• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Is abortion murder?

  • Abortion is murder, and I believe it is inherently wrong.

  • Abortion is not murder, but I still believe it is wrong.

  • Abortion is murder, but I don't believe it is wrong.

  • Abortion is not murder, and I don't believe it is inherently wrong


Results are only viewable after voting.

platzapS

Expanding Mind
Nov 12, 2002
3,574
300
35
Sunshine State
Visit site
✟5,263.00
Faith
Humanist
To answer your question, in the words of Christ, "It was not so from the beginning." Animals were not created for consumption and babies were not created to be murdered.

As for the value of animals opposed to humans, whom did Jesus die for?

Lisa
I'm not religious.
 
Upvote 0

WatersMoon110

To See with Eyes Unclouded by Hate
May 30, 2007
4,738
266
42
Ohio
✟28,755.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I still find this comparison pretty inane. Shooting someone with a gun is not really much like choosing to have an abortion. Other born humans that one might shoot are not feeding off of one's body, after all. Pregnancy is the only case where one human is housed inside the body of another human. As such, it is a very singular situation when it comes to the rights involved.
Legally, of course, unborn humans have no rights. But ethically, I don't know. The issue is, as you stated, do any rights unborn humans have to control their own bodies (without, of course, the cognitive ability to willing do so) give them any right in regards to the body they are currently housed in and feeding off of?

I still say that unborn humans don't have any right to use the body of the pregnant woman, even given that they might have the right (if not the ability) to control their own body. I don't feel that any right they have to control their body extends to the body of the pregnant woman, which is keeping them alive.

As such, elective abortion is still ethical in my opinion (until some immediate alternative is available that allows the removal of the unborn human but doesn't result in its death).
 
Upvote 0

WatersMoon110

To See with Eyes Unclouded by Hate
May 30, 2007
4,738
266
42
Ohio
✟28,755.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Answer yes or no. Did the woman consent to sex? If so, then, she consented to all the inherant risks including pregnancy. Stop making this the fetus' responsibility when it is the parent's responsibility to care for that child.
I disagree. Consenting to sex can be considered as consenting to the possibility of pregnancy (though hopefully a slim chance, as anyone not looking to get pregnant really should use a condom or other contraceptive method if they choose to have sex), since there is always a risk of getting pregnant. But, I don't feel that it is the same as consenting to carry any pregnancy created to term. In my opinion, a woman or couple has the right to choose what to do with an unexpected pregnancy after it happens, if she/they are going to keep the pregnancy or terminate it.

One wouldn't say that an STI should go untreated just because a couple "consented to that risk when they chose to have sex". Obviously, since treatment exists for STIs, the couple in question might have consented to the possibility of catching something, but they didn't consent to leaving it untreated because they were aware that treatment exists for such conditions. Likewise, I feel, a couple consents to the possibility of a pregnancy, but they didn't necessarily consent to carry that pregnancy to term (since they would have knowledge of there being ways to terminate the pregnancy).
Don't play God.
And yet, couldn't a person who would propose to force couples to keep pregnancies they don't want, and would choose to abort, be said to be "playing God" with their lives? "Playing God" by trying to force others to act as they wish?

If you can call humans choosing to terminate a pregnancy to be "playing God" I certainly can feel that someone trying to take that choice from the people in the situation to be "playing God" with their lives.
 
Upvote 0

stan1980

Veteran
Jan 7, 2008
3,238
261
✟27,040.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Lisa,

I think for rational debate, it will be best all round to leave God, the Bible, and Jesus out of this. Many people don't believe in God, so if you want to convince an atheist such as myself why abortion is bad, speaking about God isn't going the right way about it. Say I believed in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and I told you that it says abortion is good, you'd likely dismiss my claims. Well I feel the same when you mention God. Besides which, look how cute that lamb is!!
 
Upvote 0

Lisa0315

Respect Catholics and the Mother Church!
Jul 17, 2005
21,378
1,650
57
At The Feet of Jesus
✟45,077.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

Remove God from the equation and you will get exactly what we have, a culture of death.

Before I was a Christian, I was Pro-Choice. I didn't like abortion, but I thought it was a necessary evil. I no longer feel that way and I am convinced that it is truly the most evil thing that this planet has ever conceived.

Lisa
 
Upvote 0

WatersMoon110

To See with Eyes Unclouded by Hate
May 30, 2007
4,738
266
42
Ohio
✟28,755.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
So you are saying that the only reason you are Pro-Life is because you are Christian, and all you have is your religious beliefs to back up any Pro-Life argument you make? Perhaps you might prefer debating this topic in a section of this forum that doesn't allow non-Christians (or people who aren't the right "kinds" of Christians), since your arguments really don't help you to reach anyone who doesn't share your religious beliefs?

I actually a bit of a parable to explain why I feel that religious beliefs are very bad thing to use to back up one's arguments in a debate. Don't get me wrong, religious beliefs certainly can be very good reasons to believe a certain way about a matter, but they do nothing to convince others to do the same, unless those others share one's religion:

Imagine that I belonged to a religion that believed all frogs were evil and wanted to eat your soul. Were I to try to convince people of this belief, I couldn't just say "my religion thinks frogs are evil" because they wouldn't share my religion and wouldn't accept that as a good reason to do so. Rather, I would have to point to facts as to why I, and my religion, believed that frogs were evil. Because, to convince other people of the horrible dangers of frogs, I would need information that doesn't come from the teachings of my religion, since they didn't believe in those teachings.

Understand?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

LittleNipper

Contributor
Mar 9, 2005
9,011
174
MOUNT HOLLY, NEW JERSEY
✟10,660.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

When a person truly finds GOD, that person begins a process which brings him closer and closer to GOD's understanding of reality. In other words, that person is being conformed to the image of CHRIST. Pagans believe that as long as one follows religious guidlines one is of that religion. Religion mandates a person follow set rules. The Christian begins to actually see things from GOD perspective and does things out of desire and not fear.
 
Upvote 0

WatersMoon110

To See with Eyes Unclouded by Hate
May 30, 2007
4,738
266
42
Ohio
✟28,755.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Whatever.

Anyway, that really has nothing to do with using, or not using, one's religious beliefs in an attempt to convince people who don't share those beliefs, of one's arguments on a separate topic.
 
Upvote 0

LittleNipper

Contributor
Mar 9, 2005
9,011
174
MOUNT HOLLY, NEW JERSEY
✟10,660.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

Well, Stan --- you presently live in a society that has been influenced greatly by Judeo/Christian thinking. I don't believe life would be as pleasent if one totally removed that influence. The reality is that there are nations in this world without Christ or very limited enternal interaction with Christianity Those places are not very happy locations to live for the most part (unless one rules or is very rich). As Christianity has interacted, it has influenced people to want what people in the "West" have. We however, seem to be losing joy as our society's Christian heritage has been shunned. I see the strong possibility of third world status for the United States once we have one world government in control. Everyone will pretty much be dependent on the authorities (those in command) for protection, welfare, food, any entertainment, and love...... And the fact of even having a baby will depend on governmental protocol.
 
Upvote 0

FlamingFemme

The Flaming One
May 2, 2008
406
113
USA
✟27,903.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat

Exactly what, if anything, does this diatribe have to do with the discussion at hand?

 
Upvote 0

LightHorseman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2006
8,123
363
✟10,643.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
AU-Liberals
Exactly what, if anything, does this diatribe have to do with the discussion at hand?


Not a thing... but heres a tip for young players, when you find yourself on the loosing side of a discussion topic, rather than try to address the actual topic and convince people to change their position through reason and evidence based argument, its much easier and much more fun to make some general statements in an inflamatory way that will result in the absolute derailment of the thread.

What thread was that again?

Abortion, where legal, can never be murder.
 
Upvote 0

Lisa0315

Respect Catholics and the Mother Church!
Jul 17, 2005
21,378
1,650
57
At The Feet of Jesus
✟45,077.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The poll uses the word inherantly, doesn't it? My explanation of WHY it is inherantly wrong is because we are CREATED beings and the right to life or death should not be our decision. Whether or not you believe in God does not negate the reason behind my argument.

So, even if you do not believe in God, why do we have the right to determine who lives or dies?

Lisa
 
Upvote 0

cantata

Queer non-theist, with added jam.
Feb 20, 2007
6,215
683
38
Oxford, UK
✟32,193.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
So, even if you do not believe in God, why do we have the right to determine who lives or dies?

Why wouldn't we?

Is dying so bad? Why is it bad for a first-trimester foetus?
 
Upvote 0

cantata

Queer non-theist, with added jam.
Feb 20, 2007
6,215
683
38
Oxford, UK
✟32,193.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Okay, then, why should you be deciding the rights of others if you do not believe in them?

Lisa

I believe neither that people have a "right" to decide who lives or dies, nor that anything has a "right" to life.

I make moral judgements based on my sympathies. That's why I ask you, why is it bad to die, from the point of view of a first trimester foetus? That's my only measure of whether or not I want abortions to happen. I have to weigh up the suffering of the foetus against the suffering of the woman carrying an unwanted pregnancy. As far as I can see, the woman's potential for suffering from the outcome of this decision is the higher, so I am inclined to hand the decision to her.
 
Upvote 0

Lisa0315

Respect Catholics and the Mother Church!
Jul 17, 2005
21,378
1,650
57
At The Feet of Jesus
✟45,077.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

Well, as adamant as I am against abortion, I have to say that is the best argument FOR abortion, I have ever heard.

Lisa
 
Reactions: LightHorseman
Upvote 0