of convenience?

Hypocrite much?

Eh no i don't think so.
I'm not trotting out the rape victims as you put it.
I was simply pointing out that in that scenario i would not be opposed to someone having an abortion. I am sure this situation has come up more than you think.

 

[Neverfly]

Can i also just say i am not in favour of abortion in general. I have a friend who decided it was the right thing for her, purely because she was single, it was a holiday fling and she was not financially fit as she put it, plus she wanted to travel etc. There was a guy out there who didn't know he was a dad for a few weeks. This upset me.
I remember feeling very angry at her for ages, i didn't let her know this because i thought who am i to judge? She needed my support right?
Anyway i think this example is what Neverfly is talking about. I agree with it but certain circumstances may apply IMHO.

Convenience.

It interrupted her selfish wants.

I say that your friend is a fool. I Was not financially ready when I learned that I was about to be a dad.
I GOT READY.

And he is my son. he is here, enriching my life and I'll walk across the fires of Hell for him.

 

[Piero]

Let's take this to another logical conclusion:

If we assume
- a woman has the right to choose what to do with her body...
- the child in the womb is somehow magically the womans body (How to justify that claim I have no idea at all but let's assume it anyway)
- the child in the womb is not a person - it's just a THING... nothing more

Then the expectant mother should have the right to abuse drugs, alcohol and tobacco all while carrying the child.
She should have the right to engage in extreme sports, boxing and night clubbing.

- I agree. Not only women, though: people in general have the right to choose what to do with their bodies.
- I think the argument is not that the child in the womb is part of the mother's body; rather, it is an occupant of the mother's body. So, since the body belongs to her, she has the right to decide whether to allow the child to stay or not.
- Why "child"? You are assuming that whatever is inside the uterus is a child, and that's not necessarily the case. Before it has developed a brain, it is in fact just an organic "thing".

Some women may abuse drugs, alcohol, etc. out of ignorance. Some because they can't help it. Some because they don't care. There are different contexts in which to judge that issue. Yet it seems contradictory that you can judge women for not taking appropriate care of themselves while pregnant, but you do not criticize parents who do not raise their children to the best of their abilities. So, you appear to be more concerned with the welfare of something that may or may not be a person, than with the welfare of children who are definitely and undoubtedly persons.

 

[truethat]

That's interesting because I wasn't thinking about judging someone else for a decision to have an abortion. To me the issue is none of my business unless it directly involves me. It would not occur to me that someone would think that I'm telling them what to do. I'm only speaking for me.