The issue of Abortion in accordance to Christian beliefs

One of my early senseis actually was studying to be a Zen Monk when I trained for him. He brought a lot of Zen concepts to Judo which I use in my own teaching.

 

Ethically there is no difference, it's still unique homo sapien DNA distinct from the parent.

The transition from embryo to fetus is an ethically arbitrary distinction. They both represent a human existence.

 

Well, if your line for life is a one-cell zygote, I guess the distinction between different stages of prenatal development don't matter, because, hey, what the hell, everything is human (which is about an extreme of a position is saying life only begins at birth).

In that case, your arguments on why government intervention on abortion will work better than that on alcohol or soft drugs?

You should be aware that abortion rates are currently at near all-time lows, and keep on declining year in year out. You want to focus on that rather than the whole "ohhh abortions are bad." No one is having that argument with you.

 

You do understand that the concept of viability came into the picture only once the Supreme Court got involved. The concept of viability is a judicial construct created solely for the purpose of drawing a bright line legally.

Many pro choice people I have discussed this issue with refer to the fetus as a "potential life." The argument is that it is not a life until it becomes viable.

 

Just this:

 

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/01/10/abortion-rate-stalls-years-decline/

This article suggests that abortions go UP when the economy is in decline and go DOWN when the economy is doing better-- which indicates a certain amount of control

One reason to expect more success with restriction on abortion in comparison to alcohol or drugs is the reality that, unlike alcohol or drugs, there is clearly a victim in an abortion.

Yes, sensitivity needs to be raised but I am hopeful for humankind!
Concocting laws that empower you to just be rid of your "problem" is the lowest kind of "problem-solving."

40,000,000 a year worldwide are paying the ultimate price.

 

The difference, of course, is the fact that north of 99% of the American people believe that murder and rape should be illegal while support for banning abortion isn't even remotely close to that level.

Nice straw man, but intellectual dishonesty doesn't win debates.

 

The HUGE difference between a gestating fetus and a breastfeeding baby is that only the woman who is pregnant can bring a fetus to term while anyone can breastfeed a baby (even men, they showed us a creepy apparatus that we can strap to our chests to simulate breastfeeding).

You have no right to dictate to a woman what she must use her uterus for.

 

So you're not in favor of giving the baby a choice? Only the mother the choice to kill her baby? Hypocrite.

 

In the universe where I live, you have just posted an absurd argument. How does this compare with your observations?

 

...yes, this is my exact point.

Abortion laws (a recent imposition of the 19th century with no tradition in English common law) are the lowest form of problem-solving for the very complex problem of unwanted pregnancies and abortions. Thanks for spelling it out. Just banning it doesn't solve the problem, it just pretends to do so.

You want to say correlation with economic trends imply abortion can be controlled? Because from your same article, there is another correlation.

Want to disentangle causality? Find an empirical paper on the subject.

Unfortunately for your second point, this has no basis in reality, unlike the correlation between increased contraception, and decreased abortions.

http://m.spokesman.com/stories/2012/oct/05/study-free-birth-control-leads-to-fewer-abortions1/

Ah! Solutions to have less abortions without using heavy-handed government bans that violate a woman's due process and rights? whodathunk it.

That's the argument you want to knock down. With abortion rates declining, and better sets of policy options to reduce abortions other than heavy-handed abortion laws that you correctly stated are the lowest way to problem-solve, I don't quite see it. sorry.

 

yup. and with more education and access to contraceptives, abortion rates will fall even further.

if "pro-life" people really cared about saving babies, they would be against abstinence education and they would pass out condoms on streetcorners. but we all know that's not the real issue here.

what i don't really understand is how people who want to ban abortion plan on carrying that out. "save the babies" brings the warm fuzzies, for sure, but can no one see a dark side in forcing women to carry a fetus to term against her will? if she is found getting a back alley abortion, will she face jail time? if her boyfriend pokes a hole in their condom and it results in pregnancy (yup, men do it too), she's just S.O.L., right? since y'all are saying men should be able to stop her from terminating the pregnancy. i just don't get the logistics of this dystopian fantasy.

 

Is this really the most shocking part? To them it's a murderous mother vs a voiceless fetus.

 

It's not shocking but it is the type of extremist views that prevent real progress on the issue. For the vast majority of US society doesn't believe that abortion should have no restrictions but they also don't believe that it should be absolutely outlawed. We can debate the philosophical implications of when life begins but that is a debate that doesn't really stop abortion as long as the root cause of abortion continues to exist, unwanted pregnancy.

The real goal that we should all be pursuing is ending unwanted pregnancy.

 

100% agree

 

You forgot that last part, cuz people gotta have their cake and eat it too.

 

Only abortion exception that would exist for me is in life threatening situations.

My reasoning is exactly what your post is about. I can't justify taking a life, just because of rape. I know it isn't fair to the victim, and in fact could be quite terrible carrying around a constant reminder of what happened to them, but it isn't enough to justify taking a life.

The day after pills would still be available.

I'd tend to agree that it is unfair for the Religous to let their faith interfere. Of course that is impossible since religion helps shape values, and values are legitimate reasoning behind laws.

 

Many of us "pro-life" people do believe in more open sex education, and greater availability of contraceptive.

I do feel bad for the mothers. A man only has to live with the consequences of his actions financially, and that is only if the mother forces it. It doesn't make it okay when you see it as a life.

 

I sincerely wish that you were a woman raped that had become pregnant as a result. It is so easy for a "righteous man" to make comments like yours, when such a thing could never be experienced by you. If your wife were assaulted and raped, and became pregnant as a result, the discussion between the two of you about this subject would be very interesting to witness, and just as tragic. Hypocrisy is a ill fitting suit to wear.