Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 72

Thread: Question for pro-lifers

  1. #1
    User
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    5

    Question for pro-lifers

    My understanding is that at the time an abortion is performed, the embryo/fetus isn't conscious, but the reason we would apply moral principles to it is because it has the potential to become a human and form complex thoughts. (And if it is at all conscious, it would still be at a lower level than what society seems to deem okay for killing other small animals/creatures.) But the issue I have with this reasoning is the following: this potential exists just as much before conception as it does after; in other words, sure, it would suck to be the kid who was denied existence because your parents decided to have an abortion, but it would suck just as much to be denied existence because your parents chose not to conceive you in the first place. Yet, it would be morally absurd to enforce some rule mandating pregnancy, so why would abortion be any less moral than simply not having children by means of abstinence or contraception?

  2. #2
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,209

    Re: Question for pro-lifers

    Quote Originally Posted by Flaetan View Post
    My understanding is that at the time an abortion is performed, the embryo/fetus isn't conscious, but the reason we would apply moral principles to it is because it has the potential to become a human and form complex thoughts. (And if it is at all conscious, it would still be at a lower level than what society seems to deem okay for killing other small animals/creatures.) But the issue I have with this reasoning is the following: this potential exists just as much before conception as it does after; in other words, sure, it would suck to be the kid who was denied existence because your parents decided to have an abortion, but it would suck just as much to be denied existence because your parents chose not to conceive you in the first place. Yet, it would be morally absurd to enforce some rule mandating pregnancy, so why would abortion be any less moral than simply not having children by means of abstinence or contraception?
    You've just posted the Catholic dogma on sex and marriage.

  3. #3
    User
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    5

    Re: Question for pro-lifers

    Quote Originally Posted by weaver2 View Post
    You've just posted the Catholic dogma on sex and marriage.
    If you're saying the Catholic dogma on sex and marriage is that women should be required to have children, I find it genuinely hard to comprehend how anybody could find that at all ethical. But even so, when a someone has a child there is still potential for her to have another; so, if we were to follow the same reasoning, it would seem that they should be obligated to have as many children as physically possible. But given that the size of most Catholic families is far below that limit, that is clearly not the case.
    Last edited by Flaetan; 03-26-20 at 12:18 AM.

  4. #4
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,209

    Re: Question for pro-lifers

    Quote Originally Posted by Flaetan View Post
    If you're saying the Catholic dogma on sex and marriage is that women should be required to have children, I find it genuinely hard to comprehend how anybody could find that at all ethical. But even so, when a someone has a child there is still potential for her to have another; so, if we were to follow the same reasoning, it would seem that they should be obligated to have as many children as physically possible. But given that the size of most Catholic families is far below that limit, that is clearly not the case.
    That's pretty much the Catholic position. Catholic families just don't observe it. Catholic women do observe the strict ban on abortion. They get abortions at a slightly higher rate then pro-choice women.

  5. #5
    Guru Blue Donkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    3,046

    Re: Question for pro-lifers

    Quote Originally Posted by Flaetan View Post
    My understanding is that at the time an abortion is performed, the embryo/fetus isn't conscious, but the reason we would apply moral principles to it is because it has the potential to become a human and form complex thoughts. (And if it is at all conscious, it would still be at a lower level than what society seems to deem okay for killing other small animals/creatures.) But the issue I have with this reasoning is the following: this potential exists just as much before conception as it does after; in other words, sure, it would suck to be the kid who was denied existence because your parents decided to have an abortion, but it would suck just as much to be denied existence because your parents chose not to conceive you in the first place. Yet, it would be morally absurd to enforce some rule mandating pregnancy, so why would abortion be any less moral than simply not having children by means of abstinence or contraception?
    First of all, thank you for registering as a liberal. DP needs more people like you.

    Second, beware of nasty responses from anti-choicers (who IMO are not always pro-life). They usually struggle with understanding the points we pro-choicers make and don't know how to respond, to put it nicely.

    Now, here is the meat of it: "Pro-lifers" believe zygotes are human beings, not just "human" even though one cell is nothing more than that - a new human. They can't tell the difference between an embryo and a baby, likely because pregnant girls and women call it a baby for emotional reasons. So there is always a "word game" argument about the definitions of "baby" and "infant" based on nothing but the conservative Christian belief that zygotes are much more than just singular human cells. Don't fall for it. Embyology rules on this specific aspect of pregnancy and abortion, not psychology.

    So what is the difference between a potential and actual human being? There is no simple, arbitrary answer to this question. Religion plays a huge role in the responses, but it should not. I refuse to accept the Catholic position for many reasons including the fact it is hypocritica to oppose abstinence and abortions at the same time. That is just ridiculous. But it is what the Catholic Catechism and dogma require of all Church members who get married.
    Jesus rode a donkey, not an elephant.

  6. #6
    Student Dacke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Ikealandia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    176

    Re: Question for pro-lifers

    The fetus lives inside and of the pregnant and no being has the right to do that to another being without consent. Crude as it may sound, the unwanted fetus is a trespasser.

    I am not saying abortion is good. I doubt anyone has ever made that claim. However, it is insane to seriously advocate for illegalisation since the true problem most Pro Lifers have is not abortion per se, but rather what leads to it; namely, extramarital sex.

    And.extramarital.sex is a matter of culture and culture should only change organically and not via the pen of the government.

  7. #7
    Guru Blue Donkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    3,046

    Re: Question for pro-lifers

    Pro-lifers have a lot of problems. They are hypocrites, saying all a woman needs to do is refrain from having sex or use contraception when she does, despite knowing the legal and dictionary definitions of rape. Many abortion opponents are married so they know why couples have sex and that abstinence only for life is unrealistic. They also know the only 100% effective contraception methods are spaying and neutering, which would not be covered by health insurance without a medical reason like cancer. But they still insist there is no excuse for getting pregnant despite having mandatory sex education starting at age 10.
    Jesus rode a donkey, not an elephant.

  8. #8
    Student Dacke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Ikealandia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    176

    Re: Question for pro-lifers

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue Donkey View Post
    Pro-lifers have a lot of problems. They are hypocrites, saying all a woman needs to do is refrain from having sex or use contraception when she does, despite knowing the legal and dictionary definitions of rape. Many abortion opponents are married so they know why couples have sex and that abstinence only for life is unrealistic. They also know the only 100% effective contraception methods are spaying and neutering, which would not be covered by health insurance without a medical reason like cancer. But they still insist there is no excuse for getting pregnant despite having mandatory sex education starting at age 10.
    Pro Lifers are Anti-Happiness and by that also Anti-Life. Their problem with abortion is not the act of abortion per she, but rahter that it is the result of an orgasm without the parties involved having rings on their fingers. Their problem is sex and they are people with serious OCD who want the State to step in to satisfy their unhealthy demand for perceived control.

    Pro Choicers are not much better, but at least they are being principled since they tend to be Pro-Government in general.

    I really do not like that the premise of the whole abortion debate is one of "life vs non-life". The premise should rather be what can be done to have an abortion rate as low as possible? since it is clear to both sides that no one desires to have an abortion. And the only answer to this question is self-responsibility.

    But, sometimes people make mistakes and no one would want to see a black market for abortions which is why it should be kept legal.
    “Academia is to knowledge what prostitution is to love: close enough on the surface.”
    - Nassim Nicholas Taleb

  9. #9
    Guru Blue Donkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    3,046

    Re: Question for pro-lifers

    Quote Originally Posted by Dacke View Post
    Pro Lifers are Anti-Happiness and by that also Anti-Life. Their problem with abortion is not the act of abortion per se, but rather that it is the result of an orgasm without the parties involved having rings on their fingers. Their problem is sex and they are people with serious OCD who want the State to step in to satisfy their unhealthy demand for perceived control.

    Pro Choicers are not much better, but at least they are being principled since they tend to be Pro-Government in general.

    I really do not like that the premise of the whole abortion debate is one of "life vs non-life." The premise should rather be what can be done to have an abortion rate as low as possible? since it is clear to both sides that no one desires to have an abortion. And the only answer to this question is self-responsibility.

    But, sometimes people make mistakes and no one would want to see a black market for abortions which is why it should be kept legal.
    Pro-choicers are often accused of just wanting abortions to increase. That is completely false. Of course we all want girls and women to be responsible. No argument there. But they can't do it all themselves. Anti-choicers want poor single women to be locked up just because they had unwanted pregnancies. This is hypocrisy. What the anti-abortion crowd should favor is federal and state government programs that solve all of hte problems which can lead to abortions.
    Jesus rode a donkey, not an elephant.

  10. #10
    Student Dacke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Ikealandia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    176

    Re: Question for pro-lifers

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue Donkey View Post
    Pro-choicers are often accused of just wanting abortions to increase. That is completely false.
    The whole abortion debate is nothing but one gigantic pile of strawmen. Both sides are guilty of this with their "you is a murderers!" and "you hatings womyns!" That is the reason each and every thread in this sub is filled with the exact same posts and the reason why nothing productive has ever come out of an abortion debate.

    The more sane and serious voices are quickly shut down by the more loud and empty aggressors.

    Of course we all want girls and women to be responsible. No argument there. But they can't do it all themselves. Anti-choicers want poor single women to be locked up just because they had unwanted pregnancies. This is hypocrisy. What the anti-abortion crowd should favor is federal and state government programs that solve all of hte problems which can lead to abortions.
    I do not think the solution is to be found in more government programs, we have enough of those already. A "Responsibility Program" would only serve to disincentivise responsibility.

    In the West we already have easy access to contraceptives and birth control; the individuals who wish to engage in sexual activities without causing pregnancies have all the opportunities to achieve those goals.

    Adults are adults and really do not need some pompous bureaucrat miles and miles away from home to tell them how to be responsible. If you allow someone else to dictate your responsibility, you are - by definition - not being responsibile.
    “Academia is to knowledge what prostitution is to love: close enough on the surface.”
    - Nassim Nicholas Taleb

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •