Abortion to prevent increased suffering

[o_mlly]

So? Is my point about the emotional suffering not valid in that regard?

The deer hunter justly serving 10 years for manslaughter also suffers emotionally. He chose to irresponsibly fire his weapon. Did the young girl aspiring to be a doctor not irresponsibly engage in sexual intercourse?

 

[nhisname]

Let’s only consider the abortions where the early zygote, that isn’t conscious and can’t feel anything, isn’t wanted for whatever reason. Assuming they’ll go to heaven in some capacity, why would it be better to take them full term just to be put into foster care and possibly suffer mental/physical abuse that will effect them for an entire lifetime? Will their reward in heaven be greater if they endure a lifetime of suffering? Is that the only justification for taking it full term to birth?

The last time I checked God is in charge of someone, person, kid, baby dying, everyone born is given by God for his purposes. When sperm meets the egg boom conception, without either one of these a person isn't created. If this creation isn't full filing the lives of the biological parents adoption is the choice not murder.

 

[nhisname]

The fact that there are nearly 424,000 children in the foster system waiting for foster parents suggests you are wrong.

No doubt it’s more loving to give birth and raise the child, but most who want abortions aren’t capable, or just don’t want to give that love, thus why they give them to foster care and why we have over 400,000 kids in foster care. Regardless what you think, that fact will always be there to remind you that we need a better solution, unless you’re fine with that number rising? Can’t force people to take kids in, better to let people make and learn from their own choices.

If parents did was Right there wouldn't be a need for foster homes but unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world that's why we need God's word more than ever before for direction in this evil society. Ppl need to start doing things his way instead of ours.

 

[Chriliman]

Abortion to prevent increased suffering

If parents did was Right there wouldn't be a need for foster homes but unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world that's why we need God's word more than ever before for direction in this evil society. Ppl need to start doing things his way instead of ours.

I’m all about trying to follow some objectively correct rule book about every issue we face, but that rule book doesn’t exist, and no the Bible doesn’t address everything, at least not in good enough detail that prevents misinterpretations. Plus, it has many morally questionable commands that I pointed out earlier in this thread. I think it’s important to question those commands, especially since so many think the Bible is perfectly infallible, but based on what those verses command, seems clear that it’s not. Don’t get me wrong, I do think truth comes from within us(think Holy Spirit) and relates to objective facts in the world and that’s what I’d rather rely on, over strictly the Bible(which does have good, true teaching, but also bad teaching as I pointed out.)

 

[Kylie]

The deer hunter justly serving 10 years for manslaughter also suffers emotionally. He chose to irresponsibly fire his weapon. Did the young girl aspiring to be a doctor not irresponsibly engage in sexual intercourse?

Maybe she was raped.

Maybe she used birth control and it failed through no fault of hers.

Maybe the guy stealthed her (removed the condom secretly).

There could be any number of reasons.

 

[Kettriken]

If a woman does not want to endure the discomfort of a pregnancy or she believes the child born of an unwanted pregnancy will inordinately suffer then celibacy will absolutely prevent the unwanted event.

How can you say this, given the fact of rape and sexual assault/coercion?

 

[o_mlly]

Maybe she was raped.
Maybe she used birth control and it failed through no fault of hers.
Maybe the guy stealthed her (removed the condom secretly).
There could be any number of reasons.

How can you say this, given the fact of rape and sexual assault/coercion?

The pro abortion argument seems to always attempt to justify the act by deflection pretending the rare to be the normal. The only novelty in the above arguments seems to be the nonsensical claim that only women who intend to become pregnant may not kill their child.

These are "Yes" of "No" questions:
Do you agree that science cannot tell us when the life inside the mother's body is a human life?
Do you agree that we are therefore ignorant of exactly when human life begins?

Do you agree that in ignorance one may not commit an act (other than the self-defense of one's own life) that can be lethal to another?
Do you agree that a responsible person accepts the possibility of procreation in a consensual act of sexual intercourse?

 

[Chriliman]

The pro abortion argument seems to always attempt to justify the act by deflection pretending the rare to be the normal. The only novelty in the above arguments seems to be the nonsensical claim that only women who intend to become pregnant may not kill their child.

These are "Yes" of "No" questions:
Do you agree that science cannot tell us when the life inside the mother's body is a human life?

Its human life from conception, but the question is when does it gain human qualities like consciousness, ability to suffer, and viability that would reasonably grant it as much rights as the mother has. Like I said before, prior to 12 weeks clearly shows the zygote doesn't have any of those human qualities.

Do you agree that we are therefore ignorant of exactly when human life begins?

No

Do you agree that in ignorance one may not commit an act (other than the self-defense of one's own life) that can be lethal to another?

No for reasons stated above.

Do you agree that a responsible person accepts the possibility of procreation in a consensual act of sexual intercourse?

Yes

Like I said before, It really comes down to if you think abortion is murder, are we willing to prosecute all those involved? And are we willing to take on the increased burden of possibly millions of kids without parents who want them?

Or is it possible there’s a valid justification for abortions in most cases?

 

[o_mlly]

... the question is when does it gain human qualities like consciousness, ability to suffer, and viability... prior to 12 weeks clearly shows the zygote doesn't have any of those human qualities (.

There are several problems with this argument.

• The argument presumes that these qualities are necessary and sufficient to evidence human life. The "sleeping infant" example shows the error of this presumption.
• There are no authoritative scientific studies that support your claim of "clearly shows" the absence of these human qualities in the unborn.
  
• Science does not and cannot prove any positive claims.
  
• The axiom that absence of evidence does not provide evidence of absence must obtain on an issue as important as deciding to kill the child.

To refute the basis of your argument I refer you to:
Personhood status of the human zygote, embryo, fetus

 

[Chriliman]

There are several problems with this argument.

• The argument presumes that these qualities are necessary and sufficient to evidence human life. The "sleeping infant" example shows the error of this presumption.
• There are no authoritative scientific studies that support your claim of "clearly shows" the absence of these human qualities in the unborn.
  
• Science does not and cannot prove any positive claims.
  
• The axiom that absence of evidence does not provide evidence of absence must obtain on an issue as important as deciding to kill the child.

To refute the basis of your argument I refer you to:
Personhood status of the human zygote, embryo, fetus

“The first projections from the thalamus to cortex (the higher alarm) appear at 12-16 weeks' gestation. By this stage the brain's outer layer has split into an outer cortical rim, with a subplate developing below. The thalamic projections that develop from 12-16 weeks penetrate the subplate. Within the subplate, cortical afferents establish prolonged synaptic contacts before entering the cortical plate. The subplate is a “waiting compartment,” required for mature connections in the cortex.6,7 The major afferent fibres (thalamocortical, basal forebrain, and corticocortical) can wait in the subplate for several weeks, before they penetrate and form synapses within the cortical plate from 23-25 weeks' gestation. Subsequent dissolution of the subplate occurs through prolonged growth and maturation of associative connections in the human cerebral cortex.

Spinothalamic projections into the subplate may provide the minimal necessary anatomy for pain experience,8 but this view does not account for the transient nature of the subplate and its apparent role in the maturation of functional cortical connections.6 A lack of functional neuronal activity within the subplate calls into question the pain experience of a fetus before the penetration of spinothalamic fibres into the cortical plate.”

Controversy: Can fetuses feel pain?

it’s essentially saying prior to 12 weeks the zygote doesn’t have the necessary receptors in place to feel pain.

Can you acknowledge the difference between that zygotes state of being and a sleeping infants state of being?

I’d also appreciate it if you didn’t ignore all the other points and implications of those points that I made in my previous posts.

 

[Kylie]

The pro abortion argument seems to always attempt to justify the act by deflection pretending the rare to be the normal. The only novelty in the above arguments seems to be the nonsensical claim that only women who intend to become pregnant may not kill their child.

These are "Yes" of "No" questions:
Do you agree that science cannot tell us when the life inside the mother's body is a human life?
Do you agree that we are therefore ignorant of exactly when human life begins?

Do you agree that in ignorance one may not commit an act (other than the self-defense of one's own life) that can be lethal to another?
Do you agree that a responsible person accepts the possibility of procreation in a consensual act of sexual intercourse?

The Bible makes it clear when life begins:

Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Job 33:4 The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.
Ezekiel 37:5-6 Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live. And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live; and you shall know that I am the Lord.

And let's not forget that in Exodus 21:22 it states that if a man causes a woman to have a miscarriage, he shall be fined; however, if the woman dies then he will be put to death. It should be apparent from this that the aborted fetus is not considered a living human being since the resulting punishment for the abortion is nothing more than a fine; it is not classified by the bible as a capital offense.

So how about this: You tell me when we consider that someone has STOPPED living. Do we say it's when their heart stops? No brain activity? What? And then we'll use the opposite of that to determine when life starts. So if you say that we consider a person dead when they have no brain activity, we'll consider them alive when they DO have brain activity.

 

[disciple Clint]

If it does not matter what you claim, then we can discard your claim that a fertilized egg is a person.

You can disregard my claim and the science is still there to prove that a fertilized egg is a person.

 

[Kylie]

You can disregard my claim and the science is still there to prove that a fertilized egg is a person.

Please provide a link to this science.

 

[disciple Clint]

Problem is when you rationalize that abortion is murder you have to pick one of those 2 options, so which do you pick?

the fact the abortion is the killing of an innocent child is not rationalization

 

[disciple Clint]

If this is true then IVF is also murder, even mass murder.

“On average most patients will have 70-85% of their mature eggs fertilize”

source:
Guide to IVF Lab Results | PCRM

I think it’s important to at least acknowledge the spectrum of value we put on human life and determine at what point a human embryo is conscious, can feel pain, and is viable to help decide when it’s actually murder.

IVF can be killing but not necessary

 

[disciple Clint]

Please provide a link to this science.

I have done that read the string.

 

[Kylie]

I have done that read the string.

You have posted 12 times in this thread and I have checked each and every one of them. At no point have you posted anything links at all, let alone a link to some science article that shows that a fertilized egg is scientifically a person.

So I ask again, please provide a scientific source to back up your claim that "the science is still there to prove that a fertilized egg is a person."

 

[o_mlly]

Controversy: Can fetuses feel pain?

From the study you cited:

Important neurobiological developments occur at 7, 18, and 26 weeks' gestation and are the proposed periods for when a fetus can feel pain. Although the developmental changes during these periods are remarkable they do not tell us whether the fetus can experience pain. The subjective experience of pain cannot be inferred from anatomical developments because these developments do not account for subjectivity and the conscious contents of pain.

Funding: This author is supported by a grant from the Pittsburgh Foundation and the John F and Nancy A Emmerling Fund.

Competing interests: SWGD has served as an unpaid consultant for Planned Parenthood of Virginia, USA and Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, USA, and for the Pro-Choice Forum, United Kingdom.
​

Based on funding, one must question the author's objectivity in the study.

The author concludes that the anatomical observations, "do not tell us whether the fetus can experience pain." The equally true conclusion is that the observations do not tell us that the fetus cannot feel pain.

As to the science in the study:
Fetuses can feel pain

He (SWGD) then adopts a definition of pain from the International Association for the Study of Pain as “an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage” but concludes that pain is “a conscious experience” rather than “merely the response to noxious stimuli,” so a fetus cannot experience pain.

This is a specious argument. There are many examples of the ability of babies of this gestation to feel pain.

Competing interests: None declared.
​

I’d also appreciate it if you didn’t ignore all the other points and implications of those points that I made in my previous posts.

Let us proceed in a linear fashion to argue the points one at a time.

​

 

[o_mlly]

The Bible makes it clear when life begins:

The Bible is not a science book.

 

[Kylie]

The Bible is not a science book.

Then I can assume you will be happy to proceed in this discussion without using the Bible in any way?