• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Prolifers: what do you think happens to the souls of aborted fetuses and embryos?

Blue Donkey said:
What is your reason to be pro-life then?
Click to expand...

Basic science and my own opinion. It's morally wrong to snuff out a human life at any stage unless that human chooses death for him/herself.
 
Last edited:
Josie said:
Basic science and my own opinion. It's morally wrong to snuff out a human life at any stage unless that human chooses death for him/herself.
Click to expand...

"Basic science" includes the mother suffering directly as a result of being pregnant. Do you care if her life sucks for nine months?
 
Blue Donkey said:
"Basic science" includes the mother suffering directly as a result of being pregnant. Do you care if her life sucks for nine months?
Click to expand...

Life sucking for a short period of time =/= life dying.
 
Josie said:
Life sucking for a short period of time =/= life dying.
Click to expand...
But dying leads to Heaven for many people, especially babies. Life dying before a fetus even knows what life is would lead to only a few possibilities for an afterlife if you believe in a god. Any righteous god would not condemn a baby to hell even if they had a soul. So that leaves some sort of limbo (which still seems quite cruel to me) or heaven. So if the babies end up in heaven vice living what would likely (based on odds, not any rare circumstances you may find) be an awful life, possibly very painful and/or without love, why the complaints? So you can feel better that a baby lived horribly rather than going up to heaven without even knowing what life is?

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Josie said:
Life sucking for a short period of time =/= life dying.
Click to expand...

Most women who chose abortion are under resourced. Either no insurance or Medicaid- which can leave her dependent on county clinics that are already overburdened. Most have poor financial resources - working several jobs to barely pay rent. Housing insecurity which could lead to homelessness or shelter life - or making worse choices about becoming dependent in an unhealthy (abusive ) relationship to keep a roof over her head. Most are already struggling to care for a child at home. So anything that happens due to pregnancy (health issues, joblessness) affects that child as well.

I don't think I would ever chose abortion, but hell if I am going to take part in preventing a woman from making such decisions.

When you indicate "life sucking" - women are fearful of real consequences such as job loss, homelessness, inadequate healthcare resources that can lead to an increased possibility to missing complications early. "Life sucking" means making decisions on whether to skip a "routine" OB appointment because you need to make rent. Do you put your health in danger or make rent.

I am thankful that when I had my serious complications.....I had the LUXURY of having social, financial, and medical resources to get me through the ordeal. Most women who choose abortion have no such "luxury".
 
roguenuke said:
But dying leads to Heaven for many people, especially babies. Life dying before a fetus even knows what life is would lead to only a few possibilities for an afterlife if you believe in a god. Any righteous god would not condemn a baby to hell even if they had a soul. So that leaves some sort of limbo (which still seems quite cruel to me) or heaven. So if the babies end up in heaven vice living what would likely (based on odds, not any rare circumstances you may find) be an awful life, possibly very painful and/or without love, why the complaints? So you can feel better that a baby lived horribly rather than going up to heaven without even knowing what life is?

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Nah, I'm not into "mercy killing" humans against their will. You?
 
Josie said:
Nah, I'm not into "mercy killing" humans against their will. You?
Click to expand...
Actually, how do you prove someone's will at all if they cant communicate with you? Do dogs get a choice when put down because the pain of their life is unbearable? Is it wrong to pull the plug on someone being kept on life support who has no living will?

Fetuses are not born yet. They have a 30% chance of not making it to birth. They also have a high chance of causing the mother pain and/or death.

You also fail to address the point, rather trying to deflect with insinuations that don't actually correlate to what was being stated. Parents can choose to not resuscitate their children, without the child consenting, remove them from life support too. And these are children who can survive on their own, without causing any pain or potential death just by existing to a particular person.



Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
roguenuke said:
Actually, how do you prove someone's will at all if they cant communicate with you? Do dogs get a choice when put down because the pain of their life is unbearable? Is it wrong to pull the plug on someone being kept on life support who has no living will?

Fetuses are not born yet. They have a 30% chance of not making it to birth. They also have a high chance of causing the mother pain and/or death.

You also fail to address the point, rather trying to deflect with insinuations that don't actually correlate to what was being stated. Parents can choose to not resuscitate their children, without the child consenting, remove them from life support too. And these are children who can survive on their own, without causing any pain or potential death just by existing to a particular person.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

We're not talking about animals or children close to dying or on life support. I'm against killing a human simply because of what might happen or because their afterlife will be better than life on earth. Who am I to choose for them if they should live or die?

Are you for mercy killing already born people who can't make decisions on their own (e.g. those who are severely mentally handicapped who cannot communicate)?
 
Last edited:
Josie said:
Nah, I'm not into "mercy killing" humans against their will. You?
Click to expand...

I am not into disresprecting a mother who has no resources to carry the unwanted baby to term knowing he/she will just be put up for foster care and never even know her.
 
Blue Donkey said:
I am not into disresprecting a mother who has no resources to carry the unwanted baby to term knowing he/she will just be put up for foster care and never even know her.
Click to expand...

But you are into killing that child. Okay.
 
Josie said:
We're not talking about animals or children close to dying or on life support. I'm against killing a human simply because of what might happen or because their afterlife will be better than life on earth. Who am I to choose for them if they should live or die?

Are you for mercy killing already born people who can't make decisions on their own (e.g. those who are severely mentally handicapped who cannot communicate)?
Click to expand...

What "might" happen is what PROBABLY WON'T happen. So if you are concerned about what 'might happen" that is actually a reason to SUPPORT choice for the mother!
 
Josie said:
But you are into killing that child. Okay.
Click to expand...

I already said eariler I want to prevent abortions by helping women get the resources they need to take care of themselves and their unborn babies for nine months, not threaten to throw them in jail just for getting pregnant. Do you have any compassion and sympathy at all for mothers, or think they are second-class citizens for nine months of their lives?
 
Josie said:
We're not talking about animals or children close to dying or on life support. I'm against killing a human simply because of what might happen or because their afterlife will be better than life on earth. Who am I to choose for them if they should live or die?

Are you for mercy killing already born people who can't make decisions on their own?
Click to expand...
I'm for allowing people to die who are terminally ill, incurably in pain because it is cruel to force them to live that life.

And my question was is heaven not better than the potential possibility of living a good life which would be more likely to living a life of poverty or pain or that is lacking highly in love, which would in most cases then lead to bad life choices, and very likely a negative afterlife rather than a good one? Seems to me you are fine with condemning a person to hell just so they can live a miserable life their own parents/mother knew was likely and tried to prevent.

Would you condemn a mother who chose to kill both her daughters rather than allow them to be raped? What about a brother who refused to choose a little brother to kill (between two) allowing both to be killed to save them from a life as a slave/child soldier? How about a mother who smothers her children rather than allowing them to die of starvation, crying the whole time?

You are still avoiding the question, which us better living a crappy life that will likely lead to hell or being aborted to go to heaven almost guaranteed so long as god truly is righteous, good, benevolent?

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Blue Donkey said:
What "might" happen is what PROBABLY WON'T happen. So if you are concerned about what 'might happen" that is actually a reason to SUPPORT choice for the mother!
Click to expand...

Well, that made no sense.

1. I'm not the one making the "but what if this happens..." argument. I distinctly said the choice to end a human life shouldn't rest upon what might happen.
2. If what might happen probably WON'T happen, then that's an argument on the pro-life side. If what might happen, probably WILL happen (e.g. an ectopic pregnancy killing the mother), then that's an argument for abortion.

Blue Donkey said:
I already said earliler I want to prevent abortions by helping women get the resources they need to take care of themselves and their unborn babies for nine months, not threaten to throw them in jail just for getting pregnant.
Click to expand...

Everyone wants to prevent abortions. We're talking about women who are already pregnant with a child. You have no qualms about that child being eliminated.
 
roguenuke said:
I'm for allowing people to die who are terminally ill, incurably in pain because it is cruel to force them to live that life.
Click to expand...

Me too, as long as they agreed to it. I asked about people who can't communicate that to you - like severely mentally ill people.

And my question was is heaven not better than the potential possibility of living a good life which would be more likely to living a life of poverty or pain or that is lacking highly in love, which would in most cases then lead to bad life choices, and very likely a negative afterlife rather than a good one? Seems to me you are fine with condemning a person to hell just so they can live a miserable life their own parents/mother knew was likely and tried to prevent.
Click to expand...

Nah, I'm not into the extremist religious notion that you should mercy kill your children so they'll go to heaven and be saved from a cruel world. Are you into that? Should people who have done that be applauded?

Would you condemn a mother who chose to kill both her daughters rather than allow them to be raped?
Click to expand...

Only God condemns. Your question is odd -- Why on earth would the mother choose to kill the victims instead of the perpetrator?

What about a brother who refused to choose a little brother to kill (between two) allowing both to be killed to save them from a life as a slave/child soldier?
Click to expand...

When does this happen? And, again, why wouldn't the brother just choose to kill the guy wanting to kill them?

How about a mother who smothers her children rather than allowing them to die of starvation, crying the whole time?
Click to expand...

Again, I don't support mercy killing children -- do you?

You are still avoiding the question, which us better living a crappy life that will likely lead to hell or being aborted to go to heaven almost guaranteed so long as god truly is righteous, good, benevolent?
Click to expand...

I'm not avoiding the question at all. I'm answering it every time. I don't support killing people simply so they can get to Heaven faster. That's some f'd up **** there.

Do you believe in an after-life?
 
Josie said:
Everyone wants to prevent abortions. We're talking about women who are already pregnant with a child. You have no qualms about that child being eliminated.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as eliminating an unborn child. Embryos and fetuses automatically go to heave if they are aborted or miscarried.

You are still not answering my question.
 
Blue Donkey said:
There is no such thing as eliminating an unborn child. Embryos and fetuses automatically go to heave if they are aborted or miscarried.
Click to expand...

Killing a human is eliminating them no matter if you believe in an after-life or not. Why are you for that?

You are still not answering my question.
Click to expand...

What question?
 
Josie said:
Killing a human is eliminating them no matter if you believe in an after-life or not. Why are you for that?
Click to expand...

Using the word "eliminated" is treating embryos and fetuses as objects, not living creatures, so you actually made yourself look like an abortion supporter.

I am for women's rights. It is her body, her choice.

What question?
Click to expand...

Do you have any compassion and sympathy at all for mothers, or think they are second-class citizens for nine months of their lives?
 
Blue Donkey said:
Using the word "eliminated" is treating embryos and fetuses as objects, not living creatures, so you actually made yourself look like an abortion supporter.
Click to expand...

Uh huh. Good try.

I am for women's rights. It is her body, her choice.
Click to expand...

Her choice to what? Kill her own child. You think it's perfectly fine to kill a child. Mmmkay.

Do you have any compassion and sympathy at all for mothers, or think they are second-class citizens for nine months of their lives?
Click to expand...

I have compassion for all humans - born and unborn. You only have compassion for the born.
 
Josie said:
Her choice to what? Kill her own child. You think it's perfectly fine to kill a child.

I have compassion for all humans - born and unborn. You only have compassion for the born.
Click to expand...

No, it is her choice whether to be a mom or not. It is her choice whether to be pregnant or not. It is her choice to control her physical and mental health. It is her choice to keep a job, stay in school, live in her own apartment . . . IOW it is a choice to help herself and contribute to society. Choosing to kill a baby is just wanting the baby to die - ending a life for the sake of ending a life. That is not her intent.

If you have compassion for all humans, you support a pregnant woman's right to not suffer for nine months against her will. Do you support government programs that would help her get the health care, counseling, housing, and edibles she needs to live and have a baby? Without Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, welfare, Section 8 housing, and (if she is disabled) Social Security Disability Income, a single mother can't take care of herself and a baby who should not exist at the same time while she is unable to work. Republican pro-lifers have a terrible habit of opposing "government handouts" for the people who need them most, which includes single mothers who are at risk of having abortions mostly for financial reasons.
 
Blue Donkey said:
No, it is her choice whether to be a mom or not. It is her choice whether to be pregnant or not. It is her choice to control her physical and mental health. It is her choice to keep a job, stay in school, live in her own apartment . . . IOW it is a choice to help herself and contribute to society. Choosing to kill a baby is just wanting the baby to die - ending a life for the sake of ending a life. That is not her intent.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter her intent --- still killing a child. And, for some reason, you're perfectly fine with that. Kinda messed up.

If you have compassion for all humans, you support a pregnant woman's right to not suffer for nine months against her will. Do you support government programs that would help her get the health care, counseling, housing, and edibles she needs to live and have a baby? Without Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, welfare, Section 8 housing, and (if she is disabled) Social Security Disability Income, a single mother can't take care of herself and a baby who should not exist at the same time while she is unable to work. Republican pro-lifers have a terrible habit of opposing "government handouts" for the people who need them most, which includes single mothers who are at risk of having abortions mostly for financial reasons.
Click to expand...

I believe as Christ did and preached --- humans should help other humans because they want to.
 
Josie said:
Doesn't matter her intent - still killing a child. And, for some reason, you're perfectly fine with that. Kinda messed up.

I believe as Christ did and preached - humans should help other humans because they want to.
Click to expand...

The intent makes a difference in whether abortion should be punishable or not. If the woman does not want to end a life for the sake of ending a life, but needs to abort her pregnancy because nobody is helping her abortion must be legal during hte first trimester. In cases where there is no legitimate reason to want an abortion and all the woman cares about is killing her unwanted baby, abortion should be outlawed. I hope you can see a difference there.
 
Blue Donkey said:
The intent makes a difference in whether abortion should be punishable or not. If the woman does not want to end a life for the sake of ending a life, but needs to abort her pregnancy because nobody is helping her abortion must be legal during hte first trimester. In cases where there is no legitimate reason to want an abortion and all the woman cares about is killing her unwanted baby, abortion should be outlawed. I hope you can see a difference there.
Click to expand...

Nope, I don't. And this is one of the most vapid opinions on the topic I've ever heard.
 
Because you don't want to see the difference. I believe in supporting the woman whose life is turned upside down because of a fetus that never should have existed. I believe in doing what Jesus would do, which is helping her in every way possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom