I know that abortion is a sensitive topic, but hear me out, okay?

I believe P said most of what I think in this matter. I'll answer a question but I really don't see one here.

And no I am not an athesit, and even if I was I would ot rage at such a statement. If I wish for my opinions to be listened to I shall listen to those of others even if I dislike them. You're free to think as you wish after all.

So hard to avoid most of the time. Again, not much else to say.


About the last post, I would like to point out that in the bible I believe it stated those of other religions were to be brought to justice or something of the sort so you shouldn't get mad for someone thinking that, though I am glad you accept other relgions. If I am wrong then I do apologize.

 

I do believe that you're right about that, but many of the laws in the Old Testament have been discredited. Modern Jews don't stone women who've committed adultery. Christians (and again, it might be just Catholics) believe that Jesus came to fulfill the Law, not rewrite it. However, we still recognize that the Hebrew Scriptures contain many unjust laws and statements and we do in fact reject them. The one that you mentioned is one of those. That's one thing that separates us from fundamentalist Christians who believe that the Bible is to be taken word for word and never once uses figurative language. For example, did you know that there's a verse in Proverbs (?) that says something to tune of "The happy man dashes babies against the stones." We, or at least I, take this to mean that happiness can be achieved through sin, but will never take the place of salvation from God.

 

. .

 

However, what Jesus says can be taken figuratively there. As I said, Catholics don't take the Bible word for word. The water is a symbol for rebirth, nothing more. For an atheist, being born of the Spirit could mean simply trying to understand the viewpoint of those who do believe in God. That's a spiritual enlightenment, is it not? It could also mean making an effort to live by the teachings of the Bible without ever believing a word of it in terms of God and Christ and all that. I know several atheists who dedicate their lives to living out the teachings of Jesus simply because they believe Him to be a wise philosopher. Isn't that also a spiritual rebirth? The same could be said of your other quote. You can know Jesus on even the most intimate level without believing Him to be the Messiah simply by following his moral teachings. The Beatitudes have hardly anything to do with God, do they not? To give an example, here are some religion neutral interpretations of the version from Matthew.

Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (Verse 3)
This means simply that you must live your life as if you need to depend on others. Even if you're rich beyond anyone's wildest dreams, accept help where it is offered and never turn down a free meal just because you can buy the same meal without putting so much as a dent in your own wealth. Doing this, you can find happiness for yourself.

Blessed are the meek: for they shall possess the land. (Verse 4)
If you want anything that you cannot provide for yourself, ask for it. Even if you don't get it, you'll feel better for having asked.

Blessed are they who mourn: for they shall be comforted. (Verse 5)
This one is already religion neutral, so I'm not gonna explain.

Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice: for they shall have their fill. (Verse 6)
Already religion neutral. If you want justice and strive for it, you'll see it in one way or another.

Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. (Verse 7)
This could be shown in court. I may be and likely am wrong here, but if you hurt someone and manage to hold yourself back from killing without restraint, you can be given a lighter sentence.

Blessed are the clean of heart: for they shall see God. (Verse 8)
This means that you need to be able to forgive yourself in addition to being forgiven by others. To an atheist, you can replace God with any aspect of yourself that you wish could show itself more.

Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. (Verse 9)
Self explanatory. To an atheist you can replace "called the children of God" with "become less unknown to the masses." The masses can be anywhere from a worldwide audience to a small group of your peers.

Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
This is simply saying that if you suffer for the sake of righteousness, you can sure as Jesus expect retribution for your suffering.

 

The fact that the parents should be more accepting of the girl's pregnancy doesn't mean that they will be. Unfortunate, but true.

Unless the girl is lucky and gives birth to the baby during summer holidays, it is going to affect her education, and quite probably her social life. From what I've heard, you should take some time off before giving birth, and you need at least six weeks after labour to let your body heal, probably more, if you're still a teenager. At least in my school, that would mean losing at least one term, if not an entire school year.

If women knew who was going to rape them, the number of rapes would go down drastically. Seriously, most of the time the rapist is someone you would least expect. Sure, there are times when it's that creepy stalker who's been leering at you since you've known him, but more often than not it isn't. Then there's the rapists who don't even know their victim...

 

For the record, it's actually been estimated that in some parts of the world more men get raped by women than women by men. It's just that more women report rape. Do with that what you will.

 

Okay, first off, when did this thread turn religious? Yes, maybe it has a little bit of relevance, but in my opinion, religion shouldn't control every aspect of our lives. Including abortion.
Now, I'm not athiest, not am I full on Christian. I'm more along the lines of 'I don't really care'. So, as an outsider to both, I think religion shouldn't be a factor in that decision. I realise religion is an important factor in many peoples lives (I wrote a paper on the subject), but it shouldn't be the thing that you eat, live for, and BREATH OFF OF.
Ahem.

Anyway, abortion.
Personally, I don't really care. If you want an abortion, it's your choice. Maybe it will teach you to use a fecking condom. Not that hard.
I suppose this makes me pro-choice? Not really. I think every life deserves a chance, and it's your own damn fault for getting pregnant/getting someone pregnent. Take responsibility for your actions.
But I'd rather, if an abortion is a must, that it get done in a safe manner. Professional Doctor>Coathanger.
The only situation I can think of that abortion may be a better choice is if the baby would be born with some horrible defect, like no legs or heart problems or something.

On the subject of rape; Don't they have those Plan B pills? For the day after, just in case?

 

For the record, religion is typically where people (even many atheists) get their morality. That's why it plays such a big part in whether or not we believe the cluster of cells, fetus, and baby to be alive, human, and a person and whether or not killing it/him/her is morally right. As I said in my other post, I know several Atheists that follow the teachings of Jesus without question save for the bits and pieces that deal with God. So these psuedo-Christians draw their morality from religion and still reject the points of it that don't matter. Yes, you heard it. A devout Catholic believes that it doesn't matter whether or not God exists. If God exists, that's good, I believe it, and I can't imagine the universe otherwise. If He doesn't, then I'm wrong and will continue believing until we have proof.

 

Your point is? Men can't get pregnant, hence they won't need abortions, which is what we're supposed to be discussing.

And don't get me wrong, I'm in no way saying that female on male rape is okay, or that male victims don't suffer as much as female ones because they can't get pregnant, I'm just saying that it has very little to do with the topic at hand.

@Fearless: Plan B pills are a good option, if you can get them in time, but I doubt that most pro-lifers would support it either, as it's sort of a mixure between contraceptives and an early abortion. (On the other hand, most of them probably would never know when a woman has taken one.)

I couldn't find any info on this on-line, but my Health Ed teacher said that women shouldn't take the 'morning after pill' more than three times during their life, preferrably less than that. I can't remember why though, it might've had something to do with it not being as effective if taken more than once, or it might cause some health problems. It's possible that he was talking about an older version of the pill though, so I don't have any idea if this still applies...

 

Well, hate to burst your bubble here, but under Planned Parenthood, therapy is already available to abortion patients and potential patients. Hasn't stopped the dumber pro-"life" folks from declaring that women get abortions because pregnancy is "inconvenient."

 

If Christian groups are willing to take on all of the unwanted pregnancies of the world then I agree that abortion should be outlawed. Oh, is that too much of a drain on resources? Then what are you talking about? What right do you have to talk about what happens with a woman's body? It belongs to her, it is a part of her. She is the one to decide what happens to her body.

HOWEVER, I do not agree with abortion being used as a contraceptive. Girls like that should be sterilised.

 

I'm not saying it should be outlawed. In fact, I feel that it would be unconstitutional to outlaw it, just like how it would be unconstitutional to outlaw being Muslim. I'm all for the legalization of abortion. I'm only against the actual act of it. However, if what you're saying is true, then it should also be legal to say, birth the baby and then kill it before the umbilical cord is cut. It's still part of the mother's body, isn't it? According to Catholic beliefs, it becomes a human life as soon as the sperm meets the egg and provides its half of the DNA. As soon as that happens, that zygote/fetus/human/person is entitled to the unalienable rights of life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and, depending on where you live, universal health care.

And what do you mean abortion as a form of contraception? You're killing a human life either way, so what's the difference?

 

I mean that some girls use abortion to get rid of what they see as the side effects of their ridiculous promiscuity. i.e. They are complete whores and they use abortions to get rid of the pregnancies associated with having their legs constantly open.

My cure is having everyone reversibly sterilised at birth. Therefore therefore there will be no unwanted pregnancies as you will have to prove that you are able to look after the resulting child (not necessarily because of marriage, but you know what I mean).

 

But that completely takes away to purpose of sex. Sex is a bodily function designed for reproduction. As I said before, if I could remove orgasm ala the Party in Orwell's 1984, I would. That would also prevent unwanted pregnancies, would it not? Pleasure and orgasm are the side effects, not the pregnancy. My realistic solution is that those unwanted pregnancies are terminated in nine months when they are SUPPOSED to be terminated and then either given up for adoption or being raised anyway, with all the challenges involved. And in case we go to the rape argument again, the baby can be seen as God's way of making the best of a horrible situation. Yes it's harder than even I can imagine to be a 16 year old girl raising a baby and possibly having to drop out of school, but at the same time it can be rewarding to know that you've been able to carry on through it and finally realizing it may have been your purpose in life to go against the odds and raise a child that a vast majority will believe should never have existed. Forgive me if that's a run-on sentence, I was on a roll and didn't want to interrupt it with ". Shift Letter."

 

However, and I don't mean this as a jab against your beliefs, you have to look at this in a purely secular standpoint. Not everyone belongs to a faith that says no to abortion. Therefore you can't base your argument on religious grounds. What I am saying is that it is the woman's choice. If she doesn't believe in abortion then she'll give birth and either keep it or give it up for adoption. If she doesn't necessarily say no to abortion, she may have an abortion. What I don't see as right is for a girl to have multiple abortions in a row. Clearly she is unable to control her sex life, and shouldn't be allowed to get pregnant until she is able to do so.

Basically, abortion should never be made illegal, but it shouldn't be massively easy either.

 

And that is the point of the petition that I'm proposing. You're arguing against precisely what you're trying to argue for.

And on it being the woman's choice, shouldn't the father get a say in it too? It is the man's potential son/daughter. Why should the mother be the only one with a choice to make?

And to be honest, how can one not take a religious standpoint on it? Everyone in the world is influenced by religion somehow or another. Most of the Atheists I know (ironically, they're around 60% of the religious make-up of my Catholic school) live their lives according to the moral teachings of the Bible. You can't say that religion can't get involved because religion is the basis of practically all non-scientific beliefs these days, even for those who don't belong to a religion.

 

The father has very little input in the creation (sperm being an order of magnitude smaller than the egg) of the fertilised egg and the mother has all the responsibility of carrying the child. Why should the father have any say? The only time he has any responsibility is when the child is born (apart from supporting the mother towards the end of the pregnancy as she probably won't be able to continue working).

As for the petition you are proposing, I will be honest and admit that I didn't read the whole thread xD I just jumped in at the end and commented. I apologise.

 

Because the sperm contains HALF of the genetic material that makes up the full human life. Would you stand by and let an organism that is HALF you get killed without having a say in the matter?

No apology necessary. I do it all the time.

And since you clearly posted right after I edited my post, here's the other part regarding religion and stuff having to do with it.

 

They don't live their lives according to the teachings of the Bible entirely. They pick and choose the bits they use, unless they're into stonings and removing their hands. Sure, you can chuck out parts that don't fit, or say that the eye-ripping part is only a metaphor, but eventually it no longer becomes living by the Bible, and instead living by your own views.

The Bible endorses (not necessarily created) some good ideas, certainly, but it has a lot of concepts which just don't fit into modern day times, such an anti-homosexuality and the like. So it's significantly better to pick and choose. But that's using your own mind to decide what's right, instead of living from a book. It's a better choice than following some of the more ridiculous aspects (i.e. The stonings/eye rippings) under the argument of "The no killing thing was a good idea, so by association, the rest is also good". Everything should be judged with its own merit.

Religion clouds arguments about morals, because it stops being about morals, and starts being about religion. The morals are the morals, and it should be argued based on the morals, not the religion.

 

Alright, so per your "logic" (if it can even be called that), if say, a 14 year old girl was just minding her own business then some loser who can't get laid consentually decides to rape her, and she's impregnated, she's supposed to just go through even MORE pain and trauma? Are you shitting me? First you get raped, then you have to go through pregnancy, at an early age as well!? Just because "O LOL IT'S MURDER DERP"? That's just plain stupid and sadistic. Make the girl go through 9 months of pregnancy, go through the pain of giving birth so early, then unless they gave it up for adoption, having to completely rewrite your future plans.

A fetus technically isn't a human being. It's one in development. It's like writing a story and such for a movie plot and going "there, that's a movie."
If it's needed, then damn straight abortion should be legal. Try thinking of the actual human beings here, people.