Abortion Discussion

[PapaZoom]

Your interpretation of the Bible is not sound information.

There are plenty of reasons, outside of using the Bible, to oppose abortion. But this being a Christian site, you're going to have those arguments that include biblical principles directly. It's best to keep that in mind and not focus only on that side of the argument. When talking to Christians or others of faith, I will use the Bible to help make my case against abortion. But mostly my arguments are the kind that even atheists have used.

 

[PapaZoom]

No, it's not. It's his thoughts and opinions on the post he quoted.

it's only about religion if you make it that way - focus on the bigger picture

 

[AirPo]

You are forgetting that, according to the Bible, our bodies belong to God. If you do not even own your body, then it follows that neither you do own the body of the unborn child.

Your forgetting that the Bible doesn't apply, and that she does own her own body.

 

[Nic Samojluk]

If abortion isn't immoral, why bother with the abortion rate? We don't care about the tooth extraction rate. Why does the abortion rate matter? What difference does it make?

Excellent response!

 

[PapaZoom]

Your forgetting that the Bible doesn't apply, and that she does own her own body.

your argument about "her own body" should then exclude the abortionist from preforming the abortion. It's not the doctor's body so why should he/she have anything to do with the killing of the unborn?

 

[AirPo]

There are plenty of reasons, outside of using the Bible, to oppose abortion. But this being a Christian site, you're going to have those arguments that include biblical principles directly. It's best to keep that in mind and not focus only on that side of the argument. When talking to Christians or others of faith, I will use the Bible to help make my case against abortion. But mostly my arguments are the kind that even atheists have used.

It doesn't matter if it's a Christian site, Bible based arguments are still not sound.

 

[PapaZoom]

It doesn't matter if it's a Christian site, Bible based arguments are still not sound.

according to you

 

[KCfromNC]

If abortion isn't immoral, why bother with the abortion rate? We don't care about the tooth extraction rate.

Back here in reality, tooth brushes exist. Finding easy way to prevent more complex medical procedures says nothing about the morality of that procedure when it become necessary.

 

[AirPo]

Excellent response!

Not excellent at all. It's actually really stupid. We do care about tooth extractions. That's why have things called dentists, toohpaste, and floss.

 

[AirPo]

your argument about "her own body" should then exclude the abortionist from preforming the abortion. It's not the doctor's body so why should he/she have anything to do with the killing of the unborn?

That's as stupid as implying that people should remove brain tumors by themselves.

 

[AirPo]

according to you

According to logic, and the law.

 

[KitKatMatt]

You are forgetting that, according to the Bible, our bodies belong to God. If you do not even own your body, then it follows that neither you do own the body of the unborn child.

I do not believe the same as you do. God gave me my body, I believe my body belongs to me.

There are people out there who are not Christians, and it is also not fair to hold them to this standard.

 

[KitKatMatt]

This can be avoided through adoption. An infertile couple will be blessed, and the victim of rape will not have to struggle with the guilt of having participated in the murder of an innocent human being.

No, it can't. I will still be forced to carry the pregnancy. This is a violation of my body.

An infertile couple already has choice when it comes to adoption. They do not need a baby I conceived via rape and was forced against my will to carry.

 

[jayem]

I'm not opposed to adoption, I'm for adoption. What I'm opposed to is the way our current adoption system functions. The things on which we base a family's worthiness to adopt are completely unsound. Whether they are considered full time or part time workers or if its a one or two income household or whether its a single parent or a married couple are all completely irrelevant.

Are they financially able to take on a child? Do they have enough space in their home? Is there any evidence of abuse or neglect? Do they have a plan for child care when they themselves are not around?

Those are the better questions.

Keep in mind that I'm not talking about the foster system for older children. Do you have evidence that prospective adoptive parents--those who seek full parental rights for children under a year old--are not screened adequately? Or are abusing babies, or committing financial fraud? Is there data that this is a widespread problem? But in any event, that's a tangential issue. This thread is about abortion and, as you mentioned in your OP, ways to reduce it. Infant adoption is one of those ways. It's encouraged by all pro-life organizations I know of. (Do you think it would be if it were as problematic as you imply?)

 

[Archivist]

Are you saying that the murder of an innocent baby is less horrible than rape? The victim of rape can, with the grace of God, recover from the terrible ordeal and live an almost normal life. Such a privilege is denied to the innocent child. The act if final and irreversible.

And how is requiring a rape victim to carry the fetus to term not involuntary servitude and therefore a violation of the 13th Amendment? You might want to read these law review articles that discuss the issue. You should be able to locate them on Hein Online, Westlaw or in print in most academic law libraries:

Hirschmann, Nancy J., Abortion, Self-Defense, and Involuntary Servitude, 13 Tex. J. Women & L. 41 (2003-2004)

McConnell, Joyce E., Beyond Metaphor: Battered Women, Involuntary Servitude and the Thirteenth Amendment, 4 Yale J.L. & Feminism 207 (1991-1992)

 

[Julie.S]

Are you saying that the murder of an innocent baby is less horrible than rape? The victim of rape can, with the grace of God, recover from the terrible ordeal and live an almost normal life. Such a privilege is denied to the innocent child. The act if final and irreversible.

I never said it was worse then that specifically. As a woman rape is one of the worst things that can happen to me. I have read some of the worst stories. The depression that can come from it, the fear, anger and hopelessness in some cases.

It's down right horible and if a child is the result of it I don't know what a woman is to do when she has to deal with recovering from trauma because of rape and then know she is also pregnant with the child of the man who did that to her

Yet those guys walk away scott free sometimes. They forcefully inpregnanted a woman against her will with no consent at all.

 

[Julie.S]

This can be avoided through adoption. An infertile couple will be blessed, and the victim of rape will not have to struggle with the guilt of having participated in the murder of an innocent human being.

Understand that they may never want to see that child again though. It could trigger bad emotions and memories.

 

[jayem]

If a child was born at 28 weeks, was viable and would likely go on to a normal life, are you honestly going to tell me that just before it was born it should have been legal to kill it? Developmentally there is no difference, the only difference is the location

It is not legal to electively terminate a 28 week fetus. The only reason it would be done is for a life-threatening maternal emergency that cannot be managed any other way. And yes, location makes an enormous difference. Because the fetus is attached inside the mother's body. And if a difficult medical decision must be made, her health is the highest priority unless she chooses differently.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

If a rapist should live, more so the innocent unborn baby who has not committed any crime. Killing the innocent is a travesty of justice.

Where'd that baby come from and why should a woman who was raped have to carry it to term?

 

[jayem]

Great idea! Perhaps we should decriminalize rape, burglary, theft, and sexual abuse of children as well. If legalization of abortion can do wonders for murder, it should do wonder for all crimes.

OK, now you're talking legally. Those are crimes against persons. Legally, the unborn are not persons. The Constitution can be amended if you don't agree. And good luck with that.