What I don't understand about the arguement for Abortion.

[religious&reasonable]

No insulting or flaming please. I come in peace.

So, some people consider a fetus not to be a person, or a part of the female and nothing more during inital pregnancy for it is not self-aware or self-concious. Therefore it is the Woman's right to decide.

But isn't the potential for human life just almost or just as important as human life?

Consider myself. At one point, I was an unborn fetus who was unware. At the time, my mother had a right to abort me. 9 months later I am now a functioning being. The potential was always the same, but yet it is somewhat more justifiable to terminate a human-in-the-making than it is to kill a born baby.

Now, I am no Woman, and couldn't possible understand the stress of pregnancy, but this is just a thought I had when listening to a Ron Paul interview (Ron Paul 2012!).


Comments? Ideas?

 

[Jase]

Why would a few week old embryo/fetus who is 100% dependent on the mother for existing be just as valuable as a baby already born, breathing, eating, functioning on its own?

Does an ovum or sperm carry as much value as a baby since they too are potential life?

While there will always be a grey area to what point a fetus has comparable value to a baby, I don't see how this is comparable to a newborn baby:

 

[lismore]

But isn't the potential for human life just almost or just as important as human life?

I agree with you. The huge number of abortions is a very great tragedy.

 

[ThankGod]

I think abortion is wrong, period. Under no circumstance should a baby be aborted, depriving that baby of life. You're not even giving it a chance. I don't care if it's rape, incest, ect. Abortion is taking a life, and it is wrong. You wouldn't like to be aborted...

And ESPECIALLY if the woman decided to have sex... You chose to have premarital sex, and mistakes happen... Now, own up to it.

 

[Jase]

I think abortion is wrong, period. Under no circumstance should a baby be aborted, depriving that baby of life. You're not even giving it a chance. I don't care if it's rape, incest, ect. Abortion is taking a life, and it is wrong. You wouldn't like to be aborted...

And ESPECIALLY if the woman decided to have sex... You chose to have premarital sex, and mistakes happen... Now, own up to it.

Under no circumstances? What about ectopic pregnancy? What if incest means the baby will be genetically deformed?

You also ignore that the baby has a 90% chance of being born into poverty and starvation, and by Conservative theology, an overwhelmingly high chance of spending eternity in Hell.

If I actually believed in conservative theology, I'd consider abortion the lesser of the evils.

 

[Tinker Grey]

I think potentiality is an unrealistic way to go about attempting to preserve human life. A sperm has potential and so does an egg.

Francis Collins, an evangelical Christian who wrote The Language of God and was the head of the human genome project in the US, agrees to some extent. He is not pro-choice so far as I know. But there was a section in that book where he was talking about potential. Ever skin cell has the potential to become a full grown human person. Each cell in our bodies contains all the information necessary for becoming human. We have cloning technology for one. And though it is beyond us technologically, there is no particular reason why we couldn't use skin cells to make a woman pregnant.

Consider an analogy. An acorn is a potential oak. Should one get as upset (if one were so inclined) with kids crushing the acorn on the pavement with a rock as with a land developer cutting down a 250 year old healthy oak?

 

[sniperelite7]

It is morally wrong to kill an unborn child because it deprives that being of its future, whatever that future may be, and unlike aborting under certain circumstances, we have no right to say whether or not a person will lead a happy life and terminate their life based on that inference.

I'll put a note here. A woman who is has been raped is under no moral obligation to carry the child. To do so would be incredibly generous of her.

On that note, what if her life was in real mortal peril? Its a tough decision. A decision that should lay with her alone, and a decision she can make free of the scorn of others.

Genetic defects? Malformed? Certainly up to the woman(and her husband). At that point I feel we should step aside and allow abortion as a viable medical procedure.

 

[religious&reasonable]

I think potentiality is an unrealistic way to go about attempting to preserve human life. A sperm has potential and so does an egg.

Francis Collins, an evangelical Christian who wrote The Language of God and was the head of the human genome project in the US, agrees to some extent. He is not pro-choice so far as I know. But there was a section in that book where he was talking about potential. Ever skin cell has the potential to become a full grown human person. Each cell in our bodies contains all the information necessary for becoming human. We have cloning technology for one. And though it is beyond us technologically, there is no particular reason why we couldn't use skin cells to make a woman pregnant.

Consider an analogy. An acorn is a potential oak. Should one get as upset (if one were so inclined) with kids crushing the acorn on the pavement with a rock as with a land developer cutting down a 250 year old healthy oak?

I see your point, but a fetus is a human already in development, which means sooner or later it will eventually be a human baby (except for certian circumstances such as a miscarriage). At that point it has a far greater value of potential than say a sperm or skin cell.

 

[Tinker Grey]

I see your point, but a fetus is a human already in development, which means sooner or later it will eventually be a human baby (except for certian circumstances such as a miscarriage). At that point it has a far greater value of potential than say a sperm or skin cell.

I am not going to argue about abortion. But I'm glad you see my point. If one is going to be anti-abortion/pro-life, then one's argument cannot rely on mere potentiality.

You say "at that point". The question is what point is that. I think the question of personhood is useful for this. A fetus that is forming without a brain (I am given to understand that this does happen), will never be a person. Similarly as Jase noted, it is hard to consider a cluster of undifferentiated cells a person. (Sorry, Jase, if I misrepresent you.)

I am not prepared to say when a fetus becomes a person, but I do think that answering that question is essential to moving the debate forward.

 

[kabizzle]

I just don't get why conservatives are so strung up about saving babies, but once the baby is born it could die in the streets for all they care.

 

[Jase]

I just don't get why conservatives are so strung up about saving babies, but once the baby is born it could die in the streets for all they care.

Same reason they call themselves "Pro-Life" and yet rejoice over executions. Hypocrisy.

 

[kabizzle]

Same reason they call themselves "Pro-Life" and yet rejoice over executions. Hypocrisy.

pfft pro-life

i'm pro-quality-life tbh

 

[lismore]

I just don't get why conservatives are so strung up about saving babies, but once the baby is born it could die in the streets for all they care.

Hello

There are a lot of Christian organisations that support children, Compassion Child Sponsorship for example.

 

[cfyahoo08]

No insulting or flaming please. I come in peace.

So, some people consider a fetus not to be a person, or a part of the female and nothing more during inital pregnancy for it is not self-aware or self-concious. Therefore it is the Woman's right to decide.

But isn't the potential for human life just almost or just as important as human life?

Consider myself. At one point, I was an unborn fetus who was unware. At the time, my mother had a right to abort me. 9 months later I am now a functioning being. The potential was always the same, but yet it is somewhat more justifiable to terminate a human-in-the-making than it is to kill a born baby.

Now, I am no Woman, and couldn't possible understand the stress of pregnancy, but this is just a thought I had when listening to a Ron Paul interview (Ron Paul 2012!).


Comments? Ideas?

Let me ask you a couple of questions about the importance of human life.


If a 4 month old child laying on top of a blanket is crushed to death ( On Purpose) by someone that had the intent of crushing that child is that murder ?

If a 4 month old child laying under a blanket is crushed to death ( On Purpose) by someone that had the intent of crushing that child is that murder ?

Now if that same child is under its mothers skin and is crushed to death on purpose is that murder ? Seems pretty similar to me..

There are exceptions to nearly every rule but seems like murder to me.

 

[Jase]

Let me ask you a couple of questions about the importance of human life.


If a 4 month old child laying on top of a blanket is crushed to death ( On Purpose) by someone that had the intent of crushing that child is that murder ?

If a 4 month old child laying under a blanket is crushed to death ( On Purpose) by someone that had the intent of crushing that child is that murder ?

Now if that same child is under its mothers skin and is crushed to death on purpose is that murder ? Seems pretty similar to me..

There are exceptions to nearly every rule but seems like murder to me.

Nope, it's not murder, because murder is a legal definition and the last scenario does not fall under that definition.

 

[Satine]

No insulting or flaming please. I come in peace.

So, some people consider a fetus not to be a person, or a part of the female and nothing more during inital pregnancy for it is not self-aware or self-concious. Therefore it is the Woman's right to decide.

But isn't the potential for human life just almost or just as important as human life?

Consider myself. At one point, I was an unborn fetus who was unware. At the time, my mother had a right to abort me. 9 months later I am now a functioning being. The potential was always the same, but yet it is somewhat more justifiable to terminate a human-in-the-making than it is to kill a born baby.

Now, I am no Woman, and couldn't possible understand the stress of pregnancy, but this is just a thought I had when listening to a Ron Paul interview (Ron Paul 2012!).


Comments? Ideas?

Well, myself, the way I approach the abortion issue is to consider the environment into which my child will be born. Do I want to bring them into it?

So far in my life the answer has always been no. This is due to a number of reasons but the main one is that I had a very bad relationship with my mother and am reluctant to enter into a mother-child relationship again, even with me as the mother. I feel a strong imperative that a child should have a pleasant experience as a child - free from undue stress, abuse and the kind of threat I experienced - but I'm not sure that deep down I am the kind of person who can be a good mother. After all, the background I come from makes that dubious enough that I don't want to risk it. Once I'd become a mother I wouldn't be able to go back on it. You can't put a baby back, and if it turned out that I just resented the little one, what kind of life would be ahead of the poor kid?

Therefore, if I ever became pregnant I would abort the pregnancy because I don't want to subject a child to the kind of suffering I experienced. True, I am very careful not to become pregnant by accident, but if it did happen I'd just grit my teeth and go in there, just get the abortion out of the way.

There are other reasons I would not have a child. The things I have said above are backed up by a lack of maternal feeling. I don't know whether this came from my negative feelings about the mother-daughter relationship, but what I can tell you is that the concept of motherhood simply doesn't appeal to me.

There is also my opinion that being a child in modern times is difficult. A child is expected to grow up very quickly and has the future effects of climate change to contend with. I wouldn't want to be a child in today's world - it sounds really difficult. Therefore, why would I subject someone else to that?

The bottom line is, I recognise that a foetus that could grow into a human has a lot of potential, but ultimately I am the mother, and have more ability to check the surrounding environment for suitability to raising an offspring.

Hope this helps?

 

[lismore]

Nope, it's not murder, because murder is a legal definition and the last scenario does not fall under that definition.

I think a bigger issue to consider would be if God looks on it as murder or not.

 

[cfyahoo08]

Nope, it's not murder, because murder is a legal definition and the last scenario does not fall under that definition.

Which definition are you using ?

 

[Jase]

I think a bigger issue to consider would be if God looks on it as murder or not.

Well, since the only verse pertaining to this in the Bible does not view a forced miscarriage as a punishable crime unless the assailant also kills/injures the mother, it seems that it doesn't fall under the Biblical definition of murder.

If it did, a forced miscarriage would carry the death penalty under Jewish law, not a monetary fine.

 

[Jase]

Which definition are you using ?

Murder is "the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought".