News:

There is also the shroud of turin, which verifies Jesus in a new way than other evidences.

Main Menu

Any Atheists Here Opposed to Abortion?

Started by LegendarySandwich, January 11, 2011, 02:49:23 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Will

I'm not fundamentally opposed to it because I'm both well aware that there's a causal relationship between a woman's right to choose and lower abortion rates/safer abortions and also that forcing a woman to carry a child to term is a fundamental violation of her individual rights. I don't like abortions, I think they're very sad and I'd like for there to be less of them, but I'm certainly not opposed to them.

I WAS against abortions as an atheist for a time because I found the 'err on the side of life' argument compelling, but I know women who have had abortions now and I'm comfortable in understanding that, while it's important to value human life, a real threat to individual rights for the sake of hypothetical human life means that you have to err on the side of what violation exists vs. might exist.
I want bad people to look forward to and celebrate the day I die, because if they don't, I'm not living up to my potential.

AnimatedDirt

Quote from: "Tank"Abortion is the result of a mistake, bad choices or rape. It should always be the alternative of last resort. But it is a resort that should be available. I am against any system that makes abortion necessary, but I would wholeheartedly support a woman's right to have control over her body. Contraception should be freely available to any person who requires it.  

However I would also, if it were my choice, create an environment that if a girl/woman finds herself pregnant and does not want to keep the child that 'at birth' adoption should always be an alternative to abortion.
I stand with Tank...I would simply add that I would do as the character of Lt. Cdr. JoAnne Galloway (Demi Moore) in the movie, A Few Good Men
Quote from: "Lt. Cdr. JoAnne Galloway "We strenuously object...
...simply because I do find it so horrible.

What about the repeat "offender"?  I have pondered this myself and while I support Pro-Choice, I don't know I could support a "habit"...define habit...?

a-train

This is a complicated legal matter.  Example: a man can be charged with homicide if he commits the premeditated murder of an unborn child against the wishes of the mother.  If he has permission however, he is not charged.  This is a murky topic due to the fact that our society does not agree on the source and definition of individual human rights.  Therefore some find the unborn void of such rights while others find the opposite.  Until the source and definition of individual human rights is clearly defined, this will be an endless debate.

-a-train

Tank

Quote from: "a-train"This is a complicated legal matter.  Example: a man can be charged with homicide if he commits the premeditated murder of an unborn child against the wishes of the mother.  If he has permission however, he is not charged.  This is a murky topic due to the fact that our society does not agree on the source and definition of individual human rights.  Therefore some find the unborn void of such rights while others find the opposite.  Until the source and definition of individual human rights is clearly defined, this will be an endless debate.

-a-train
Even with a definition you will find people who will not agree with that definition so the debate won't stop.

Primarily the issue is that there is not just one person involved. One exists and the other starts out as a potential person. It's a knife edge balancing act if one intends to take any of the choice to give birth away from the woman. To do so is, at some point, to declare her a piece of meat and fit only to be a womb on legs. However, at some point in the gestation period the off spring becomes capable of independent survival, abortion after this point is to me, repugnant. To my way of thinking once this point has been reached the issue of which life should be considered 'a piece of meat' is highly debatable. Once past 26 weeks I would be very uncomfortable about aborting a healthy foetus growing in a healthy woman. But as a male I will never face that choice. For me this is an academic debate. I find my feelings highly conflicted on this matter, but ultimately I must come down on the side of the extant life in favour of the potential life and as such support the woman's right to choose.

In Saudi Arabia girls with non-congenital physical or mental handicaps often become the third or forth wife of a man simply to produce children. This to me is one of the most degrading things done anywhere on Earth.
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

a-train

Quote from: "Tank"In Saudi Arabia girls with non-congenital physical or mental handicaps often become the third or forth wife of a man simply to produce children. This to me is one of the most degrading things done anywhere on Earth.
But what if this woman, suffering her condition, is happy in this scenario?  Would we banish her to loneliness?  Prevent her from enjoying the pleasure she desires?  Perhaps this is the only man in her society that will offer her these opportunities, will we prevent him?

-a-train

Thumpalumpacus

Quote from: "Wilson"There's a very good reason to extend personhood to a fetus - that it is literally a living human being with the potential for developing into a fully formed person, and there's no logical way to draw the line between personhood and non-personhood.  

I draw the line at the development of thought.  Even our very species-name regards thought as the quintessence of humanity: we are, after all, Homo Sapiens, "man, the wise."
Illegitimi non carborundum.

Wilson

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"I draw the line at the development of thought.  Even our very species-name regards thought as the quintessence of humanity: we are, after all, Homo Sapiens, "man, the wise."

How do you define thought?  There may some sort of thought going on inside the uterus at who knows what stage.  And the thoughts of a newborn baby are so rudimentary that it's a long way from wisdom.

Others would say at the moment of birth.  Others, able to live outside the womb.  Others, self-awareness.  Others, the moment of conception.

I sort of draw the line at when it looks too much like a baby to think it isn't.  The truth is that there is no absolute line between personhood and non-personhood, only individual emotions and prejudices.

LegendarySandwich

I draw the line at birth. Then again, I don't think I would have that much of a problem if a parent had to kill a newborn for good reasons.

Thumpalumpacus

Quote from: "Wilson"
Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"I draw the line at the development of thought.  Even our very species-name regards thought as the quintessence of humanity: we are, after all, Homo Sapiens, "man, the wise."

How do you define thought?  There may some sort of thought going on inside the uterus at who knows what stage.  And the thoughts of a newborn baby are so rudimentary that it's a long way from wisdom.

Others would say at the moment of birth.  Others, able to live outside the womb.  Others, self-awareness.  Others, the moment of conception.

I sort of draw the line at when it looks too much like a baby to think it isn't.  The truth is that there is no absolute line between personhood and non-personhood, only individual emotions and prejudices.

Intrauterine brainwaves seems as good a criterion as any for determining when thought begins, don't you think?  After all, there is a very strong correlation between an active EEG readout and and active thought process.
Illegitimi non carborundum.

Wilson

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"Intrauterine brainwaves seems as good a criterion as any for determining when thought begins, don't you think?  After all, there is a very strong correlation between an active EEG readout and and active thought process.

What I'm saying is that that's pretty arbitrary as a dividing line.  A matter of individual opinion.

TheJackel

Why would it be a sin to abort? Apparently the GOD in Genesis felt abortion was ok. I wonder how many fetuses died then, should you believe the bible. If you view a fetus as a human child, you would be technically correct.  However, abortions are usually considered when someone decides they can not handle the barring of a child, or if it's dangerous for them to do so. However, if you want to force someone to bare a child, you better be prepared to be the one to pay for all the mothers medical bills, and the care of the child. So if such a law is enacted, anyone who voted for the law should be forced to pay via taxes to support the targets of their law. And if the mother dies giving birth, they should all be forced to pay the family grievance money, and pay for the funeral. It is a tough moral dilemma though isn't it? Especially since such laws wouldn't stop back alley abortions or dumpster babies.

The other problem is world over population. You can't force people to not have sex or to abide by your rules in this case. If man's very existence depended on population reduction, how would you accomplish it?

Will

Quote from: "TheJackel"If man's very existence depended on population reduction, how would you accomplish it?
Ensuring gender equality and education is a start. Among nations with better education and gender equality, birth rates are much lower. If that isn't enough, we can start exploring more severe options, but it doesn't make sense to go there just yet. Once the entire planet is in wonderful education systems and women have equal rights everywhere, then we'll talk.
I want bad people to look forward to and celebrate the day I die, because if they don't, I'm not living up to my potential.

TheJackel

Quote from: "Will"
Quote from: "TheJackel"If man's very existence depended on population reduction, how would you accomplish it?
Ensuring gender equality and education is a start. Among nations with better education and gender equality, birth rates are much lower. If that isn't enough, we can start exploring more severe options, but it doesn't make sense to go there just yet. Once the entire planet is in wonderful education systems and women have equal rights everywhere, then we'll talk.

It was to show that at some point, hypocrisy would be required. Yes I agree that we aren't quite there yet, but human nature has been known to do nothing until it must do something, or until it's on that dividing line of being to late to do anything about it becomes absolute. So when I ask that what would you do if man's very survival depended on it, what would you do?

LegendarySandwich

Quote from: "TheJackel"
Quote from: "Will"
Quote from: "TheJackel"If man's very existence depended on population reduction, how would you accomplish it?
Ensuring gender equality and education is a start. Among nations with better education and gender equality, birth rates are much lower. If that isn't enough, we can start exploring more severe options, but it doesn't make sense to go there just yet. Once the entire planet is in wonderful education systems and women have equal rights everywhere, then we'll talk.

It was to show that at some point, hypocrisy would be required. Yes I agree that we aren't quite there yet, but human nature has been known to do nothing until it must do something, or until it's on that dividing line of being to late to do anything about it. So when I ask that what would you do if man's very survival depended on it, what would you do?
Me, personally? I don't know. Probably encourage abortions, I guess.

TheJackel

QuoteMe, personally? I don't know. Probably encourage abortions, I guess.

Exactly, because man must balance it's own existence with nature or face extinction itself. It's a matter of what price will it cost us to realize that we are not above the limits of our natural world. So unless Faster than light speed becomes realized, there is literally nothing man can do to survive other than balance it's own existence with nature. It's said that human nature will not allow us to survive another 10,000 years at the rate it's going. And that is a pretty short time period IMO, even though that prediction is an assumption.

Anyways, the real reason Christians view abortion as a sin is not just because they view it as murder, they also view it as a loss of a potential follower of their ideology. And the more they are involved in that process the more they have power and say in the child's possible future with them. We (being me and the churches I worked with) used to target pregnant teens and make them feel like only the lord can save their child, and that for them to avoid their damnation that they must join and conform to our ideology. The easiest way was to target the mortal well being of their unborn child while offering the carrot of salvation through Jesus Christ. That was some serious manipulation, and it was intentionally done. So there is more to the abortion argument than just the killing of the fetus. Hence, it's GODS Christian children you are killing.  :blink:

Anyways, here is the worlds estimated population growth by year:
Quotehttp://geography.about.com/od/obtainpop ... lation.htm

Year    Population
1    200 million
1000    275 million
1500    450 million
1650    500 million
1750    700 million
1804    1 billion
1850    1.2 billion
1900    1.6 billion
1927    2 billion
1950    2.55 billion
1955    2.8 billion
1960    3 billion
1965    3.3 billion
1970    3.7 billion
1975    4 billion
1980    4.5 billion
1985    4.85 billion
1990    5.3 billion
1995    5.7 billion
1999    6 billion
2006    6.5 billion
2009    6.8 billion
2012    7 billion
2027    8 billion
2044    9 billion
2050    9.2 billion

What would it be estimated at in the year 3500?